THE UNITED STVTKS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
J_U
MM
isL U
Statutes and Legislative Historv
Executive Orders
Regulations
Guidelines and Reports
3)
V
ui
O
-------
-------
THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1L
Qfctttai
Statutes and Legislative History
Executive Orders
Regulations
Guidelines and Reports
ai
JANUARY 1973
WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS
Administrator
Civ".
-------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D. C. 20402 - Price $17.80 Per Set of Five Vols. (Sold in Sets Only)
Stock Number 5500-0064
-------
FOREWORD
It has been said that America is like a gigantic boiler in that once
the fire is lighted, there are no limits to the power it can generate.
Environmentally, the fire has been lit!
With a mandate from the President and an aroused public concern-
ing the environment, we are experiencing a new American Revolution,
a revolution in our way of life. The era which began with the industrial
revolution is over and things will never be quite the same again. We
are moving slowly, perhaps even grudgingly at times, but inexorably
into an age when social, spiritual and aesthetic values will be prized
more than production and consumption. We have reached a point
where we must balance civilization and nature through our technology.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, formed by Reorganiza-
tion Plan No. 3 of 1970, was a major commitment to this new ethic.
It exists and acts in the public's name to ensure that due regard is
given to the environmental consequences of actions by public and
private institutions.
In a large measure, this is a regulatory role, one that encompasses
basic, applied, and effects research; setting and enforcing standards;
monitoring; and making delicate risks-benefit decisions aimed at
creating the kind of world the public desires.
The Agency was not created to harass industry or to act as a shield
behind which man could wreak havoc on nature. The greatest disser-
vice the Environmental Protection Agency could do to American
industry is to be a poor regulator. The environment would suffer,
public trust would diminish, and instead of free enterprise, environ-
mental anarchy would result.
It was once sufficient that the regulatory process produce wise and
well-founded courses of action..The public, largely indifferent to regu-
latory activities, accepted agency actions as being for the "public
convenience and necessity." Credibility gaps and cynicism make it
essential not only that today's decisions be wise and well-founded but
that the public know this to be true. Certitude, not faith, is de rigueur.
In order to participate intelligently in regulatory proceedings, the
citizen should have access to the information available to the agency.
EPA's policy is to make the fullest possible disclosure of information,
without unjustifiable expense or delay, to any interested party. With
iii
-------
iv FOREWORD
this in mind, the EPA Compilation of Legal Authority was produced
not only for internal operations of EPA, but as a service to the public,
as we strive together to lead the way, through the law, to preserving
the earth as a place both habitable by and hospitable to man.
WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
PREFACE
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 transferred 15 governmental
units with their functions and legal authority to create the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Since only the major laws were
cited in the Plan, the Administrator, William D. Ruckelshaus, re-
quested that a compilation of EPA legal authority be researched and
published.
The publication has the primary function of providing a working
document for the Agency itself. Secondarily, it will serve as a research
tool for the public.
A permanent office in the Office of Legislation has been established
to keep the publication updated by supplements.
It is the hope of EPA that this set will assist in the awesome task
of developing a better environment.
LANE WARD GENTRY, J.D.
Assistant Director for Field Operations
Office of Legislation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The idea of producing a compilation of the legal authority of EPA
was conceived and commissioned by William D. Ruckelshaus, Ad-
ministrator of EPA. The production of this compilation involved the
cooperation and effort of numerous sources, both within and outside
the Agency. The departmental libraries at Justice and Interior were
used extensively; therefore we express our appreciation to Marvin
P. Hogan, Librarian, Department of Justice; Arley E. Long, Land &
Natural Resources Division Librarian, Department of Justice;
Frederic E. Murray, Assistant Director, Library Services, Department
of the Interior.
For exceptional assistance and cooperation, my gratitude to:
Gary Baise, formerly Assistant to the Administrator, currently Direc-
tor, Office of Legislation, who first began with me on this project;
A. James Barnes, Assistant to the Administrator; K. Kirke Harper, Jr.,
Special Assistant for Executive Communications; John Dezzutti,
Administrative Assistant, Office of Executive Communications;
Roland O. Sorensen, Chief, Printing Management Branch, and
Jacqueline Gouge and Thomas Green, Printing Management Staff;
Ruth Simpkins, Janis Collier, Wm. Lee Rawls, Peter J. McKenna,
James G. Chandler, Jeffrey D. Light, Randy Mott, Thomas H. Rawls,
John D. Whittaker, Linda L. Payne, John M. Himmelberg, and
Dana W. Smith, a beautiful staff who gave unlimited effort; and to
many others behind the scenes who rendered varied assistance.
LANE WARD GENTRY, J.D.
Assistant Director for Field Operations
Office of Legislation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
VI
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
The goal of this text is to create a useful compilation of the legal
authority under which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
operates. These documents are for the general use of personnel of the
EPA in assisting them in attaining the purposes set out by the Presi-
dent in creating the Agency. This work is not intended and should
not be used for legal citations or any use other than as reference of a
general nature. The author disclaims all responsibility for liabilities
growing out of the use of these materials contrary to their intended
purpose. Moreover, it should be noted that portions of the Con-
gressional Record from the 92nd Congress were extracted from the
"unofficial" daily version and are subject to subsequent modification.
EPA Legal Compilation consists of the Statutes with their legisla-
tive history, Executive Orders, Regulations, Guidelines and Reports.
To facilitate the usefulness of this composite, the Legal Compilation
is divided into the eight following chapters:
A. General E. Pesticides
B. Air F. Radiation
C. Water G. Noise
D. Solid Waste H. International
AIR
The chapter labeled "Air," and color coded light blue, contains the
legal authority of the Agency directly related to air pollution. Several
documents under this title are applicable to other areas of pollution,
and when this occurs, a reference is made back to "General" where
the full text appears. This method is used in order that the documents
are not needlessly reproduced in each chapter.
SUBCHAPTERS
Statutes and Legislative History
For convenience, the Statutes are listed throughout the Compilation
by a one-point system, i.e., 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc., and Legislative History
begins wherever a letter follows the one-point system. Thusly, any
l.la, Lib, 1.2a, etc., denotes the public laws comprising the 1.1,
vii
-------
viii INSTRUCTIONS
1.2 statute. Each public law is followed by its legislative history.
The legislative history in each case consists of the House Report,
Senate Report, Conference Report (where applicable), the Congres-
sional Record beginning with the time the bill was reported from
committee.
Example:
1.1 Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §1857 et seq. (1970).
l.la Air Pollution Act of July 14, 1955, P.L. 84-159, 69 Stat. 322.
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 389, 84th Cong.,
1st Sess. (1955).
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, H.R. REP.
No. 968, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955).
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 101 (1955):
(a) May 31: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 7248-7250;
(b) July 5: Amended and passed House, pp. 9923-9925;
(c) July 6: Senate concurs in House amendment, pp. 9984-9985.
This example not only demonstrates the pattern followed for legislative
history, but indicates the procedure where only one section of a public
law appears. You will note that the Congressional Record cited pages
are only those pages dealing with the discussion and/or action taken
pertinent to the section of law applicable to EPA. In the event there
is no discussion of the pertinent section, only action or passage, then
the asterisk (*) is used to so indicate, and no text is reprinted in the
Compilation. In regard to the situation where only one section of a
public law is applicable, then only the parts of the report dealing with
same are printed in the Compilation.
Secondary Statutes
Many statutes make reference to other laws and rather than have
this manual serve only for major statutes, these secondary statutes
have been included where practical. These secondary statutes are
indicated in the table of contents to each chapter by a bracketed cite
to the particular section of the major act which made the reference.
Citations
The United States Code, being the official citation, is used through-
out the Statute section of the compilation.
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
TABLE OF STATUTORY SOURCE
IX
Statute
Source
.1 The Clean Air Act, as amended,
42 U.S.C. §1857 et seq. (1970).
.2 Public Contracts, Advertisements
for Proposals for Purchases and
Contracts for Supplies or Services
for Government Departments;
Application to Government Sales
and Contracts to Sell and to
Government Corporations, as
amended, 41 U.S.C. §5 (1958).
1.3 Advances of Public Moneys,
Prohibition Against, as revised,
31 U.S.C. §529 (1946).
1.4 Contracts: Acquisition, Construc-
tion or Furnishing of Test Facilities
and Equipment, as amended, 10
U.S.C. §2353 (1956).
1.5 Record on Review and Enforcement
of Agency Orders, as amended,
28 U.S.C. §2112 (1966).
1.6 Disclosure of Confidential Informa-
tion Generally, as amended, 18
U.S.C. §1905
1.7 Per Diem, Travel and Transporta-
tion Expenses; Experts and Con-
sultants; Individuals Serving With-
out Pay, as amended, 5 U.S.C.
§5703 (1969).
1.8 Highway Safety Act of 1966, as
amended, 23 U.S.C. §402 (1970).
1.9 Federal Salary Act, as amended,
5 U.S.C. §§5305, 5332 (1970).
1.10 The Federal Aviation Act of 1958,
as amended, 49 U.S.C. §1301 et seq.
(1970).
1.11 Department of Transportation Act,
as amended, 49 U.S.C. §1651
et seq. (1968).
1.12 The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §4332(2) (c)
(1970).
1.13 The Public Health Service Act,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§241, 243,
246 (1970).
1.14 The Davis-Bacon Act, as amended,
40 U.S.C. §§276a-276a-5 (1964).
1.15 Reorganization Plan No. 14 of
1950, 64 Stat. 1267 (1950).
Directly transferred to EPA in Reorg.
Plan No. 3 of 1970.
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857b-l(a)(2)(D).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857b-l(a)(2)(D).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857b-(a)(2)(D).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§§1857c-5(f)(2)(B), 1857f-5(b)(2)(B)(ii).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§§1857c-9(c), 1857d(j)(l), 1857f-6(b),
1857h-5(a)(l).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§§1857d(i), 1857e(e), 1857f-6e(b)(2).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857f-6b(2).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857f~6e(b)(3)(A).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§§1857f-10(a), (b), 1857f-12.
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857f-10(b).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857h-7(a).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857i(b).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857j-3.
Referred to in the Clean Air Act at
§1857j-3.
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1.16 Regulations Governing Contractors
and Subcontractors, as amended,
40 U.S.C. §276c (1958).
1.17 Federal Aid Highway Act, as
amended, 23 U.S.C. §109(h), (j)
(1970).
1.18 Airport and Airway Development
Act, as amended, 49 U.S.C.
§§1712(f), 1716(c)(4), (e)(1970).
1.19 Amortization of Pollution Control
Facilities, as amended, 26 U.S.C.
§169(d)(l)(B), (3) (1969).
1.20 Interest on Certain Government
Obligations, as amended, 26 U.S.C.
§103 (1969).
Referred to in the Clean Air Act ;
§1857j-3.
Direct reference in Act to EPA and a
pollution at §109(h), (i), (j).
Direct reference in Act to air pollutio
at §§1712(f), 1716(e)(l).
§169d(l)(B) makes direct reference t
the Clean Air Act.
At §103 (c) (4) (F) industrial developmen
bonds are exempt from taxes on ai
pollution control facilities.
Executive Orbers
The Executive Orders are listed by a two-point system (2.1, 2.2,
etc.). Executive Orders found in General are ones applying to more
than one area of the pollution chapters.
Regulations
The Regulations are noted by a three-point system (3.1, 3.2, etc.).
Included in the Regulations are those not only promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency, but those under which the Agency
has direct contact.
Guidelines and Reports
This subchapter is noted by a four-point system (4.1, 4.2, etc.)- In
this subchapter is found the statutorily required reports of EPA,
published guidelines of EPA, selected reports other than EPA's and
inter-departmental agreements of note.
UPDATING
Periodically, a supplement will be sent to the interagency dis-
tribution and made available through the U.S. Government Printing
Office in order to provide an accurate working set of EPA Legal
Compilation.
-------
CONTENTS
B. Air
VOLUME I
Page
1. STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
1.1 Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §1857 et seq. (1970) 1
l.la Air Pollution Act of July 14, 1955, P.L. 84-159, 69 Stat.
322 81
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
389, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955) 83
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 968, 84th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1955) 93
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 101 (1955):
(a) May 31: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
7248-7250 104
(b) July 5: Amended and passed House, pp. 9923-
9925 106
(c) July 6: Senate concurs in House amendment,
pp. 9984-9985 110
Lib Extension of §5-a of Air Pollution Act of July 14, 1955,
September 22, 1959, P.L. 86-365, 73 Stat. 646 114
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 960, 86th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1959) 115
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
182, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959) 123
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1187,
86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959) 136
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 105 (1959):
(a) Sept. 1: Passed House, pp. 17584-17586 140
(b) Sept. 9: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
18733-18734 144
(c) Sept. 10, 11: House and Senate ask for con-
ference, pp. 18997, 19046 146
(d) Sept. 14: House and Senate agree to conference
report, pp. 19704-19705, 19434-19435 146
l.lc Motor Vehicle Exhaust Study Act of June 8, 1960,
P.L. 86-493, 74 Stat. 1625 153
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 814, 86th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1959) 154
(2) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
S. REP. No. 1410, 86th Cong., 2d Sess. (1960) 171
XI
-------
xii CONTENTS
Page
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 105 (1959), Aug. 17: Passed House, pp.
16074-16080 176
(b) Vol. 106 (1960), May 26: Passed Senate, p.
11209 191
l.ld Amendment of Act of July 14, 1955, October 9, 1962,
P.L. 87-761, 76 Stat. 760 192
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
1083, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961) 193
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 2265, 87th Cong., 2d Sess.
(1962) 199
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 107 (1961), Sept. 20: Passed Senate, pp.
20417-20418 220
(b) Vol. 108 (1962), Sept. 17: Amended and passed
House, pp. 19658-19661 223
(c) Vol. 108 (1962), Sept. 26: Senate concurs in
House amendments, pp. 20802-20803 232
l.le The Clean Air Act, December 17, 1963, P.L. 88-206,
77 Stat. 392 235
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 508, 88th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1963) 247
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
638, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963) 277
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1003,
88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963) 295
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 109 (1963):
(a) July 24: Considered and passed House, pp.
13273-13281; 13283-13285 305
(b) Nov. 19: Considered and passed Senate,
amended, pp. 22321-22326; 22329-22331 328
(c) Dec. 10: House and Senate agree to conference
report, pp. 23954; 23959-23966; 21083-21085.. 344
l.lf Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act, and Solid
Waste Disposal Act, October 20, 1955TP.L. 89-272,
79 Stat. 992 'il&L 364
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
192, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965) 377
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 899, 89th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1965) 410
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965):
(a) May 18: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
10779; 10782-10783 431
(b) Sept. 23: Considered in House, pp. 24941-
24943 434
(c) Sept. 24: Considered and passed House,
amended, pp. 25049-25059; 25061-25065;
25072 436
-------
CONTENTS xiii
Page
(d) Oct. 1: Senate concurred in House amendments,
pp. 25847; 25850-25851 471
l.lg Clean Air Amendments of 1966, October 15, 1966, P.L.
89-675, 80 Stat. 954 473
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
1361, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 475
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 2170, 89th Cong., 2d Sess.
(1966) 493
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2256,
89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 514
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 112 (1966):
(a) July 11: Considered in Senate, p. 15169 517
(b) July 12: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
15248-15262 518
(c) Oct. 3: Considered and passed House, amended,
pp. 24853-24855 549
(d) Oct. 13: House agreed to conference report, p.
26596 555
(e) Oct. 14: Senate agreed to conference report,
p. 26808-26809 557
l.lh Air Quality Act of 1967, November 21, 1967, P.L.
90-148, 81 Stat. 485 560
VOLUME II
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
403, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 593
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 728, 90th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1967) 703
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 916,
90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 834
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 113 (1967):
(a) July 18: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
19164, 19171-19186 839
(b) Nov. 2: Considered and passed House, amended,
pp. 30939-30963; 30975-30981; 30988-30989;
30999 872
(c) Nov. 9: Senate rejected House amendments,
pp. 32072-32073; 32079 965
(d) Nov. 13: House insisted on amendments and
agreed to conference, p. 32213 965
(e) Nov. 14: Senate and House adopted conference
report, pp. 32475-32479 966
l.li Authorization for Fuel and Vehicle Research, 1969,
December 5, 1969, P.L. 91-137, 83 Stat. 283 973
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-286, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969) 973
-------
xiv CONTENTS
Page
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 91-349, 91st Cong., 1st Sess.
(1969) 990
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-690,
91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969) 997
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 115 (1969):
(a) July 8: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
18540-18541; 18544 1000
(b) Sept. 3, 4: Considered and passed House,
amended, pp. 24005-24006; 24356-24372;
24374-24378 1003
(c) Nov. 25: House and Senate agreed to conference
report, pp. 35640; 35805-35807 1050
l.lj Extension of Clean Air Act, July 10, 1970, P.L. 91-316,
84Stat. 416 1054
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-941, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 1054
(2) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) June 25: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
21363-21364 1056
(b) June 30: Considered and passed House, p.
22095 1056
l.lk Clean Air Amendments of 1970, December 31, 1970,
P.L. 91-604, 84 Stat. 1676 1057
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 91-1146, 91st Cong., 2d Sess.
(1970) 1115
VOLUME III
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-1196, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 1189
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-1783,
91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 1367
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) June 10: Considered and passed House, pp.
19200-19244 1391
(b) Sept. 21, 22: Considered and passed Senate,
amended, pp. 32837; 32900-32928; 33072-
33121 1493
(c) Dec. 18: Senate and House agreed to conference
report, pp. 42381-42395; 42519-42524 1672
(5) The President's Remarks Upon Signing the Bill into
Law, Dec. 31, 1970, Weekly Compilation of Presi-
dential Documents, Vol. 6, No. 1, January 4, 1971
(p. 11) 1717
1.11 Technical Amendments to the Clean Air Act, November
18, 1971, P.L. 92-157, §302, 85 Stat. 464 1719
-------
CONTENTS xv
Page
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 92-258, 92d Cong., 1st Sess.
(1971) 1720
(2) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
S. REP. No. 92-251, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 1720
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 92-578,
92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 1720
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):
(a) July 1: Considered and passed House; * 1721
(b) July 14: Considered and passed Senate, amended
in lieu of S. 934; * 1721
(c) Oct. 19: Senate agreed to conference report; *_. 1721
(d) Nov. 9: House agreed to conference report. *__ 1721
1.2 Public Contracts, Advertisements for Proposals for Purchases
and Contracts for Supplies or Supplies for Government Depart-
ments; Application to Government Sales and Contracts to Sell
and to Government Corporations, as amended, 41 U.S.C. §5
(1958). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857b-l(a)(2)(D)]. (See,
"General 1.14" for legislative history) 1721
1.3 Advances of Public Moneys, Prohibition Against, as revised,
31 U.S.C. §529 (1946). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857b-
l(a)(2)(D) 1722
1.3a Advances of Public Moneys; Prohibition Against, August
2, 1946, R.S. §3648, §11, 60 Stat. 809 1722
1.3b E.G. 10410, Specification of Laws Prom Which the
Escapee Program Administered by the Department of
State Shall be Exempt, November 14, 1952, 17 Fed.
Reg. 10495 1723
1.3c E.O. 11223, Relating to the Performance of Functions
Authorized by the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
May 12, 1965, 30 Fed. Reg. 6635 1723
1.4 Contracts: Acquisition, Construction or Furnishing of Test
Facilities and Equipment, as amended, 10 U.S.C. §2353 (1956).
[Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857b-l(a)(2)(D)] 1726
1.4a Act of July 16, 1952, P.L. 82-557, 66 Stat. 725 1726
(1) House Committee on Armed Services, H.R. REP.
No. 548, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. (1951) 1730
(2) Senate Committee on Armed Services, S. REP. No.
936, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. (1951) 1743
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 97 (1951), Oct. 19: Objected to in Senate,
p. 13530 1755
(b) Vol. 98 (1952), July 3: Passed Senate, pp.
9053-9054 1756
(c) Vol. 98 (1952), July 4: Passed House, pp.
9374-9375 1757
1.4b An Act to Revise, Codify and Enact Into Law Title X
of the United States Code, August 10, 1956, §2353,
70A Stat. 149 1759
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
970, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955) 1760
-------
xvi CONTENTS
Pages
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
2484, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956) 1761
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 101 (1955), Aug. 1: Amended and passed
House, p. 12719 1762
(b) Vol. 102 (1956), July 23: Amended and passed
Senate, p. 13953 1762
(c) Vol. 102 (1956), July 25: House concurs in
Senate amendment, p. 14455 1762
1.5 Record on Review and Enforcement of Agency Orders, as
amended, 28 U.S.C. §2112 (1966). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C.
§§1857c-5(f)(2)(B), 1857f-5(b)(2)(B)(ii)] 1763
1.5a Record on Review and Enforcement of Agency Orders,
August 28, 1958, P.L. 85-791, §2, 72 Stat. 941 1765
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
842, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 1768
VOLUME IV
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
2129, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 1777
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 103 (1957), Aug. 5: Amended and passed
House, pp. 13617-13618 1802
(b) Vol. 104 (1958). Aug. 14: Passed Senate, p.
17537 1804
1.5b Rules of Civil Procedure, November 6, 1966, P.L.
89-773, §5(a), (b), 80 Stat. 1323 1804
(1) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
1406, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 1805
(2) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
2153, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 1814
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 112 (1966):
(a) July 27: Passed Senate, p. 17306 1824
(b) Oct. 20: Passed House, p. 28141 1825
1.6 Disclosure of Confidential Information Generally, as amended,
18 U.S.C. §1905 (1948). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §§1857c-9(c),
1857d(j)(l), 1857f-6(b), 1857h-5(a)(l)]. (See, "General 1.16a-
1.16a(3)(d)" for legislative history) 1828
1.7 Per Diem, Travel, and Transportation Expenses; Experts and
Consultants; Individuals Serving Without Pay, as amended,
5 U.S.C. §5703 (1969). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §§1857(d)(i),
1857e(e), 1857f-6e(b)(2)]. (See, "General 1.15a-1.15b(3)(c)"
for legislative history). 1828
1.8 Highway Safety Act of 1966, as amended, 23 U.S.C. §402
(1970). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857f-6b(2)] 1829
1.8a Highway Safety Act of 1966, September 9, 1966, P.L.
89-564, Title I, §101, 80 Stat. 731 1832
-------
CONTENTS xvii
Page
(I) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
1302, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 1838
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP.
No. 1700, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 1861
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1920,
89th Cong., 2d Sees. (1966) 1885
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 112 (1966):
(a) June 27: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
14936-14938 1898
(b) Aug. 18: Amended and passed House, pp.
19926-19939; 19940-19944 1898
(c) Aug. 31: House agrees to conference report, pp.
21355-21358 1937
(d) Sept. 1: Senate agrees to conference report, p.
21595-21596 1944
1.8b Highway Safety Program, August 23, 1968, P.L. 90-495,
§13, 82 Stat. 822 1946
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
1340, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968) 1946
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
1584, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968) 1950
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1799,
90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968) 1952
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 114 (1968):
(a) July 1: Amended and passed Senate, p. 19552. _. 1952
(b) July 3: Amended and passed House, p. 19950.. 1952
(c) July 26: House agrees to conference report, p.
23713 1952
(d) July 29: Senate agrees to conference report,
p. 24038 1952
1.8c Federal Aid Highway Act of 1970, December 31, 1970,
P.L. 91-605, Title II, §§202(c)-(e), 84 Stat. 1740, 1741 _, 1953
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP.
No. 91-1554, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 1954
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-1254, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 1962
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-1780,
91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 1970
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) Dec. 7: Considered and passed House, p. 40096 _ _ 1971
(b) Dec. 7: Amended and passed Senate, p. 40095. _ 1971
(c) Dec. 18: House agrees to conference report,
pp. 42514-42523 1972
(d) Dec. 19: Senate agrees to conference report,
pp. 42714-42723 1979
1.9 Federal Salary Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. §§5305, 5332 (1970).
[Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857f-6e(b)(3)(A)] 2002
1.9a General Schedule, September 6, 1966, P.L. 89-554,
80 Stat. 467 2007
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
901, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965) 2008
526-701 O - 73 - 2
-------
xviii CONTENTS
Page
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
1380, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 2010
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. Ill (1965), Sept. 7: Passed House, p.
22954 2012
(b) Vol. 112 (1966), July 25, 27: Amended and
passed Senate, pp. 17010 2012
(c) Vol. 112 (1966), Sept. 11: House concurred in
Senate amendments, p. 19077 2014
1.9b Registers, Individuals Receiving Compensation,
September 11, 1967, P.L. 90-83, §1(18), 81 Stat. 199 2014
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
124, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 2015
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
482, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 2015
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 113 (1967):
(a) April 3: Amended and passed House, p. 8109_. 2015
(b) Aug. 4: Amended and passed Senate, p. 21414 2016
(c) Aug. 24: House concurs in Senate amendments,
pp. 23904-23905 2016
1.9c Postal Revenue and Federal Salary Act of 1967, Decem-
ber 16, 1967, P.L. 90-206, Title II, §202(a), 81 Stat. 624, 2016
(1) House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
H.R. REP. No. 722, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 2016
(2) Senate Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
S. REP. No. 801, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 2025
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1013,
90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 2027
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 113 (1967):
(a) Oct. 10, 11: Amended and passed House, pp.
28410, 28412, 28648-28649, 28655 2030
(b) Nov. 28, 29: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
33975, 34013-34014, 34227-34228, 34261 2037
(c) Dec. 11: House recedes from its disagreement to
the Senate amendment, and concurs therein,
with an amendment, p. 35842 2044
(d) Dec. 12: Senate concurs in House amendment to
Senate amendment, pp. 36104 2044
1.9d E.G. 11413, Adjustment of Pay Rates Effective July 1,
1969, June 11, 1968, 33 Fed. Reg. 8641 2047
1.9e E.G. 11474, Adjustment of Pay Rates Effective July 1,
1969, June 16, 1969, 34 Fed. Reg. 9605 2050
1.9f E.G. 11524, Adjustment of Pay Rates Effective First Pay
Period on or After December 27, 1969, April 15, 1970,
35 Fed. Reg. 6247 2053
1.9g E.G. 11576, Adjustment of Pay Rates Effective January
1, 1971, January 8, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 347 2056
1.9h E.G. 11587, Federal Executive Salary Schedule, March
15, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 4973 2059
1.10 The Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, 49 U.S.C.
§1301 ei seq. (1970). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. |§1857f-10(a),
(b), 1857f-12] 2060
-------
CONTENTS xix
' Page
l.lOa The Federal Aviation Act of 1958, August 23, 1958,
P.L. 85-726, §§101-701, 72 Stat. 731 2132
(1) Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, S. REP. No. 1811, 85th Cong., 2d Sess.
(1958) 2153
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 2360, 85th Cong., 2d Sess.
(1958) 2161
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2556,
85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 2163
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 104 (1958):
(a) July 14: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
13621-13636, 13645-13650 2164
(b) Aug. 4: Amended and passed House, p. 16088__ 2179
(c) Aug. 11: Senate agrees to conference report,
p. 16887 2179
(d) Aug. 13: House agrees to conference report,
p. 17457 2179
l.lOb Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, December
29, 1970, P.L. 91-596, §31, 84 Stat. 1619 2179
(1) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
S. REP. No. 91-1282, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) _ _ _ 2180
(2) House Committee on Education and Labor, H.R.
REP. No. 91-1291, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 2181
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-1765,
91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 2182
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) Nov. 17: Amended and passed Senate, p.
37632 2183
(b) Nov. 24: Amended and passed House, p.
H10711 2183
(c) Dec. 16: Senate agrees to conference report, p.
41764 2183
(d) Dec. 17: House agrees to conference report, p.
42209 2183
l.lOc Clean Air Amendments of 1970, December 31, 1970,
P.L. 91-604, §ll(b)(l), 84 Stat. 1705 2183
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 91-1146, 91st Cong., 2d Sess.
(1970) 2184
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-1196, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 2186
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-1783,
91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 2190
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) June 10: Considered and passed House, p. 19228_ 2192
(b) Sept. 22: Considered and passed Senate,
amended, p. 33105 2192
(c) Dec. 18: Senate agrees to conference report,
p. 42391 2192
(d) Dec. 18: House agrees to conference report,
p. 42519 2193
-------
xx CONTENTS
Page
l.lOd Amendments to the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956,
November 18,1971, P.L. 92-159, §2a, 85 Stat. 481 2193
(1) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fish-
eries, H.R. REP. No. 92-202, 92d Cong., 1st Sess.
(1971) 2194
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No.
92-421, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 2195
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):
(a) May 17: Considered and passed House, pp.
H3973-H3977 2196
(b) Nov. 4: Considered and passed Senate, amended,
p. 517630* 2196
(c) Nov. 5: House concurred in Senate amendments,
p. H10550* 2196
l.lOe Airport and Airway Programs, November 27, 1971,
P.L. 92-174, §§5(b), 6, 85 Stat. 492 2197
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 92-459, 92d Cong., 1st Sess.
(1971) 2197
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No.
92-378, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 2197
(3) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No.
92-394, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 2198
(4) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 92-624,
92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 2198
(5) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):
(a) Sept. 22: Considered and passed House* 2198
(b) Oct. 12: Considered and passed Senate,
amended* 2198
(c) Nov. 8: Senate agreed to conference report* 2198
(d) Nov. 16: House agreed to conference report*.. 2198
l.lOf Noise Control Act of 1972, October 27,1972, P.L. 92-574,
86 Stat. 1234 2198
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 92-842, 92d Cong., 2d Sess.
(1972) 2202
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
92-1160, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972) 2207
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 118 (1972):
(a) Feb. 29: Considered and passed House, pp.
H1508-H1539 2250
(b) Oct. 12: Considered in Senate, pp. S17743-
S17764, S17774-S17785 2278
(c) Oct. 13: Considered and passed Senate,
amended, pp. S17988-S18014 2305
(d) Oct. 18: House concurred in Senate amendment,
with an amendment, pp. H10261-H10262,
H10287-H10300 2327
(e) Oct. 18: Senate concurred in House amendment,
pp. S18638-S18646 2330
1.11 Department of Transportation Act, as amended, 49 U.S.C.
-------
CONTENTS xxi
Page
§1651 et seq. (1968). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857f-10b].
(See, "General 1.5a-1.5c(3)(d)" for legislative history) 2334
1.12 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C.
§4332(2)(c) (1970). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857h-7(a)].
(See, "General 1.2a-1.2a(4)(e)" for legislative history)^ 2334
1.13 Public Health Service Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§241, 243,
246 (1970). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857i(b)]. (See, "General
1.12a-1.12ae" for legislative history) 2335
1.14 The Davis-Bacon Act, as amended, 40 U.S.C. §§276a-276a-5
(1964). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857j-3]. (See, "General
1.13a-1.13h" for legislative history) 2353
1.15 Reorganization Plan No. 14 of 1950, 64 Stat. 1267 (1950).
[Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857j-3] 2357
1.16 Regulations Governing Contractors and Subcontractors, as
amended, 40 U.S.C. §276c (1958). [Referred to in 42 U.S.C.
§1857j-3] 2357
1.16a Secretaries of Treasury and Labor Shall Make Regula-
tions for Contractors and Subcontractors, June 13, 1934,
P.L. 73-324, §2, 48 Stat. 948 2358
(1) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
803, 73rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1934) 2358
(2) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
1750, 73rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1934) 2359
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 78 (1934):
(a) April 26: Passed Senate, p. 7401 2360
(b) June 7: Passed House, p. 10759 2360
1.16b Amendments to Act of June 13, 1934, May 24, 1949, P.L.
81-72, §134, 63 Stat. 108 2360
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
352, 81st Cong., 1st Sess. (1949) 2361
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
303, 81st Cong., 1st Sess. (1949) 2362
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 95 (1949):
(a) April 4: Passed House, p. 3819 2364
(b) May 6: Passed Senate, p. 5827 2365
1.16c Amendment of 1958, August 28, 1958, P.L. 85-800, §12,
72 Stat. 967 2365
(1) Senate Committee on Government Operations, S.
REP. No. 2201, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 2365
(2) Congressional Record, Vol. 114 (1958): 2368
(a) Aug. 14: Passed Senate, p. 17539
(b) Aug. 15: Passed House, p. 17909 2368
VOLUME V
1.17 Federal Aid Highway Act, as amended, 23 U.S.C. §109(h), (j)
(1970). (See, "General 1.6a-1.6d(4)(f)" for legislative history). 2369
1.18 Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970, as amended,
-------
xxii CONTENTS
Page
49 U.S.C. §§1712(f), 1716(c)(4), (e) (1970). (See, "General
1.7a-1.7a(4)(d)" for legislative history) 2369
1.19 Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, as amended,
26 U.S.C. §169 (1969). (See, "General 1.4a-1.4a(5)(c)" for
legislative history) 2369
1.20 Interest on Certain Government Obligations, Int. Rev. Code
of 1954, as amended, §103, 26 U.S.C. §103 (1969). (See,
"General 1.9a-1.9d(4)(d)" for legislative history) 2369
1.21 Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Savings Act, 15 U.S.C.
§§1961-1964 2369
1.21a Motor Vehicle Information and Cost Saving Act, October
20, 1972, P.L. 92-513, Title III, §301 (b) (2), 302(b)(l),
86 Stat. 960 2372
(1) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 92-
413, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 2375
(2) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 92-1033, 92d Cong., 2d Sess.
(1972) 2375
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 92-1476,
92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972) 2375
(4) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 117 (1971), Nov. 3: Considered and passed
Senate, p. S17570-S17575, S17578-S17591* 2376
(b) Vol. 118 (1972), May 22: Considered and passed
House, amended in lieu of H.R. 11627, p.
H4754-H4755, H4774-H4793* 2376
(c) Vol. 118 (1972), Oct. 4: House agreed to con-
ference report, p. H9138-H9139* 2376
(d) Vol. 118 (1972), Oct. 6: Senate agreed to con-
ference report, p. S17175-S17176* 2376
2. EXECUTIVE ORDERS
2.1 E.G. 11282, Prevention, Control and Abatement of Air Pollu-
tion by Federal Authorities, May 28, 1966, 31 Fed. Reg.
7663 (1966) 2379
2.2 E.O. 11507, Prevention, Control and Abatement of Air and
Water Pollution at Federal Facilities, February 5, 1970, 35 Fed.
Reg. 3573 (1970) 2382
2.3 E.O. 11523, National Industrial Pollution Control Council,
April 9, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 5993 (1970) 2388
2.4 E.O. 11587, Placing Certain Positions in Levels IV and V of the
Federal Executive Salary Schedule, March 15, 1971, 35 Fed.
Reg. 475 (1971) 2389
2.5 E.O. 11602, Providing for Administration of the Clean Air Act
with Respect to Federal Contracts, Grants, or Loans, June 29,
1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 12475 (1971) 2390
3. REGULATIONS 2395
3.1 Entry of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Engines Under
Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act, Bureau of Customs, 19
C.F.R. §12.73 (1972)
3.2 Grants for Air Pollution Control Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 42 C.F.R. §§456.1-456.45 (1971)
-------
CONTENTS xxiii
Page
3.3 National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Stand-
ards Environmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§50.1-
50.11 (1971)
3.4 Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans, Environmental Protection Agency,
40 C.F.R. §§51.1-51.32 (1971)
3.5 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §52 (1972)
3.6 Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, En-
vironmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§60.1-60.85
(1971)
3.7 Prior Notion of Citizen Suits, Environmental Protection
Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§54.1-54.3 (1971)
3.8 Prevention, Control and Abatement of Air Pollution from
Federal Government Activities: Performance Standards and
Techniques of Measurement, Environmental Protection
Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§76.1-76.9 (1971)
3.9 Registration of Fuel Additives, Environmental Protection
Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§79.1-79.31 (1971)
3.10 Air Quality Control Regions, Criteria and Control Techniques,
Environmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§81.1-81.114
(1971)
3.11 Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles and New
Motor Vehicle Engines, Environmental Protection Agency,
40 C.F.R. §§85.1-85.327 (1972)
4. GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
4.1 Environmental Protection Agency, Reports to Congress as
required by the Clean Air Act 2399
4.la "The Economics of Clean Air," Report to Congress by
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, December 1970 2399
4.1b "Progress in the Prevention and Control of Air Pollu-
tion," Report to Congress by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, January 1971 2561
4.1c "Development of Systems to Attain Established Motor
Vehicle and Engine Emission Standards," Report to
Congress by the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, September 1971 2587
4.Id "Progress in Prevention and Control of Air Pollution,"
Report to Congress by the Administrator of the En-
vironmental Protection Agency, February 1972 2626
4.2 Criteria and Control Techniques Summaries 2640
4.2a Criteria. 2640
(1) "Criteria for Carbon Monoxide," National Air
Pollution Control Administration, March 1970 2640
(2) "Criteria for Hydrocarbons," National Air Pollution
Control Administration, March 1970 2651
(3) "Criteria for Particulate Matter," National Air
Pollution Control Administration, January 1969 2658
(4) "Criteria for Photochemical Oxidants," National
-------
xxiv CONTENTS
Page
Air Pollution Control Administration, January
1969-.. 2672
(5) "Criteria for Sulfur Oxides," National Air Pollution
Control Administration, January 1969 2690
(6) "Criteria for Nitrogen Oxides," Environmental
Protection Agency, January 1971 2707
4.2b Control Techniques 2725
(1) "Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide from
Stationary Sources," National Air Pollution Control
Administration, March 1970 2725
(2) "Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide, Nitro-
gen Oxide and Hydrocarbons from Mobile Sources,"
National Air Pollution Control Administration,
March 1970 2727
(3) "Control Techniques for Hydrocarbons and Organic
Solvents from Stationary Sources," National Air
Pollution Control Administration, March 1970 2732
(4) "Control Techniques for Nitrogen Oxides Emissions
from Stationary Sources," National Air Pollution
Control Administration, March 1970 2737
(5) "Control Techniques for Particulates," National Air
Pollution Control Administration, January 1969 2744
(6) "Control Techniques for Sulfur Oxides," National
Air Pollution Control Administration, January
1969 2753
4.3 Selected Reports 2759
4.3a Semiannual Report, Prepared by the Committee on
Motor Vehicle Emissions of the National Academy of
Sciences, January 1, 1972 2759
4.4 Interagency Agreements 2822
4.4a Interagency Agreement Between Environmental Pro-
tection Agency and Department of Transportation
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 2822
-------
Statutes
and
Legislative
History
-------
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
1.1 THE CLEAN AIR ACT, AS AMENDED,
42 U.S.C. §1857 et seq. (1970)
THE CLEAN AIR ACT
Parallel Citation
Statutes At Large §
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
42 U.S.C. §
1857
1857a
1857b
1857b— 1
1857c
1857c— 1
1857c— 2
1857c— 3
1857c— 4
1857c— 5
1857c— 6
1857c— 7
1857c— 8
1857c— 9
1857d
1857d— 1
1857e
1857f
—
1857f— 1
1857f— 2
1857f— 3
1857f— 4
1857f— 5
1857f— 5a
1857f— 6
1857f— 6a
1857f— 6b
Statui
211
212
213
231
232
233
234
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
402
403
J>2 U.S.C.!
1857f—6c
1857f—6e
1857f—7
1857f—9
1857f—10
1857f—11
1857f—12
1857g
1857h
1857h—1
1857h—2
1857h—3
1857h—4
1857h—5
1857h—6
1857h—7
18571
1857J
1857J—1
1857J—2
1857J—3
1857k
18571
1858
1858a
SUBCHAPTER I.—AlR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL
Sec.
1857. Congressional findings; purposes of subchapter.
1857a. Cooperative activities.
(a) Interstate cooperation; uniform State laws; State compacts.
(b) Federal cooperation.
(c) Consent of Congress to compacts.
1857b. Research, investigations, training, and other activities.
(a) Research and development program for prevention and con-
trol of air pollution.
(b) Availabiltiy of information and recommendations; cooperative
activities; research grants, etc.; contract; training; fellow-
ships; collection and dissemination of basic data on chemical,
physical and biological effects of air quality; process, method
and device development.
(c) Results of other scientific studies.
(d) Construction of facilities.
-------
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Sec.
(e) Potential air pollution problems; conferences; findings and
recommendations of Secretary.
1857b—1. Research relating to fuels and vehicles.
(a) Research programs; grants; contracts; pilot and demon-
stration plants; byproducts research.
(b) Powers of Secretary in establishing research and develop-
ment programs.
(c) Authorization of appropriations.
1857c. Grants for support of air pollution planning and control programs.
(a) Amounts; limitations; "regional air quality control program"
defined; assurances of plan development capability.
(b) Terms and conditions; regulations; factors for consideration;
expenditure and consultation requirements.
(c) State expenditure limitation.
1857c—1. Interstate air quality agencies or commissions; program cost limi-
tations; planning commissions.
1857c—2. Air quality control regions.
(a) Atmospheric areas; designation of regions.
(b) Air quality criteria.
(e) Pollution control techniques.
(d) Revision and reissuance of criteria and techniques.
1857c—3. Air quality criteria and control techniques.
(a) Air pollutant list; publication and revision by Administra-
tor; issuance of air quality criteria for air pollutants.
(b) Issuance by Administrator of information on air pollution
control techniques; standing consulting committees for
air pollutants; establishment; membership.
(c) Review, modification, and reissuance by Administrator.
(d) Publication in Federal Register; availability of copies for
general public.
1857c—4. National primary and secondary ambient air quality standards;
promulgation; procedure.
1857c—5. State implementation plans for national primary and secondary
ambient air quality standards.
(a) Submission to Administrator; time for submission; State
procedures; required contents of plans for approval by
Administrator; approval of revised plan by Administra-
tor.
(b) Extension of period for submission of plan implementing
national secondary ambient air quality standard.
(c) Preconditions for preparation and publication by Admin-
istrator of proposed regulations setting forth an imple-
mentation plan; hearings for proposed regulations;
promulgation of regulations by Administrator.
(d) Applicable implementation plan.
(e) Extension of time period for attainment of national pri-
mary ambient air quality standard in implementation
plan; procedure; approval of extension by Administrator.
(f) Postponement of compliance by any stationary source or
class of moving sources with any requirement of an ap-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Sec.
1857c—6.
1857c—7.
1857c—8.
1857c—9.
plicable implementation plan; application by Governor
of affected State; determination by Administrator; no-
tice and opportunity for hearing; judicial review; prece-
dence of cases; subpenas.
Standards of performance by new stationary sources.
(a) Definitions.
(b) Publication and revision by Administrator of list of cate-
gories of stationary sources; inclusion of category in
list; proposal of regulations by Administrator establish-
ing standards for new sources within category; promul-
gation and revision of standards; differentiation within
categories of new sources; issuance of information on
pollution control techniques; applicability to new sources
owned or operated by United States.
(c) Implementation and enforcement by State; procedure; dele-
gation of authority of Administrator to State; enforce-
ment power of Administrator unaffected.
(d) Emission standards for any existing source for any air
pollutant; submission of State plan to Administrator
establishing, implementing and enforcing standards; au-
thority of Administrator to prescribe State plan; author-
ity of Administrator to enforce State plan; procedure.
(e) Prohibited acts.
National emission standards for hazardous air pollutants.
(a) Definitions.
(b) Publication and revision by Administrator of list of haz-
ardous air pollutants; inclusion of air pollutant in list;
proposal of regulations by Administrator establishing
standards for pollutant; establishment of standards;
standards effective upon promulgation; issuance of in-
formation on pollution control techniques.
(c) Prohibited acts; exemption by President for any stationary
source; duration and extension of exemption; report to
Congress.
(d) Implementation and enforcement by State of standards for
stationary sources; procedure; delegation of authority of
Administrator to State; enforcement power of Adminis-
trator unaffected.
Federal enforcement procedures.
(a) Determination of violation of applicable implementation
plan or standard; notification of violator; issuance of
compliance order; contents of compliance order.
(b) Civil action for appropriate relief; jurisdiction; venue;
notice to appropriate State agency.
(c) Penalties.
Recordkeeping, inspections, monitoring, and entry.
(a) Authority of Administrator or authorized representative.
(b) Enforcement procedure by State; delegation of authority
-------
4 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Sec.
of Administrator to State; power of Administrator un-
affected.
(c) Availability of records, reports, and information to pub-
lic ; disclosure of trade secrets.
1857d. Air quality standards and abatement of air pollution.
(a) Air pollution subject to abatement.
(b) Encouragement of municipal, State and interstate action.
(c) State standards; letter of intent; boards for hearings on stand-
ards; members, compensation, and expenses; violations;
jurisdiction.
(d) Conferences of air pollution agencies; participation of foreign
countries; transcript of proceedings.
(e) Recommendations of Secretary for remedial action by agencies;
commencement of recommended action.
(f) Hearings for failure to abate pollution; board members; find-
ings and recommendations.
(g) Judicial proceedings to secure abatement of pollution.
(h) Federal court proceedings; evidence; jurisdiction of court.
(i) Compensation and travel expenses for members of hearing
board.
(j) Furnishing of data to Secretary by polluter; reports; failure
to make required report; forfeitures.
(k) Injunction in cases of imminent and substantial endangerment.
1857d—1. Standards to achieve higher level of air quality.
1857e. Air Quality Advisory Board; advisory committees.
(a) Establishment of Board; membership; appointment; term.
(b) Duties of Board.
(c) Clerical and technical assistance.
(d) Advisory committees.
(e) Compensation; travel expenses.
1857f. Air pollution from Federal facilities; cooperation by Federal agencies.
SUBCHAPTER II.—EMISSION STANDARDS FOR MOVING SOURCES
Part A.—Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards
1857f—1. Standards governing emission of substances from vehicles or
engines; establishment by regulation; vehicles and engines to
which applicable; effective date of regulations.
1857f—2. Prohibited acts.
(a) Manufacture, sale, or importation of vehicles or engines
not in conformity with regulations; failure to make re-
ports or provide information; removal of devices in-
stalled in conformity with regulations.
(b) Authority of Secretary to make exemptions; refusal to
admit vehicle or engine into United States; exemption
of vehicles or engines intended for export.
1857f—3. Jurisdiction of district court to restrain violations; actions
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Sec.
brought by or in name of United States; territorial scope of
subpenas for witnesses.
1857f—4. Penalties for violations; separate offenses.
1857f—5. Testing of vehicles or engines to determine if in conformity with
regulations; issuance of certificate of conformity; similarly
constructed vehicles or engines deemed to be in conformity
with regulations.
1957f—5a. Compliance by vehicles and engines in actual use.
(a) Warranty.
(b) Testing methods and procedures.
(c) Nonconforming vehicles; plan for remedying nonconform-
ity; instructions for maintenance and use.
(d) Dealer costs borne by manufacturer.
(e) Cost statement.
(f) Inspection after sale to ultimate purchaser.
1857f—6. Records, reports and information required; access to and copying
records; confidential nature of information obtained.
1857f—6a. State standards.
1957f—6b. Federal assistance in developing vehicle inspection programs.
1857f—6c. Fuel additives.
(a) Registration with Secretary.
(b) Registration data; compliance.
(c) Trade secrets.
(d) Penalty.
(e) Recovery of penalties to be prosecuted by United States
Attorney.
1857f—6d. National emissions standards study.
1857f—6e. Low-emission vehicles.
(a) Definitions.
(b) Low-Emission Vehicle Certification Board; establishment;
composition; appointment; Chairman; compensation;
travel expenses; employment and compensation of addi-
tional personnel; time and place of meetings; powers.
(c) Determinations by Administrator of models or classes of
motor vehicles qualifying as low-emission vehicles.
(d) Certification by Board; specifications for suitable substi-
tutes; criteria for certification; term of certification;
procedure for certification.
(e) Acquisition by Federal government by purchase or lease;
procurement costs; contract provisions.
(f) Priority for purchase by procuring agency.
(g) Waiver of statutory price limitations.
(h) Testing of emissions from certified low-emission vehicles
purchased by the Federal government; procedure; re-
certification.
(i) Authorization of appropriations.
(j) Promulgation by Board of implementing procedures.
1857f—7. Definitions.
1857f—8. Repealed.
-------
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Sec.
1857f—9.
Part B.—Aircraft Emission Standards
Establishment of standards.
(a) Study; report; hearings; issuance of regulations.
(b) Effective date of regulations.
(c) Consultation with Secretary of Transportation.
1857f—10. Enforcement of standards; regulations by Secretary of Transpor-
tation; proceedings to amend, modify, suspend, or revoke cer-
tificates.
1857f—11. State standards and controls.
1857f—12. Definitions.
SUBCHAPTER III.—GENERAL PROVISIONS
1857g. Administration.
(a) Regulations; delegation of powers of Secretary.
(b) Detail of Public Health Service personnel to air pollution con-
trol agencies; payment of salaries and allowances.
(c) Payments under grants; installments; advances or reimburse-
ment.
1857h. Definitions.
1857h—1. Emergency powers.
1857h—2. Citizen suits.
(a) Establishment of right to bring suit.
(b) Notice.
(c) Venue; intervention by Administrator.
(d) Award of costs; security.
(e) Non-restriction of other rights.
(f) Definition.
1857h—3. Legal representation of Administrator and appearance by At-
torney General.
1857h—4. Federal procurement.
(a) Contracts with violators prohibited.
(b) Notification procedures.
(c) Federal agency contracts.
(d) Exemptions; notification to Congress.
(e) Annual report to Congress.
1857h—5. Administrative proceedings and judicial review.
1857h—6. Mandatory licensing.
1857h—7. Policy review.
1857i. Application to other laws; nonduplication of appropriations.
18571. Records and audit.
1857J—1. Comprehensive economic cost studies.
1857J—2. Additional reports to Congress.
1857J—3. Labor standards.
1857k. Separabiltiy of provisions.
1857?. Appropriations.
SUBCHAPTER I.—AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL
§ 1857. Congressional findings; purposes of subchapter
(a) The Congress finds—
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 7
(1) that the predominant part of the Nation's population is
located in its rapidly expanding metropolitan and other urban
areas, which generally cross the boundary lines of local juris-
dictions and often extend into two or more States;
(2) that the growth in the amount and complexity of air
pollution brought about by urbanization, industrial develop-
ment, and the increasing use of motor vehicles, has resulted
in mounting dangers to the public health and welfare, includ-
ing injury to agricultural crops and livestock, damage to and
the deterioration of property, and hazards to air and ground
transportation;
(3) that the prevention and control of air pollution at its
source is the primary responsibility of States and local gov-
ernments ; and
(4) that Federal financial assistance and leadership is es-
sential for the development of cooperative Federal, State, re-
gional, and local programs to prevent and control air pollu-
tion.
(b) The purposes of this subchapter are—
(1) to protect and enhance the quality of the Nation's air
resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and
the productive capacity of its population;
(2) to initiate and accelerate a national research and devel-
opment program to achieve the prevention and control of air
pollution;
(3) to provide technical and financial assistance to State
and local governments in connection with the development
and execution of their air pollution prevention and control
programs; and
(4) to encourage and assist the development and operation
of regional air pollution control programs.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 101, formerly § 1, as added Dec. 17,
1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 392, renumbered and amended
Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(2), (3), 79 Stat. 992;
Nov. 21,1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 485.
§ 1857a. Cooperative activities—Interstate cooperation; uni-
form State laws; State compacts
(a) The Administrator shall encourage cooperative activities by
the States and local governments for the prevention and control of
air pollution, encourage the enactment of improved and, so far as
practicable in the light of varying conditions and needs, uniform
State and local laws relating to the prevention and control of air
526-701 O - 73 - 3
-------
8 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
pollution; and encourage the making of agreements and compacts
between States for the prevention and control of air pollution.
Federal Cooperation
(b) The Administrator shall cooperate with and encourage co-
operative activities by all Federal departments and agencies hav-
ing functions relating to the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion, so as to assure the utilization in the Federal air pollution
control program of all appropriate and available facilities and
resources within the Federal Government.
Consent of Congress to compacts
(c) The consent of the Congress is hereby given to two or more
States to negotiate and enter into agreements or compacts, not in
conflict with any law or treaty of the United States, for (1)
cooperative effort and mutual assistance for the prevention and
control of air pollution and the enforcement of their respective
laws relating thereto, and (2) the establishment of such agencies,
joint or otherwise, as they may deem desirable for making effec-
tive such agreements or compacts. No such agreement or compact
shall be binding or obligatory upon any State a party thereto
unless and until it has been approved by Congress. It is the intent
of Congress that no agreement or compact entered into between
States after November 21, 1967, which relates to the control and
abatement of air pollution in an air quality control region, shall
provide for participation by a State which is not included (in
whole or in part) in such air quality control region.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title I, § 102, formerly § 2, as added Dec. 17,
1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 393, renumbered Oct. 20, 1965,
Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(3), 79 Stat. 992, amended Nov. 21,
1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 485, amended Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604, § 15(c) (2), 84 Stat. 1713.
§ 1857b. Research, invesigations, training, and other activities
—Research and development program for prevention and control
of air pollution
(a) The Administrator shall establish a national research and
development program for the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion and as part of such program shall—
(1) conduct, and promote the coordination and acceleration
of, research, investigations, experiments, training, demon-
strations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects,
extent, prevention, and control of air pollution;
(2) encourage, cooperate with, and render technical serv-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 9
ices and provide financial assistance to air pollution control
agencies and other appropriate public or private agencies,
institutions, and organizations, and individuals in the conduct
of such activities;
(3) conduct investigations and research and make surveys
concerning any specific problem of air pollution in coopera-
tion with any air pollution control agency with a view to
recommending a solution of such problem, if he is requested
to do so by such agency or if, in his judgment, such problem
may affect any community or communities in a State other
than that in which the source of the matter causing or con-
tributing to the pollution is located;
(4) establish technical advisory committees composed of
recognized experts in various aspects of air pollution to assist
in the examination and evaluation of research progress and
proposals and to avoid duplication of research.
Availability of information and recommendations; cooperative activities; re-
search grants, etc.; contract; training; fellowsh'ps; collection and dis-
semination of basic data on chemical, physical and biological effects of
air qual'ty; process, method and device development
(b) In carrying out the provisions of the preceding subsection
the Administrator is authorized to—
(1) collect and make available, through publications and
other appropriate means, the results of and other informa-
tion, including appropriate recommendations by him in
connection therewith, pertaining to such research and other
activities;
(2) cooperate with other Federal departments and agen-
cies, with air pollution control agencies, with other public and
private agencies, institutions, and organizations, and with
any industries involved, in the preparation and conduct of
such research and other activities;
(3) make grants to air pollution control agencies, to other
public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and organi-
zations, and to individuals, for purposes stated in subsection
(a) (1) of this section;
(4) contract with public or private agencies, institutions,
and organizations, and with individuals, without regard to
section 529 of Title 31 and section 5 of Title 41;
(5) provide training for, and make training grants to, per-
sonnel of air pollution control agencies and other persons
with suitable qualifications;
(6) establish and maintain research fellowships, in the En-
-------
10 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
vironmental Protection Agency and at public or nonprofit
private educational institutions or research organizations;
(7) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other Fed-
eral departments and agencies, and with other public or pri-
vate agencies, institutions, and organizations having related
responsibilities, basic data on chemical, physical, and biologi-
cal effects of varying air quality and other information per-
taining to air pollution and the prevention and control
thereof; and
(8) develop effective and practical processes, methods, and
prototype devices for the prevention or control of air pollu-
tion.
Results of other scientific studies
(c) In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this
section the Administrator shall conduct research on, and survey
the results of other scientific studies on, the harmful effects on the
health or welfare of persons by the various known air pollutants.
Construction of facilities
(d) The Administrator is authorized to construct such facilities
and staff and equip them as he determines to be necessary to carry
out his functions under this chapter.
Potential air pollution problems; conferences; findings and
recommendations of Administrator
(e) If, in the judgment of the Administrator, an air pollution
problem of substantial significance may result from discharge or
discharges into the atmosphere, he may call a conference concern-
ing this potential air pollution problem to be held in or near one or
more of the places where such discharge or discharges are occur-
ring or will occur. All interested persons shall be given an oppor-
tunity to be heard at such conference, either orally or in writing,
and shall be permitted to appear in person or by representative in
accordance with procedures prescribed by the Administrator. If
the Administrator finds, on the basis of the evidence presented at
such conference, that the discharge or discharges if permitted to
take place or continue are likely to cause or contribute to air
pollution subject to abatement under section 1857d of this title, he
shall send such findings, together with recommendations concern-
ing the measures which he finds reasonable and suitable to nrevent
such pollution, to the person or persons whose actions will result
in the discharge or discharges involved; to air pollution agencies
of the State or States and of the municipality or municipalities
where such discharge or discharges will originate; and to the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 11
interstate air pollution control agency, if any, in the jurisdictional
area of which any such municipality is located. Such findings and
recommendations shall be advisory only, but shall be admitted
together with the record of the conference, as part of the proceed-
ings under subsections (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) of section
1857d of this title.
Accelerated research program on short- and long-term effects of air pollut-
ants; conduct of studies, utilization of fac.lities, and consultations; dura-
tion of contracts; authorization of appropriations
(f) (1) In carrying out research pursuant to this chapter, the
Administrator shall give special emphasis to research on the
short- and long-term effects of air pollutants on public health and
welfare. In the furtherance of such research, he shall conduct an
accelerated research program—
(A) to improve knowledge of the contribution of air pol-
lutants to the occurrence of adverse effects on health, including,
but not limited to, behavioral, physiological, toxicological, and
biochemical effects; and
(B) to improve knowledge of the short- and long-term ef-
fects of air pollutants on welfare.
(2) In carrying out the provisions of this subsection the Admin-
istrator may—
(A) conduct epidemiological studies of the effects of air
pollutants on mortality and morbidity;
(B) conduct clinical and laboratory studies on the immu-
nologic, biochemical, physiological, and the toxicological ef-
fects including carcinogenic, teratogenic, and mutagenic ef-
fects of air pollutants;
(C) utilize, on a reimbursable basis, the facilities of exist-
ing Federal scientific laboratories and research centers;
(D) utilize the authority contained in paragraphs (1)
through (4) of subsection (b) of this section; and
(E) consult with other appropriate Federal agencies to
assure that research or studies conducted pursuant to this
subsection will be coordinated with research and studies of
such other Federal agencies.
(3) In entering into contracts under this subsection, the Admin-
istrator is authorized to contract for a term not to exceed 10 years
in duration. For the purposes of this paragraph, there are author-
ized to be appropriated $15,000,000. Such amounts as are appro-
priated shall remain available until expended and shall be in addi-
tion to any other appropriations under this chapter.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title I, § 103, formerly § 3, as added Dec. 17,
-------
12 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 394, renumbered and amended
Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, §§ 101(3), 103, 79 Stat. 992,
996; Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 486, amended Dec.
31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 2(a), 4(2), 15(a) (2), (c) (2), 84
Stat. 1676, 1689, 1710, 1713.
§ 1857b—1. Research relating to fuels and vehicles—Research
programs; grants; contracts; pilot and demonstration plants; by-
products research
(a) The Administrator shall give special emphasis to research
and development into new and improved methods having indus-
try-wide application, for the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion resulting from the combustion of fuels. In furtherance of such
research and development he shall—
(1) conduct and accelerate research programs directed to-
ward development of improved, low-cost techniques for—
(A) control of combustion byproducts of fuels,
(B) removal of potential air pollutants from fuels prior to
combustion,
(C) control of emissions from the evaporation of fuels,
(D) improving the efficiency of fuels combustion so as to
decrease atmospheric emissions, and
(E) producing synthetic or new fuels which, when used,
result in decreased atmospheric emissions.
(2) provide for Federal grants to public or nonprofit agen-
cies, institutions, and organizations and to individuals, and
contracts with public or private agencies, institutions, or per-
sons, for payment of (A) part of the cost of acquiring, con-
structing, or otherwise securing for research and develop-
ment purposes, new or improved devices or methods having
industrywide application of preventing or controlling dis-
charges into the air of various types of pollutants; (B) part
of the cost of programs to develop low emission alternatives
to the present internal combustion engine; (C) the cost to
purchase vehicles and vehicle engines, or portions thereof, for
research, development, and testing purposes; and (D) carry-
ing out the other provisions of this section, without regard to
section 529 of Title 31 and section 5 of Title 41: Provided,
That research or demonstration contracts awarded pursuant
to this subsection (including contracts for construction) may
be made in accordance with, and subject to the limitations
provided with respect to research contracts of the military
departments in, section 2353 of Title 10, except that the de-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 13
termination, approval, and certification required thereby shall
be made by the Secretary: Provided further, That no grant
may be made under this paragraph in excess of $1,500,000;
(3) determine, by laboratory and pilot plant testing, the
results of air pollution research and studies in order to de-
velop new or improved processes and plant designs to the
point where they can be demonstrated on a large and practi-
cal scale;
(4) construct, operate, and maintain, or assist in meeting
the cost of the construction, operation, and maintenance of
new or improved demonstration plants or processes which
have promise of accomplishing the purposes of this chapter;
(5) study new or improved methods for the recovery and
marketing of commercially valuable byproducts resulting
from the removal of pollutants.
Powers of Administrator in establishing research and
development programs
(b) In carrying out the provisions of this section, the Adminis-
trator may—
(1) conduct and accelerate research and development of
low-cost instrumentation techniques to facilitate determina-
tion of quantity and quality of air pollutant emissions, includ-
ing, but not limited to, automotive emissions;
(2) utilize, on a reimbursable basis, the facilities of exist-
ing Federal scientific laboratories;
(3) establish and operate necessary facilities and test sites
at which to carry on the research, testing, development, and
programing necessary to effectuate the purposes of this sec-
tion ;
(4) acquire secret processes, technical data, inventions,
patent applications, patents, licenses, and an interest in lands,
plants, and facilities, and other property or rights by pur-
chase, license, lease, or donation; and
(5) cause on-site inspections to be made of promising do-
mestic and foreign projects, and cooperate and participate in
their development in instances in which the purposes of the
chapter will be served thereby.
Authorization of appropriations
(c) For the purposes of this section there are authorized to be
appropriated $75,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1971,
$125,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1972, and
$150,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1973. Amounts
-------
14 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
appropriated pursuant to this subsection shall remain available
until expended.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title I, § 104, as added Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L.
90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 487, Dec. 5, 1969, Pub.L. 91-137, 83 Stat. 283,
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 2(b), (c), 13(a), 15(c)
(2), 84 Stat. 1676,1677, 1709, 1713.
§ 1857c. Grants for support of air pollution planning and control
programs—Amounts; limitations; assurances of plan development
capability
(a) (1) (A) The Administrator may make grants to air pollu-
tion control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost of
planning, developing, establishing, or improving, and up to one-
half of the cost of maintaining programs for the prevention and
control of air pollution or implementation of national primary and
secondary ambient air quality standards.
(B) Subject to subparagraph (C), the Administrator may make
grants to air pollution control agencies within the meaning of
paragraph (1), (2), or (4) of section 1857h(b) of this title in an
amount up to three-fourths of the cost of planning, developing,
establishing, or improving, and up to three-fifths of the cost of
maintaining, any program for the prevention and control of air
pollution or implementation of national primary and secondary
ambient air quality standards in an area that includes two or more
municipalities, whether in the same or different States.
(C) With respect to any air quality control region or portion
thereof for which there is an applicable implementation plan
under section 1857c—5 of this title grants under subparagraph
(B) may be made only to air pollution control agencies which have
substantial responsibilities for carrying out such applicable imple-
mentation plan.
(2) Before approving any grant under this subsection to any
air pollution control agency within the meaning of sections 1857h
(b) (2) and 1857h(b) (4) of this title, the Administrator shall
receive assurances that such agency provides for adequate repre-
sentation of appropriate State, interstate, local, and (when appro-
priate) international, interests in the air quality control region.
(3) Before approving any planning grant under this subsection
to any air pollution control agency within the meaning of sections
1857h(b) (2) and 1857h(b) (4) of this title, the Administrator
shall receive assurances that such agency has the capability of
developing a comprehensive air quality plan for the air quality
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 15
control region, which plan shall include (when appropriate) a
recommended system of alerts to avert and reduce the risk of
situations in which there may be imminent and serious danger to
the public health or welfare from air pollutants and the various
aspects relevant to the establishment of air quality standards for
such air quality control region, including the concentration of
industries, other commercial establishments, population and natu-
rally occurring factors which shall affect such standards.
Terms and conditions; regulations; factors for consideration;
expenditure and consultation requirements
(b) From the sums available for the purposes of subsection (a)
of this section for any fiscal year, the Administrator shall from
time to time make grants to air pollution control agencies upon
such terms and conditions as the Administrator may find neces-
sary to carry out the purpose of this section. In establishing regu-
lations for the granting of such funds the Administrator shall, so
far as practicable, give due consideration to (1) the population,
(2) the extent of the actual or potential air pollution problem, and
(3) the financial need of the respective agencies. No agency shall
receive any grant under this section during any fiscal year when
its expenditures of non-Federal funds for other than nonrecurrent
expenditures for air pollution control programs will be less than
its expenditures were for such programs during the preceding
fiscal year; and no agency shall receive any grant under this
section with respect to the maintenance of a program for the
prevention and control of air pollution unless the Administrator is
satisfied that such grant will be so used as to supplement and, to
the extent practicable, increase the level of State, local, or other
non-Federal funds that would in the absence of such grant be
made available for the maintenance of such program, and will in
no event supplant such State, local, or other non-Federal funds.
No grant shall be made under this section until the Administrator
has consulted with the appropriate official as designated by the
Governor or Governors of the State or States affected.
State expenditure limitation
(c) Not more than 10 per centum of the total of funds appro-
priated or allocated for the purposes of subsection (a) of this
section shall be granted for air pollution control programs in any
one State. In the case of a grant for a program in an area crossing
State boundaries, the Administrator shall determine the portion of
such grant that is chargeable to the percentage limitation under
this subsection for each State into which such area extends.
-------
16 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Reduction of payments; availability of reduced amounts; reduced amount
as deemed paid to agency for purpose of determining amount of grant
(d) The Administrator, with the concurrence of any recipient
of a grant under this section, may reduce the payments to such
recipient by the amount of the pay, allowances, traveling expenses,
and any other costs in connection with the detail of any officer or
employee to the recipient under section 1857g of this title, when
such detail is for the convenience of, and at the request of, such
recipient and for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of
this chapter. The amount by which such payments have been re-
duced shall be available for payment of such costs by the Adminis-
trator, but shall, for the purpose of determining the amount of
any grant to a recipient under subsection (a) of this section, be
deemed to have been paid to such agency.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 105, formerly § 4, as added Dec. 17,
1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 395, renumbered and amended §
104, Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101 (2)-(4), 79 Stat.
992; Oct. 15, 1966, Pub.L. 89-675, § 3, 80 Stat. 954, renumbered
and amended § 105, Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat.
489, amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 3(a), (b) (1),
15(c) (2), 84 Stat. 1677,1713.
§ 1857c—1. Interstate air quality agencies; program cost lim-
itations
For the purpose of developing implementation plans for any
interstate air quality control region designated pursuant to section
1857c—2 of this title, the Administrator is authorized to pay, for
two years, up to 100 per centum of the air quality planning pro-
gram costs of any agency designated by the Governors of the
affected States, which agency shall be capable of recommending to
the Governors plans for implementation of national primary and
secondary ambient air quality standards and shall include repre-
sentation from the States and appropriate political subdivisions
within the air quality control region. After the initial two-year
period the Administrator is authorized to make grants to such
agency in an amount up to three-fourths of the air quality plan-
ning program costs of such agency.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 106, as added Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L.
90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 490, amended Dec. 31 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §
3(c), 84 Stat. 1677.
§ 1857c—2. Air quality control regions—Responsibility of State
for air quality; submission of implementation plan
(a) Each State shall have the primary responsibility for assur-
ing air quality within the entire geographic area comprising such
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 17
State by submitting an implementation plan for such State which
will specify the manner in which national primary and secondary
ambient air quality standards will be achieved and maintained
within each air quality control region in such State.
Designated regions
(b) For purposes of developing and carrying out implementa-
tion plans under section 1857c—5 of this title—
(1) an air quality control region designated under this
section before December 31, 1970, or a region designated
after such date under subsection (c) of this section, shall be
an air quality control region; and
(2) the portion of such State which is not part of any such
designated region shall be an air quality control region, but
such portion may be subdivided by the State into two or more
air quality control regions with the approval of the Adminis-
trator.
Authority of Administrator to designate regions; notification of
Governors of affected States
(c) The Administrator shall, within 90 days after December 31,
1970, after consultation with appropriate State and local authori-
ties, designate as an air quality control region any interstate area
or major intrastate area which he deems necessary or appropriate
for the attainment and maintenance of ambient air quality stand-
ards. The Administrator shall immediately notify the Governors
of the affected States of any designation made under this subsec-
tion.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 107, as added Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L.
90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 490, Title I, § 107, as added Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604, § 4(a), 84 Stat. 1678.
§ 1857c—3. Air quality criteria and control techniques—Air
pollutant list; publication and revision by Administrator; is-
suance of air quality criteria for air pollutants
(a) (1) For the purpose of establishing national primary and
secondary ambient air quality standards, the Administrator shall
within 30 days after December 31, 1970, publish, and shall from
time to time thereafter revise, a list which includes each air pollu-
tant—
(A) which is his judgment has an adverse effect on public
health or welfare;
(B) the presence of which in the ambient air results from
numerous or diverse mobile or stationary sources; and
(C) for which air quality criteria had not been issued be-
-------
18 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
fore December 31, 1970, but for which he plans to issue air
quality criteria under this section.
(2) The Administrator shall issue air quality criteria for an air
pollutant within 12 months after he has included such pollutant in
a list under paragraph (1). Air quality criteria for an air pollu-
tant shall accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful
in indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on
public health or welfare which may be expected from the presence
of such pollutant in the ambient air, in varying quantities. The
criteria for an air pollutant, to the extent practicable, shall include
information on—
(A) those variable factors (including atmospheric condi-
tions) which of themselves or in combination with other fac-
tors may alter the effects on public health or welfare of such
air pollutant;
(B) the types of air pollutants which, when present in the
atmosphere, may interact with such pollutant to produce an
adverse effect on public health or welfare; and
(C) any known or anticipated adverse effects on welfare.
Issuance by Administrator of information on air pollution control techniques;
standing consulting committees for air pollutants; establishment, membership
(b) (1) Simultaneously with the issuance of criteria under
subsection (a) of this section, the Administrator shall, after con-
sultation with appropriate advisory committees and Federal de-
partments and agencies, issue to the States and appropriate air
pollution control agencies information on air pollution control
techniques, which information shall include data relating to the
technology and costs of emission control. Such information shall
include such data as are available on available technology and
alternative methods of prevention and control of air pollution.
Such information shall also include data on alternative fuels, proc-
esses, and operating methods which will result in elimination or
significant reduction of emissions.
(2) In order to assist in the development of information on
pollution control techniques, the Administrator may establish a
standing consulting committee for each air pollutant included in a
list published pursuant to subsection (a) (1) of this section,
which shall be comprised of technically qualified individuals repre-
sentative of State and local governments, industry, and the aca-
demic community. Each such committee shall submit, as appropri-
ate, to the Administrator information elated to that required by
paragraph (1).
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 19
Review, modification, and reissuance by Administrator
(c) The Administrator shall from time to time review, and, as
appropriate, modify, and reissue any criteria or information on
control techniques issued pursuant to this section.
Publication in Federal Register; availability of copies
for general public
(d) The issuance of air quality criteria and information on air
pollution control techniques shall be announced in the Federal
Register and copies shall be made available to the general public.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 108, as added Dec. 31,1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 4(a), 84 Stat. 1678.
§ 1857c—4. National primary and secondary ambient air quality
standards; promulgation; procedure
(a) (1) The Administrator—
(A) within 30 days after December 31, 1970, shall publish
proposed regulations prescribing a national primary ambient
air quality standard and a national secondary ambient air
quality standard for each air pollutant for which air quality
criteria have been issued prior to such date; and
(B) after a reasonable time for interested persons to sub-
mit written comments thereon (but no later than 90 days
after the initial publication of such proposed standards) shall
by regulation promulgate such proposed national primary and
secondary ambient air quality standards with such modifica-
tions as he deems appropriate.
(2) With respect to any air pollutant for which air quality
criteria are issued after December 31, 1970, the Administrator
shall publish, simultaneously with the issuance of such criteria
and information, proposed national primary and secondary am-
bient air quality standards for any such pollutant. The procedure
provided for in paragraph (1) (B) of this subsection shall apply
to the promulgation of such standards.
(b) (1) National primary ambient air quality standards, pre-
scribed under subsection (a) of this section shall be ambient
air quality standards the attainment and maintenance of which
in the judgment of the Administrator, based on such criteria
and allowing an adequate margin of safety, are requisite to
protect the public health. Such primary standards may be revised
in the same manner as promulgated
(2) Any national secondary ambient air quality standard pre-
scribed under subsection (a) of this section shall specify a level of
air quality the attainment and maintenance of which in the judg-
ment of the Administrator, based on such criteria, is requisite to
-------
20 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse
effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in the
ambient air. Such secondary standards may be revised in the same
manner as promulgated.1
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 109, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 4 (a), 84 Stat. 1679.
§ 1857c—5. State implementation plans for national primary
and secondary ambient air quality standards—Submission to Ad-
ministrator; time for submission; State procedures; required con-
tents of plans for approval by Administrator; approval of re-
vised plan by Administra,,
(a) (1) Each State shall, after reasonable notice and public
hearing's, adopt and submit to the Administrator, within nine
months after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air
quality standard (or any revision thereof) under section 1857c—4
of this title for any air pollutant, a plan which provides for imple-
mentation, maintenance, and enforcement of such primary stand-
ard in each air quality control region (or portion thereof) within
such State. In addition, such State shall adopt and submit to the
Administrator (either as a part of a plan submitted under the
preceding sentence or separately) within nine months after the
promulgation of a national ambient air quality secondary standard
(or revision thereof), a plan which provides for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of such secondary standard in each
air quality control region (or portion thereof) within such State.
Unless a separate public hearing is provided, each State shall
consider its plan implementing such secondary standard at the
hearing required by the first sentence of this paragraph.
(2) The Administrator shall, within four months after the date
required for submission of a plan under paragraph (1), approve
or disapprove such plan or each portion thereof. The Administra-
tor shall approve such plan, or any portion thereof, if he deter-
mines that it was adopted after reasonable notice and hearing and
that—
(A) (i) in the case of a plan implementing a national
primary ambient air quality standard, it provides for the
attainment of such primary standard as expeditiously as
practicable but (subject to subsection (e) of this section) in
no case later than three years from the date of approval of
such plan (or any revision thereof to take account of a re-
vised primary standard); and (ii) in the case of a plan imple-
menting a national secondary ambient air quality standard, it
1 Period omitted in statute.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 21
specifies a reasonable time at which such secondary standard
will be attained;
(B) it includes emission limitations, schedules, and time-
tables for compliance with such limitations, and such other
measures as may be necessary to insure attainment and main-
tenance of such primary or secondary standard, including,
but not limited to, land-use and transportation controls;
(C) it includes provision for establishment and operation
of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures nec-
essary to (i) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient
air quality and, (ii) upon request, make such data available
to the Administrator;
(D) it includes a procedure, meeting the requirements of
paragraph (4), for review (prior to construction or modifica-
tion) of the location of new sources to which a standard of
performance will apply;
(E) it contains adequate provisions for intergovernmental
cooperation, including measures necessary to insure that
emissions of air pollutants from sources located in any air
quality control region will not interfere with the attainment
or maintenance of such primary or secondary standard in any
portion of such region outside of such State or in any other
air quality control region;
(F) it provides (i) necessary assurances that the State will
have adequate personnel, funding, and authority to carry out
such implementation plan, (ii) requirements for installation
of equipment by owners or operators of stationary sources to
monitor emissions from such sources, (iii) for periodic re-
ports on the nature and amounts of such emissions; (iv) that
such reports shall be correlated by the State agency with any
emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this
chapter, which reports shall be available at reasonable time
for public inspection; and (v) for authority comparable to
that in section 1857h—1 of this title, and adequate contin-
gency plans to implement such authority;
(G) it provides, to the extent necessary and practicable, for
periodic inspection and testing of motor vehicles to enforce
compliance with applicable emission standards; and
(H) it provides for revision, after public hearings, of such
plan (i) from time to time as may be necessary to take
account of revisions of such national primary or secondary
ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved
or more expeditious methods of achieving such primary or
-------
22 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
secondary standard; or (ii) whenever the Administrator
finds on the basis of information available to him that the
plan is substantially inadequate to achieve the national am-
bient air quality primary or secondary standard which it im-
plements.
(3) The Administrator shall approve any revision of an imple-
mentation plan applicable to an air quality control region if he
determines that it meets the requirements of paragraph (2) and
has been adopted by the State after reasonable notice and public
hearings.
(4) The procedure referred to in paragraph (2) (D) for re-
view, prior to construction or modification, of the location of new
sources shall (A) provide for adequate authority to prevent the
construction or modification of any new source to which a stand-
ard of performance under section 1857c—6 of this title will apply
at any location which the State determines will prevent the attain-
ment or maintenance within any air quality control region (or
portion thereof) within such State of a national ambient air qual-
ity primary or secondary standard, and (B) require that prior to
commencing construction or modification of any such source, the
owner or operator thereof shall submit to such State such infor-
mation as may be necessary to permit the State to make a determi-
nation under clause (A).
Extension of period for submission of plan implementing national
secondary ambient air quality standard
(b) The Administrator may, wherever he determines necessary,
extend the period for submission of any plan or portion thereof
which implements a national secondary ambient air quality stand-
ard for a period not to exceed 18 months from the date otherwise
required for submission of such plan.
Preconditions for preparation and publication by Administrator of proposed
regulations setting forth an implementation plan; hearings for proposed
regulations; promulgation of regulations by Administrator
(c) The Administrator shall, after consideration of any State
hearing record, promptly prepare and publish proposed regula-
tions setting forth an implementation plan, or portion thereof, for
a State if—
(1) the State fails to submit an implementation plan for
any national ambient air quality primary or secondary stand-
ard within the time prescribed,
(2) the plan, or any portion thereof, submitted for such
State is determined by the Administrator not to be in accord-
ance with the requirements of this section, or
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 23
(3) the State fails, within 60 days after notification by the
Administrator or such longer period as he may prescribe, to
revise an implementation plan as required pursuant to a pro-
vision of its plan referred to in subsection (a) (2) (H) of
this section.
If such State held no public hearing associated with respect to
such plan (or revision thereof), the Administrator shall provide
opportunity for such hearing within such State on any proposed
regulation. The Administrator shall, within six months after the
date required for submission of such plan (or revision thereof),
promulgate any such regulations unless, prior to such promulga-
tion, such State has adopted and submitted a plan (or revision)
which the Administrator determines to be in accordance with the
requirements of this section.
Applicable implementation plan
(d) For purposes of this chapter, an applicable implementation
plan is the implementation plan, or most recent revision thereof,
which has been approved under subsection (a) of this section or
promulgated under subsection (c) of this section and which imple-
ments a national primary or secondary ambient air quality stand-
ard in a State.
Extension of time period for attainment of national primary ambient air
quality standard in implementation plan; procedure; approval of exten-
sion by Administrator
(e) (1) Upon application of a Governor of a State at the time
of submission of any plan implementing a national ambient air
quality primary standard, the Administrator may (subject to par-
agraph (2)) extend the three-year period referred to in subsec-
tion (a) (2) (A) (i) of this section for not more than two years
for an air quality control region if after review of such plan the
Administrator determines that—
(A) one or more emission sources (or classes of moving
sources) are unable to comply with the requirements of such
plan which implement such primary standard because the
necessary technology or other alternatives are not available
or will not be available soon enough to permit compliance
within such three-year period, and
(B) the State has considered and applied as a part of its
plan reasonably available alternative means of attaining such
primary standard and has justifiably concluded that attain-
ment of such primary standard within the three years cannot
be achieved.
526-701 O - 73 - 4
-------
24 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(2) The Administrator may grant an extension under para-
graph (1) only if he determines that the State plan provides for—
(A) application of the requirements of the plan which im-
plement such primary standard to all emission sources in such
region other than the sources (or classes) described in para-
graph (1) (A) within the three-year period, and
(B) such interim measures of control of the sources (or
classes) described in paragraph (1) (A) as the Administra-
tor determines to be reasonable under the circumstances.
Postponement of compliance by any stationary source or class of moving
sources with any requirement of an applicable implementation plan;
application by Governor of affected State; determination by Administra-
tor; notice and opportunity for hearing; judicial review; precedence of
cases; subpenas
(f) (1) Prior to the date on which any stationary source or
class of moving sources is required to comply with any require-
ment of an applicable implementation plan the Governor of the
State to which such plan applies may apply to the Administrator
to postpone the applicability of such requirement to such source
(or class) for not more than one year. If the Administrator deter-
mines that—
(A) good faith efforts have been made to comply with such
requirement before such date,
(B) such source (or class) is unable to comply with such
requirement because the necessary technology or other alter-
native methods of control are not available or have not been
available for a sufficient period of time,
(C) any available alternative operating procedures and in-
terim control measures have reduced or will reduce the im-
pact of such source on public health, and
(D) the continued operation of such source is essential to
national security or to the public health or welfare,
then the Administrator shall grant a postponement of such re-
quirement.
(2) (A) Any determination under paragraph (1) shall (i) be
made on the record after notice to interested persons and opportu-
nity for hearing, (ii) be based upon a fair evaluation of the entire
record at such hearing, and (iii) include a statement setting forth
in detail the findings and conclusions upon which the determina-
tion is based.
(B) Any determination made pursuant to this paragraph shall
be subject to judicial review by the United States court of appeals
for the circuit which includes such State upon the filing such court
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 25
within 30 days from the date of such decision of a petition by any
interested person praying that the decision be modified or set aside
in whole or in part. A copy of the petition shall forthwith be sent
by registered or certified mail to the Administrator and thereupon
the Administrator shall certify and file in such court the record
upon which the final decision complained of was issued, as pro-
vided in section 2112 of Title 28. Upon the filing of such petition
the court shall have jurisdiction to affirm or set aside the determi-
nation complained of in whole or in part. The findings of the
Administrator with respect to questions of fact (including each
determination made under subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D)
of paragraph (1)) shall be sustained if based upon a fair evalua-
tion of the entire record at such hearing.
(C) Proceedings before the court under this paragraph shall
take precedence over all the other causes of action on the docket
and shall be assigned for hearing and decision at the earliest
practicable date and expedited in every way.
(D) Section 1857h—5(a) of this title (relating to subpenas)
shall be applicable to any proceeding under this subsection.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 110, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 4(a), 84 Stat. 1680.
§ 1857c—6. Standards of performance for new stationary
sources—Definitions
(a) For purposes of this section:
(1) The term "standard of performance" means a standard
for emissions of air pollutants which reflects the degree of
emission limitation achievable through the application of the
best system of emission reduction which (taking into account
the cost of achieving such reduction) the Administrator de-
termines has been adequately demonstrated.
(2) The term "new source" means any stationary source
the construction or modification of which is commenced after
the publication of regulations (or, if earlier, proposed regula-
tions) prescribing a standard of performance under this sec-
tion which will be applicable to such source.
(3) The term "stationary source" means any building,
structure, facility, or installation which emits or may emit
any air pollutant.
(4) The term "modification" means any physical change in,
or change in the method of operation of, a stationary source
which increases the amount of any air pollutant emitted by
-------
26 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
such source or which results in the emission of any air pollu-
tant not previously emitted.
(5) The term "owner or operator" means any person who
owns, leases, operates, controls, or supervises a stationary
source.
(6) The term "existing source" means any stationary
source other than a new source.
Publication and revision by Administrator of list of categories of stationary
sources; inclusion of category in list; proposal of regulations by Admin-
istrator establishing standards for new sources within category; promul-
gation and revision of standards; differentiation within categories of
new sources; issuance of information on pollution control techniques;
applicability to new sources owned or operated by United States
(b) (1) (A) The Administrator shall, within 90 days after
December 31, 1970, publish (and from time to time thereafter
shall revise) a list of categories of stationary sources. He shall
include a category of sources in such list if he determines it may
contribute significantly to air pollution which causes or contributes
to the endangerment of public health or welfare.
(B) Within 120 days after the inclusion of a category of sta-
tionary sources in a list under subparagraph (A), the Administra-
tor shall publish proposed regulations, establishing Federal stand-
ards of performance for new sources within such category. The
Administrator shall afford interested persons an opportunity for
written comment on such proposed regulations. After considering
such comments, he shall promulgate, within 90 days after such
publication, such standards with such modification as he deems
appropriate. The Administrator may, from time to time, revise
such standards following the procedure required by this subsec-
tion for promulgation of such standards. Standards of perform-
ance or revisions thereof shall become effective upon promulga-
tion.
(2) The Administrator may distinguish among classes, types,
and sizes within categories of new sources for the purpose of
establishing such standards.
(3) The Administrator shall, from time to time, issue informa-
tion on pollution control techniques for categories of new sources
and air pollutants subject to the provisions of this section.
(4) The provisions of this section shall apply to any new source
owned or operated by the United States.
Implementation and enforcement by State; procedure; delegation of authority
of Administrator to State; enforcement power of Administrator unaffected
(c) (1) Each State may develop and submit to the Administra-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 27
tor a procedure for implementing and enforcing standards of per-
formance for new sources located in such State. If the Adminis-
trator finds the State procedure is adequate, he shall delegate to
such State any authority he has under this chapter to implement
and enforce such standards (except with respect to new sources
owned or operated by the United States).
(2) Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit the Administrator
from enforcing any applicable standard of performance under this
section.
Emission standards for any existing source for any air pollutant; submission
of State plan to Administrator establishing, implementing and enforcing
standards; authority of Administrator to prescribe State plan; authority
of Administrator to enforce State plan; procedure
(d) (1) The Administrator shall prescribe regulations which
shall establish a procedure similar to that provided by section
1857c—5 of this title under which each State shall submit to the
Administrator a plan which (A) establishes emission standards
for any existing source for any air pollutant (i) for which air
quality criteria have not been issued or which is not included on a
list published under section 1857c—3(a) or 1857c—7(b) (1) (A)
of this title but (ii) to which a standard of performance under
subsection (b) of this section would apply if such existing source
were a new source, and (B) provides for the implementation and
enforcement of such emission standards.
(2) The Administrator shall have the same authority—
(A) to prescribe a plan for a State in cases where the State
fails to submit a satisfactory plan as he would have under
section 1857c—5(c) of this title in the case of failure to
submit an implementation plan, and
(B) to enforce the provisions of such plan in cases where
the State fails to enforce them as he would have under sec-
L tions 1857c—8 and 1857c—9 of this title with respect to an
\ implementation plan.
^- Prohibited acts
(e) After the effective date of standards of performance pro-
mulgated under this section, it shall be unlawful for any owner or
operator of any new source to operate such source in violation of
any standard of performance applicable to such source.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 111, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 4(a), 84 Stat. 1683 and amended Nov. 18, 1971, Pub.L.
92-157, Title III, § 302(f), 85 Stat. 464.
§ 1857c—7. National emission standards for hazardous air pol-
lutants—Definitions
(a) For purposes of this section—
-------
28 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(1) The term "hazardous air pollutant" means an air pollu-
tant to which no ambient air quality standard is applicable
and which in the judgment of the Administrator may cause,
or contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in
serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible, illness.
(2) The term "new source" means a stationary source the
construction or modification of which is commenced after the
Administrator proposes regulations under this section estab-
lishing an emission standard which will be applicable to such
source.
(3) The term "stationary source", "modification", "owner
or operator" and "existing source" shall have the same mean-
ing as such terms have under section 1857c—6 (a) of this
title.
Publication and revision by Administrator of list of hazardous air pollutants;
inclusion of a;r pollutant in list; proposal of regulations by Administrator
establishing standards for pollutant; establishment of standards; stand-
ards effective upon promulgation; issuance of information on pollution
control techniques
(b) (1) (A) The Administrator shall, within 90 days after
December 31, 1970, publish (and shall from time to time there-
after revise) a list which includes each hazardous air pollutant for
which he intends to establish an emission standard under this
section.
(B) Within 180 days after the inclusion of any air pollutant in
such list, the Administrator shall publish proposed regulations
establishing emission standards for such pollutant together with a
notice of a public hearing within thirty days. Not later than 180
days after such publication, the Administrator shall prescribe an
emission standards for such pollutant, unless he finds, on the basis
of information presented at such' hearings, that such pollutant
clearly is not a hazardous air pollutant. The Administrator shall
establish any such standard at the level which in his judgment
provides an ample margin of safety to protect the public health
from such hazardous air pollutant.
(C) Any emission standard established pursuant to this section
shall become effective upon promulgation.
(2) The Administrator shall, from time to time, issue informa-
tion on pollution control techniques for air pollutants subject to
the provisions of this section.
Prohibited acts; exemption by President for any stationary source;
duration and extension of exemption; report to Congress
(c) (1) After the effective date of any emission standard under
this section—
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 29
(A) no person may construct any new source or modify
any existing source which, in the Administrator's judgment,
will emit an air pollutant to which such standard applies
unless the Administrator finds that such source if properly
operated will not cause emissions in violation of such stand-
ard, and
(B) no air pollutant to which such standard applies may be
emitted from any stationary source in violation of such stand-
ard, except that in the case of an existing source—
(i) such standard shall not apply until 90 days after
its effective date, and
(ii) the Administrator may grant a waiver permitting
such source a period of up to two years after the effective
date of a standard to comply with the standard, if he
finds that such period is necessary for the installation of
controls and that steps will be taken during the period of
the wavier to assure that the health of persons will be
protected from imminent endangerment.
(2) The President may exempt any stationary source from com-
pliance with paragraph (1) for a period of not more than two
years if he finds that the technology to implement such standards
is not available and the operation of such source is required for
reasons of national security. An exemption under this paragraph
may be extended for one or more additional periods, each period
not to exceed two years. The President shall make a report to
Congress with respect to each exemption (or extension thereof)
made under this paragraph.
Implementation and enforcement by State of standards for stationary sources;
procedure; delegation of authority of Administrator to State; enforce-
ment power of Administrator unaffected
(d) (1) Each State may develop and submit to the Administra-
tor a procedure for implementing and enforcing emission stand-
ards for hazardous air pollutants for stationary sources located in
such State. If the Administrator finds the State procedure is ade-
quate, he shall delegate to such State any authority he has under
this chapter to implement and enforce such standards (except
with respect to stationary sources owned or operated by the
United States).
(2) Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit the Administrator
from enforcing any applicable emission standard under this sec-
tion.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 112, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 4(a), 84 Stat. 1685.
-------
30 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
§ 1857c—8. Federal enforcement procedures—Determination of
violation of applicable implementation plan or standard; notifica-
tion of violator; issuance of compliance order or initiation of
civil action upon failure to correct; effect of compliance order;
contents of compliance order
(a) (1) Whenever, on the basis of any information available to
him, the Administrator finds that any person is in violation of any
requirement of an applicable implementation plan, the Adminis-
trator shall notify the person in violation of the plan and the State
in which the plan applies of such finding. If such violation extends
beyond the 30th day after the date of the Administrator's notifica-
tion, the Administrator may issue an order requiring such person
to comply with the requirements of such plan or he may bring a
civil action in accordance with subsection (b) of this section.
(2) Whenever, on the basis of information available to him, the
Administrator finds that violations of an applicable implementa-
tion plan are so widespread that such violations appear to result
from a failure of the State in which the plan applies to enforce the
plan effectively, he shall so notify the State. If the Administrator
finds such failure extends beyond the 30th day after such notice,
he shall give public notice of such finding. During the period
beginning- with such public notice and ending when such State
satisfies the Administrator that it will enforce such plan (hereafter
referred to in this section as "period of federally assumed enforce-
ment"), the Administrator may enforce any requirement of such
plan with respect to any person—
(A) by issuing an order to comply with such requirement,
or
(B) by bringing a civil action under subsection (b) of this
section.
(3) Whenever, on the basis of any information available to him,
the Administrator finds that any person is in violation of section
1857c—6(e) of this title (relating to new source performance
standards) or section 1857c—7(c) of this title (relating to stand-
ards for hazardous emissions), or is in violation of any require-
ment of section 1857c—9 of this title (relating to inspections,
etc.), he may issue an order requiring such person to comply with
such section or requirement, or he may bring a civil action in
accordance with subsection (b) of this section.
(4) An order issued under this subsection (other than an order
relating to a violation of section 1857c—7 of this title) shall not
take effect until the person to whom it is issued has had an oppor-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 31
tunity to confer with the Administrator concerning the alleged
violation. A copy of any order issued under this subsection shall
be sent to the State air pollution control agency of any State in
which the violation occurs. Any order issued under this subsection
shall state with reasonable specificity the nature of the violation,
specify a time for compliance which the Administrator determines
is reasonable, taking into account the seriousness of the violation
and any good faith efforts to comply with applicable requirements.
In any case in which an order under this subsection (or notice to a
violator under paragraph (1)) is issued to a corporation, a copy of
such order (or notice) shall be issued to appropriate corporate
officers.
Civil action for appropriate relief; jurisdiction; venue;
notice to appropriate State agency
(b) The Administrator may commence a civil action for appro-
priate relief, including a permanent or temporary injunction,
whenever any person—
(1) violates or fails or refuses to comply with any order
issued under subsection (a) of this section; or
(2) violates any requirements of an applicable implementa-
tion plan (A) during any period of Federally assumed en-
forcement, or (B) more than 30 days after having been noti-
fied by the Administrator under subsection (a) (1) of this
section of a finding that such person is violating such require-
ment ; or
(3) violates section 1857c—6(e) or section 1857c—7(c) of
this title; or
(4) fails or refuses to comply with any requirement of
section 1857c—9 of this title.
Any action under this subsection may be brought in the district
court of the United States for the district in which the defendant
is located or resides or is doing business, and such court shall have
jurisdiction to restrain such violation and to require compliance.
Notice of the commencement of such action shall be given to the
appropriate State air pollution control agency.
Penalties
(c) (1) Any person who knowingly—
(A) violates any requirement of an applicable implementa-
tion plan (i) during any period of Federally assumed enforce-
ment, or (ii) more than 30 days after having been notified by
the Administrator under subsection (a) (1) of this section
that such person is violating such requirement, or
(B) violates or fails or refuses to comply with any order
-------
32 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
issued by the Administrator under subsection (a) of this sec-
tion, or
(C) violates section 1857c—6(e) or section 1857c—7(c) of
this title,
shall be punished by a fine of not more than $25,000 per day of
violation, or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or by
both. If the conviction is for a violation committed after the first
conviction of such person under this paragraph, punishment shall
be by a fine of not more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by
imprisonment for not more than two years, or by both.
(2) Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, rep-
resentation, or certification in any application, record, report,
plan, or other document filed or required to be maintained under
this chapter or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders
inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be main-
tained under this chapter, shall upon conviction, be punished by a
fine of not more than $10,000, or by imprisonment for not more
than six months, or by both.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 113, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 4(a), 84 Stat. 1686, and amended Nov. 18, 1971, Pub.L.
92-157, Title III, § 302(b)(c), 85 Stat. 464.
§ 1857c—9. Recordkeeping, inspections, monitoring, and en-
try—Authority of Administrator or authorized representative
(a) For the purpose (i) of developing or assisting in the devel-
opment of any implementation plan under section 1857c—5 or
section 1857c—6(d) of this title any standard of performance
under section 1857c—6 of this title, or any emission standard
under'section 1857c—7 of this title, (ii) of determining whether
any person is in violation of any such standard or any require-
ment of such a plan, or (iii) carrying out section 1857h—1 of this
title—
(1) the Administrator may require the owner or operator
of any emission source to (A) establish and maintain such
records, (B) make such reports, (C) install, use, and main-
tain such monitoring equipment or methods, (D) sample such
emissions (in accordance with such methods, at such loca-
tions, at such intervals, and in such manner as the Adminis-
trator shall prescribe), and (E) provide such other informa-
tion as he may reasonably require; and
(2) the Administrator or his authorized representative,
upon presentation of his credentials—
(A) shall have a right of entry to, upon, or through
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 33
any premises in which an emission source is located or in
which any records required to be maintained under para-
graph (1) of this section are located, and
(B) may at reasonable times have access to and copy
any records, inspect any monitoring equipment or
method required under paragraph (1), and sample any
emissions which the owner or operator of such source is
required to sample under paragraph (1).
Enforcement procedure by State; delegation of authority of Administrator
to State; power of Administrator unaffected
(b) (1) Each State may develop and submit to the Administra-
tor a procedure for carrying out this section in such State. If the
Administrator finds the State procedure is adequate, he may dele-
gate to such State any authority he has to carry out this section
(except with respect to new sources owned or operated by the
United States).
(2) Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit the Administrator
from carrying out this section in a State.
Availability of records, reports, and information to public;
disclosure of trade secrets
(c) Any records, reports or information obtained under subsec-
tion (a) of this section shall be available to the public, except that
upon a showing satisfactory to the Administrator by any person
that records, reports, or information, or particular part thereof,
(other than emission data) to which the Administrator has access
under this section if made public, would divulge methods or proc-
esses entitled to protection as trade secrets of such person, the
Administrator shall consider such record, report, or information
or particular portion thereof confidential in accordance with the
purposes of section 1905 of Title 18, except that such record,
report, or information may be disclosed to other officers, employ-
ees, or authorized representatives of the United States concerned
with carrying out this chapter or when revelant in any proceeding
under this chapter.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 114, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 4(a), 84 Stat. 1687.
§ 1857d. Abatement of air pollution by means of conference
procedure—Air pollution subject to abatement
(a) The pollution of the air in any State or States which endan-
gers the health or welfare of any persons and which is covered by
subsection (b) or (c) of this section, shall be subject to abatement
as provided in this section.
-------
34 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Conferences of air pollution agencies
(b) (1) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State, a
Sate air pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of the
Governor and the State air pollution control agency for the State
in which the municipality is situated) the governing body of any
municipality, the Administrator shall, if such request refers to air
pollution which is alleged to endanger the health or welfare of
persons in a State other than that in which the discharge or
discharges (causing or contributing to such pollution) originate,
give formal notification thereof to the air pollution control agency
of the muncipality where such discharge or discharges originate,
to the air pollution control agency of the State in which such
municipality is located, and to the interstate air pollution control
agency, if any, in whose jurisdictional area such municipality is
located, and shall call promptly a conference of such agency or
agencies and of the air pollution control agencies of the municipal-
ities which may be adversely affected by such pollution, and the
air pollution control agency, if any, of each State, or for each area,
in which any such municipality is located.
(2) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State, a State
air pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of the Gov-
ernor and the State air pollution control agency for the State in
which the municipality is situated) the governing body of any mu-
nicipality, the Administrator shall, if such request refers to al-
leged air pollution which is endangering the health or welfare of
persons only in the State in which the discharge or discharges
(causing or contributing to such pollution) originate and if a
municipality affected by such air pollution, or the municipality in
which such pollution originates, has either made or concurred in
such request, give formal notification thereof to the State air pol-
lution control agency, to the air pollution control agencies of the
municipality where such discharge or discharges originate, and of
the municipality or municipalities alleged to be adversely affected
thereby, and to any interstate air pollution control agency, whose
jurisdictional area includes any such municipality and shall
promptly call a conference of such agency or agencies, unless in
the judgment of the Administrator, the effect of such pollution is
not of such significance as to warrant exercise of Federal jurisdic-
tion under this section.
(3) The Administrator may, after consultation with State
officials of all affected States, also call such a conference whenever,
on the basis of reports, surveys, or studies, he has reason to
believe that any pollution referred to in subsection (a) of this
section is occurring and is endangering the health and welfare of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 35
persons in a State other than that in which the discharge or
discharges originate. The Administrator shall invite the coopera-
tion of any municipal, State, or interstate air pollution control
agencies having jurisdiction in the affected area on any surveys
or studies forming the basis of conference action.
(4) A conference may not be called under this subsection with
respect to an air pollutant for which (at the time the conference is
called) a national primary or secondary ambient air quality stand-
ard is in effect under section 1857c—4 of this title.
Participation of foreign countries in conferences
(c) Whenever the Administrator, upon receipt of reports, sur-
veys, or studies from any duly constituted international agency,
has reason to believe that any pollution referred to in subsection
(a) of this section which endangers the health or welfare or
persons in a foreign country is occurring, or whenever the Secre-
tary of State requests him to do so with respect to such pollution
which the Secretary of State alleges is of such a nature, the
Administrator shall give formal notification thereof to the air
pollution control agency of the municipality where such discharge
or discharges originate, to the air pollution control agency of the
State in which such municipality is located, and to the interstate
air pollution control agency, if any, in the jurisdictional area of
which such municipality is located, and shall call promptly a con-
ference of such agency or agencies. The Administrator shall invite
the foreign country which may be adversely affected by the pollu-
tion to attend and participate in the conference, and the represent-
ative of such country shall, for the purpose of the conference and
any further proceeding resulting from such conference, have all
the rights of a State air pollution control agency. This subsection
shall apply only to a foreign country which the Administrator
determines has given the United States essentially the same right
with respect to the prevention or control of air pollution occurring
in that country as is given that country by this subsection.
Attendance at conference; Federal report of matters before conference; noti-
fication of date of conference; presentation of views; transcript of pro-
ceedings; summary
(d) (1) The agencies called to attend any conference under this
section may bring such persons as they desire to the conference.
The Administrator shall deliver to such agencies and make availa-
ble to other interested parties, at least thirty days prior to any
such conference, a Federal report with respect to the matters
before the conference, including data and conclusions or findings
(if any) ; and shall give at least thirty days' prior notice of the
-------
36 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
conference date to any such agency, and to the public by publica-
tion on at least three different days in a newspaper or newspapers
of general circulation in the area. The chairman of fl
shall give interested parties an opportunity to pr
to the conference with respect to such Federal rep
or findings (if any), and other pertinent informatio
istrator shall provide that a transcript be maintaii
ceedings of the conference and that a copy of sue'
made available on request of any participant in th
the expense of such participant.
(2) Following this conference, the Administrate!
and foward 1 to all air pollution control agencies
conference a summary of conference discussions including (A;
occurrence of air pollution subject to abatement under this sub-
chapter; (B) adequacy of measures taken toward abatement of
the pollution; and (C) nature of delays, if any, being encountered
in abating the pollution.
Recommendations of Administrator for remedial action by agencies;
commencement of recommended action
(e) If the Administrator believes, upon the conclusion of the
conference or thereafter, that effective progress toward abatement
of such pollution is not being made and that the health or welfare
of any persons is being endangered, he shall recommend to the
appropriate State, interstate, or municipal air pollution control
agency (or to all such agencies) that the necessary remedial ac-
tion be taken. The Administrator shall allow at least six months
from the date he makes such recommendations for the taking of
such recommended action.
Hearings for failure to abate pollution; board members;
findings and recommendations
(f) (1) If, at the conclusion of the period so allowed, such
remedial action or other action which in the judgment of the
Administrator is reasonably calculated to secure abatement of
such pollution has not been taken, the Administrator shall call a
public hearing, to be held in or near one or more of the places
where the discharge or discharges causing or contributing to such
pollution originated, before a hearing board of five or more per-
sons appointed by the Administrator. Each State in which any
discharge causing or contributing to such pollution originates and
each State claiming to be adversely affected by such pollution shall
be given an opportunity to select one member of such hearing
board and each Federal department, agency, or instrumentality
' So in original.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 37
having a substantial interest in the subject matter as determined
by the Administrator shall be given an opportunity to select one
member of such hearing board, and one member shall be a repre-
sentative of the appropriate interstate air pollution agency if one
exists, and not less than a majority of such hearing board shall be
persons other than officers or employees of the Environmental
Protection Agency. At least three weeks' prior notice of such
hearing shall be given to the State, interstate, and municipal air
pollution control agencies called to attend such hearing and to the
alleged polluter or polluters. All interested parties shall be given a
reasonable opportunity to present evidence to such hearing board.
(2) On the basis of evidence presented at such hearing, the
hearing board shall make findings as to whether pollution referred
to in subsection (a) of this section is occurring and whether
effective progress toward abatement thereof is being made. If the
hearing board finds such pollution is occurring and effective prog-
ress toward abatement thereof is not being made it shall make
recommendations to the Administrator concerning the measures,
if any, which it finds to be reasonable and suitable to secure
abatement of such pollution.
(3) The Administrator shall send such findings and recommen-
dations to the person or persons discharging any matter causing
or contributing to such pollution; to air pollution control agencies
of the State or States and of the municipality or municipalities
where such discharge or discharges originate; and to any inter-
state air pollution control agency whose jurisdictional area in-
cludes any such municipality, together with a notice specifying a
reasonable time (not less than six months) to secure abatement of
such pollution.
Judicial proceedings to secure abatement of pollution
(g) If action reasonably calculated to secure abatement of the
pollution within the time specified in the notice following the pub-
lic hearing is not taken, the Administrator—
(1) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons (A) in a State other than that in
which the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to
such pollution) originate, or (B) in a foreign country which
has participated in a conference called under subsection (c)
of this section and in all proceedings under this section result-
ing from such conference, may request the Attorney General
to bring a suit on behalf of the United States in the appropri-
ate United States district court to secure abatement of the
pollution.
-------
38 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(2) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons only in the State in which the
discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such pol-
lution) originate, at the request of the Governor of such
State, shall provide such technical and other assistance as in
his judgment is necessary to assist the State in judicial pro-
ceedings to secure abatement of the pollution under State or
local law or, at the request of the Governor of such State,
shall request the Attorney General to bring suit on behalf of
the United States in the appropriate United States district
court to secure abatement of the pollution.
Federal court proceedings; evidence; jurisdiction of court
(h) The court shall receive in evidence in any suit brought in a
United States court under subsection (g) of this section a tran-
script of the proceedings before the board and a copy of the
board's recommendations and shall receive such further evidence
as the court in its discretion deems proper. The court, giving due
consideration to the practicability of complying with such stand-
ards as may be applicable and to the physical and economic feasi-
bility of securing abatement of any pollution proved, shall have
jurisdiction to enter such judgment, and orders enforcing such
judgment, as the public interest and the equities of the case may
require.
Compensation and travel expenses for members of hearing board
(i) Members of any hearing board appointed pursuant to
subsection (f) of this section who are not regular full-time officers
or employees of the United States shall, while participating in the
hearing conducted by such board or otherwise engaged on the
work of such board, be entitled to receive compensation at a rate
fixed by the Administrator, but not exceeding $100 per diem, in-
cluding travel-time, and while away from their homes or regular
places of business they may be allowed travel expenses, including
per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law (section 5703
of Title 5) for persons in the Government service employed inter-
mittently.
Furnishing of data to Administrator by polluter; reports; failure to
make required report; forfeitures
(j) (1) In connection with any conference called under this
section, the Administrator is authorized to require any person
whose activities result in the emission of air pollutants causing or
contributing to air pollution to file with him, in such form as he
may prescribe, a report, based on existing data, furnishing to the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 39
Administrator such information as may reasonably be required as
to the character, kind, and quantity of pollutants discharged and
the use of devices or other means to prevent or reduce the emis-
sion of pollutants by the person filing such a report. After a
conference has been held with respect to any such pollution the
Administrator shall require such reports from the person whose
activities result in such pollution only to the extent recommended
by such conference. Such report shall be made under oath or
otherwise, as the Administrator may prescribe, and shall be filed
with the Administrator within such reasonable period as the Ad-
ministrator may prescribe, unless additional time be granted by
the Administrator. No person shall be required in such report to
divulge trade secrets or secret processes and all information re-
ported shall be considered confidential for the purposes of section
1905 of Title 18.
(2) If any person required to file any report under this subsec-
tion shall fail to do so within the time fixed by the Administrator
for filing the same, and such failure shall continue for thirty days
after notice of such default, such person shall forfeit to the United
States the sum of $100 for each and every day of the continuance
of such failure, which forfeiture shall be payable into the Treas-
ury of the United States, and shall be recoverable in a civil suit in
the name of the United States brought in the district where such
person has his principal office or in any district in which he does
business: Provided, That the Administrator may upon application
therefor remit or mitigate any forfeiture provided for under this
subsection and he shall have authority to determine the facts upon
all such applications.
(3) It shall be the duty of the various United States attorneys,
under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States,
to prosecute for the recovery of such forfeitures.
Compliance with any requirement of an applicable implementation
plan or prescribed standard
(k) No order or judgment under this section, or settlement,
compromise, or agreement respecting any action under this section
(whether or not entered or made before December 31, 1970) shall
relieve any person of any obligation to comply with any require-
ment of an applicable implementation plan, or with any standard
prescribed under section 1857c—6 or section 1857c—7 of this title.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 115, formerly § 5, as added Dec. 17,
1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 396, renumbered § 105, and
amended Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, §§ 101(2), (3),
102, 79 Stat. 992, 995, renumbered § 108, and amended Nov. 21
526-701 O - 73 - 5
-------
40 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 491, renumbered § 115, and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 4(a), (b) (2)-(10),
15(c) (2), 84 Stat. 1678,1688, 1689, 1713.
§ 1857d—1. Retention of State authority
Except as otherwise provided in sections 1857f—6a, 1867f—
6c(c) (4), and 1857f—11 of this title (preempting certain State
regulation of moving sources) nothing in this chapter shall pre-
clude or deny the right of any State or political subdivision
thereof to adopt or enforce (1) any standard or limitation respect-
ing emissions of air pollutants or (2) any requirement respecting
control or abatement of air pollution; except that if an emission
standard or limitation is in effect under an applicable implementa-
tion plan or under section 1857c—6 or section 1857c—7 of this
title, such State or political subdivision may not adopt or enforce
any emission standard or limitation which is less stringent than
the standard or limitation under such plan or section.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 116, formerly § 109 as added Nov.
21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 497, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, § 4(a), (c), 84 Stat. 1678,
1689.
§ 1857e. Air Quality Advisory Board; advisory committees—Es-
tablishment of Board; membership; appointment; term
(a) (1) There is hereby established in the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency an Air Quality Advisory Board, composed of the
Administrator or his designee, who shall be Chairman, and fifteen
members appointed by the President, none of whom shall be Fed-
eral officers or employees. The appointed members, having due
regard for the purposes of this chapter, shall be selected from
among representatives of various State, interstate, and local gov-
ernmental agencies, of public or private interests contributing to,
affected by, or concerned with air pollution, and of other public
and private agencies, organizations, or groups demonstrating an
active interest in the field of air pollution prevention and control,
as well as other individuals who are expert in this field.
(2) Each member appointed by the President shall hold office
for a term of three years, except that (A) any member appointed
to fill a vacancy occurring prior to the expiration of the term for
which his predecessor was appointed shall be appointed for the
remainder of such term, and (B) the terms of office of the mem-
bers first taking office pursuant to this subsection shall expire as
follows: five at the end of one year after the date of appointment,
five at the end of two years after such date, and five at the end of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 41
three years after such date, as designated by the President at the
time of appointment, and (C) the term of any member under the
preceding provisions shall be extended until the date on which his
successor's appointment is effective. None of the members shall be
eligible for reappointment within one year after the end of his
preceding term, unless such term was for less than three years.
Duties of Board
(b) The Board shall advise and consult with the Administrator
on matters of policy relating to the activities and functions of the
Administrator under this chapter and make such recommenda-
tions as it deems necessary to the President.
Clerical and technical assistance
(c) Such clerical and technical assistance as may be necessary
to discharge the duties of the Board and such other advisory
committees as hereinafter authorized shall be provided from the
personnel of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Advisory committees
(d) In order to obtain assistance in the development and imple-
mentation of the purposes of this chapter including air quality
criteria, recommended control techniques, standards, research and
development, and to encourage the continued efforts on the part of
industry to improve air quality and to develop economically feasi-
ble methods for the control and abatement of air pollution, the
Administrator shall from time to time establish advisory commit-
tees. Committee members shall include, but not be limited to, per-
sons who are knowledgeable concerning air quality from the
standpoint of health, welfare, ecomonics, or technology.
Compensation; travel expenses
(e) The members of the Board and other advisory committees
appointed pursuant to this chapter who are not officers or employ-
ees of the United States while attending conferences or meetings
of the Board or while otherwise serving at the request of the
Administrator, shall be entitled to receive compensation at a rate
to be fixed by the Administrator, but not exceeding $100 per diem,
including traveltime, and while away from their homes or regular
places of business they may be allowed travel expenses, including
per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by section 5703 of
Title 5 for persons in the Government service employed intermit-
tently.
Consultation by Administrator
(f) Prior to—
-------
42 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
(1) issuing criteria for an air pollutant under section
1857c—3 (a) (2) of this title,
(2) publishing any list under section 1857c—6(b) (1) (A)
or section 1857c—7(b) (1) (A) of this title,
(3) publishing any standard under section 1857c—6(b)
(1) (B) or section 1857c—7(b) (1) (B) of this title, or
(4) publishing any regulation under section 1857f—l(a)
of this title,
the Administrator shall, to the maximum extent practicable within
the time provided, consult with appropriate advisory committees,
independent experts, and Federal departments and agencies.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 117, formerly § 6, as added Dec. 17,
1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1 (77 Stat. 399, renumbered § 106, Oct. 20,
1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(3), 79 Stat. 992, renumbered §
110, and amended Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 498,
renumbered, § 117, and amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub. L. 91-604, §§
4(a),(d), 15(c)(2), 84 Stat. 1678,1689,1713.
§ 1857f. Control and abatement of air pollution from Federal
facilities: compliance of Federal departments, etc., with Federal,
State, interstate, and local requirements; exemption by President
of any emission source from any executive branch department,
etc.; report to Congress
Each department, agency, and instrumentality of the executive,
legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government (1)
having jurisdiction over any property or facility, or (2) engaged
in any activity resulting, or which may result, in the discharge of
air pollutants, shall comply with Federal, State, interstate, and
local requirements respecting control and abatement of air pollu-
tion to the same extent that any person is subject to such require-
ments. The President may exempt any emission source of any
department, agency, or instrumentality in the executive branch
from compliance with such a requirement if he determines it to be
in the paramount interest of the United States to do so, except
that no exemption may be granted from section 1857c—6 of this
title, and an exemption from section 1857c—7 of this title may be
granted only in accordance with 1857c—7(c) of this title. No
such exemption shall be granted due to lack of appropriation un-
less the President shall have specifically requested such appropria-
tion as a part of the budgetary process and the Congress shall
have failed to make available such requested appropriation. Any
exemption shall be for a period not in excess of one year, but
additional exemptions may be granted for periods of not to exceed
one year upon the President's making a new determination. The
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 43
President shall report each January to the Congress all exemp-
tions from the requirements of this section granted during the
preceding calendar year, together with his reason for granting
each such exemption.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title I, § 118, formerly § 7, as added Dec. 17,
1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 399, renumbered § 107, Oct. 20,
1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(3), 79 Stat. 992, renumbered
§ 111, and amended Nov. 21,1967, Pub. L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 499,
renumbered § 118, and amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604 §§
4(a), 5, 84 Stat. 1678, 1689.
SUBCHAPTER II.—EMISSION STANDARDS FOR MOVING SOURCES
Part A.—Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards
§ 1857f—1. Establishment of standards—Air pollutant emis-
sions
(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this
section—
(1) The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and
from time to time revise) in accordance with the provisions
of this section, standards applicable to the emission of any air
pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or
new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment causes or
contributes to, or is likely to cause or to contribute to, air
pollution which endangers the public health or welfare. Such
standards shall be applicable to such vehicles and engines for
their useful life (as determined under subsection (d) of this
section), whether such vehicles and engines are designed as
complete systems or incorporated devices to prevent or con-
trol such pollution.
(2) Any regulation prescribed under this subsection (and
any revision thereof) shall take effect after such period as the
Administrator finds necessary to permit the development and
application of the requisite technology, giving appropriate
consideration to the cost of compliance within such period.
Model year 1975, reduction requirement; model year 1976, reduction require-
ment; promulgation; report to Congress; suspension of standards; in-
terim standards
(b) (1) (A) The regulations under subsection (a) of this sec-
tion applicable to emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons
from light duty vehicles and engines manufactured during or after
model year 1975 shall contain standards which require a reduction
of at least 90 per centum from emissions of carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbons allowable under the standards under this section
-------
44 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
applicable to light duty vehicles and engines manufactured in
model year 1970.
(B) The regulations under subsection (a) of this section appli-
cable to emissions of oxides of nitrogen from light duty vehicles
and engines manufactured during or after model year 1976 shall
contain standards which require a reduction of at least 90 per
centum from the average of emissions of oxides of nitrogen ac-
tually measured from light duty vehicles manufactured during
model year 1971 which are not subject to any Federal or State
emission standard for oxides of nitrogen. Such average of emis-
sions shall be determined by the Administrator on the basis of
measurements made by him.
(2) Emission standards under paragraph (1), and measure-
ment techniques on which such standards are based (if not pro-
mulgated prior to December 31, 1970), shall be prescribed by
regulation within 180 days after such date.
(3) For purposes of this part—
(A) (i) The term "model year" with reference to any
specific calendar year means the manufacturer's annual pro-
duction period (as determined by the Administrator) which
includes January 1 of such calendar year. If the manufac-
turer has no annual production period, the term "model year"
shall mean the calendar year.
(ii) For the purpose of assuring that vehicles and engines
manufactured before the beginning of a model year were not
manufactured for purposes of circumventing the effective
date of a standard required to be prescribed by subsection
(b) of this section, the Administrator may prescribe regula-
tions defining "model year" otherwise than as provided in
clause (i).
(B) The term "light duty vehicles and engines" means new
light duty motor vehicles and new light duty motor vehicle
engines, as determined under regulations of the Administra-
tor.
(4) On July 1, of 1971, and of each year thereafter, the Admin-
istrator shall report to the Congress with respect to the develop-
ment of systems necessary to implement the emission standards
established pursuant to this section. Such reports shall include
information regarding the continuing effects of such air pollutants
subject to standards under this section on the public health and
welfare, the extent and progress of efforts being made to develop
the necessary systems, the costs associated with development and
application of such systems, and following such hearings as he
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 45
may deem advisable, any recommendations for additional con-
gressional action necessary, to achieve the purposes of this chap-
ter. In gathering information for the purposes of this paragraph
and in connection with any hearing, the provisions of section
1875c—5(a) of this title (relating to subpenas) shall apply.
(5) (A) At any time after January 1, 1972, any manufacturer
may file with the Administrator an application requesting the
suspension for one year only of the effective date of any emission
standard required by paragraph (1) (A) with respect to such
manufacturer. The Administrator shall make his determination
with respect to any such application within 60 days. If he deter-
mines, in accordance with the provisions of this subsection, that
such suspension should be granted, he shall simultaneously with
such determination prescribe by regulation interim emission
standards which shall apply (in lieu of the standards required to
be prescribed by paragraph (1) (A)) to emissions of carbon
monoxide or hydrocarbons (or both) from such vehicles and en-
gines manufactured during model year 1975.
(B) At any time after January 1, 1973, any manufacturer may
file with the Administrator an application requesting the suspen-
sion for one year only of the effective date of any emission stand-
ard required by paragraph (1) (B) with respect to such manufac-
turer. The Administrator shall make his determination with res-
pect to any such application within 60 days. If he determines, in
accordance with the provisions of this subsection, that such sus-
pension should be granted, he shall simultaneously with such de-
termination prescribe by regulation interim emission standards
which shall apply (in lieu of the standards required to be pre-
scribed by paragraph (1) (B)) to emissions of oxides of nitrogen
from such vehicles and engines manufactured during model year
1976.
(C) Any interim standards prescribed under this paragraph
shall reflects the greatest degree of emission control which is
achievable by application of technology which the Administrator
determines is available, giving appropriate consideration to the
cost of applying such technology within the period of time availa-
ble to manufacturers.
(D) Within 60 days after receipt of the application for any
such suspension, and after public hearing, the Administrator shall
issue a decision granting or refusing such suspension. The Admin-
istrator shall grant such suspension only if he determines that (i)
such suspension is essential to the public interest or the public
health and welfare of the United States, (ii) all good faith efforts
-------
46 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
have been made to meet the standards established by this subsec-
tion, (iii) the applicant has established that effective control tech-
nology, processes, operating methods, or other alternatives are not
available or have not been available for a sufficient period of time
to achieve compliance prior to the effective date of such standards,
and (iv) the study and investigation of the National Academy of
Sciences conducted pursuant to subsection (c) of this section and
other information available to him has not indicated that technol-
ogy, processes, or other alternatives are available to meet such
standards.
(E) Nothing in this paragraph shall extend the effective date of
any emission standard required to be prescribed under this subsec-
tion for more than one year.
Feasibility study and investigation by National Academy of Sciences; re-
ports to Administrator and Congress; availability of information
(c) (1) The Administrator shall undertake to enter into appro-
priate arrangements with the National Academy of Sciences to
conduct a comprehensive study and investigation of the technolog-
ical feasibility of meeting the emissions standards required to be
prescribed by the Administrator by subsection (b) of this section.
(2) Of the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Adminis-
trator by this chapter, such amounts as are required shall be
available to carry out the study and investigation authorized by
paragraph (1) of this subsection.
(3) In entering into any arrangement with the National Acad-
emy of Sciences for conducting the study and investigation au-
thorized by paragraph (1) of this subsection, the Administrator
shall request the National Academy of Sciences to submit semian-
nual reports on the progress of its study and investigation to the
Adminisirator and the Congress, beginning not later than July 1,
1971, and continuing until such study and investigation is com-
pleted.
(4) The Administrator shall furnish to such Academy at its
request any information which the Academy deems necessary for
the purpose of conducting the investigation and study author-
ized by paragraph (1) of this subsection. For the purpose of
furnishing such information, the Administrator may use any au-
thority he has under this chapter (A) to obtain information from
any person, and (B) to require such person to conduct such tests,
keep such records, and make such reports respecting research or
other activities conducted by such person as may be reasonably
necessary to carry out this subsection.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 47
Useful life of vehicles
(d) The Administrator shall prescribe regulations under which
the useful life of vehicles and engines shall be determined for
purposes of subsection (a) (1) of this section and section 1857f—
5a of this title. Such regulations shall provide that useful life
shall—
(1) in the case of light duty vehicles and light duty vehicle
engines, be a period of use of five years or of fifty thousand
miles (or the equivalent), whichever first occurs; and
(2) in the case of any other motor vehicle or motor vehicle
engine, be a period of use set forth in paragraph (1) unless
the Administrator determines that a period of use of greater
duration or mileage is appropriate.
New power sources or propulsion systems
(e) In the event a new power source or propulsion system for
new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines is submitted for
certification pursuant to section 1857f—5(a) of this title, the Ad-
ministrator may postpone certification until he has prescribed
standards for any air pollutants emitted by such vehicle or engine
which cause or contribute to, or are likely to cause or contribute
to, air pollution which endangers the public health or welfare but
for which standards have not been prescribed under subsection
(a) of this section.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 202, as added Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.
L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(8), 79 Stat. 992, and amended Nov. 21,
1967, Pub.L.90-148 § 2, 81 Stat. 499, amended Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604, § 6(a), 84 Stat. 1690.
§ 1857f—2. Prohibited acts—Manufacture, sale, or importation
of vehicles or engines not in conformity with regulations; failure
to make reports or provide information; removal of devices in-
stalled in conformity with regulations; prohibited sale or lease
of vehicles or engines
(a) The following acts and the causing thereof are prohibited—
(1) in the case of a manufacturer of new motor vehicles or
new motor vehicle engines for distribution in commerce, the
sale, or the offering for sale, or the introduction, or delivery
for introduction, into commerce, or (in the case of any per-
son, except as provided by regulation of the Administrator),
the importation into the United States, of any new motor
vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, manufactured after the
effective date of regulations under this part which are appli-
cable to such vehicle or engine unless such vehicle or engine is
-------
48 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
covered by a certificate of conformity issued (and in effect)
under regulations prescribed under this part (except as pro-
vided in subsection (b) of vhis section);
(2) for any person to fail or refuse to permit access to or
copying of records or to fail to make reports or provide infor-
mation, required under section 1857f—6 of this title;
(3) for any person to remove or render inoperative any
device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle
or motor vehicle engine in compliance with regulations under
this part prior to its sale and delivery to the ultimate pur-
chaser, or for any manufacturer or dealer knowingly to re-
move or render inoperative any such device or element of
design after such sale and delivery to the ultimate purchaser;
or
(4) for any manufacturer of a new motor vehicle or new
motor vehicle engine subject to standards prescribed under
section 1857f—1 of this title—
(A) to sell or lease any such vehicle or engine unless
such manufacturer has complied with the requirements
of section 1857f—5a(a) and (b) of this title with re-
spect to such vehicle or engine, and unless a label or tag is
affixed to such vehicle or engine in accordance with sec-
tion 1857f—5a(c) (3) of this title, or
(B) to fail or refuse to comply with the requirements
of section 1857f—5a(c) or (e) of this title.
Authority of Administrator to make exemptions; refusal to admit vehicle
or engine into United States; vehicles or engines intended for export
(b) (1) The Administrator may exempt any new motor vehicle
or new motor vehicle engine from subsection (a) of this section
upon such terms and conditions as he may find necessary for the
purpose of research, investigations, studies, demonstrations, or
training, or for reasons of national security.
(2) A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine offered
for importation or imported by any person in violation of subsec-
tion (a) of this section shall be refused admission into the United
States, but the Secretary of the Treasury and the Administrator,
may, by joint regulation, provide for deferring final determination
as to admission and authorizing the delivery of such a motor
vehicle or engine offered for import to the owner or consignee
thereof upon such terms and conditions (including the furnishing
of a bond) as may appear to them appropriate to insure that any
such motor vehicle or engine will be brought into conformity
with the standards, requirements, and limitations applicable to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 49
it under this part. The Secretary of the Treasury shall, if a motor
vehicle or engine is finally refused admission under this para-
graph, cause disposition thereof in accordance with the customs
laws unless it is exported, under regulations prescribed by such
Secretary, within ninety days of the date of notice of such refusal
or such additional time as may be permitted pursuant to such
regulations, except that disposition in accordance with the cus-
toms laws may not be made in such manner as may result, directly
or indirectly, in the sale, to the ultimate consumer, of a new motor
vehicle or new motor vehicle engine that fails to comply with
applicable standards of the Administrator under this part.
(3) A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine intended
solely for export, and so labeled or tagged on the outside of the
container and on the vehicle or engine itself, shall be subject to the
provisions of subsection (a) of this section, except that if the
country of export has emission standards which differ from the
standards prescribed under subsection (a) of this section, then
such vehicle or engine shall comply with the standards of such
country of export.
Exemptions; annual report of exemptions to Congress
(c) Upon application therefor, the Administrator may exempt
from subsection (a) (3) of this section any vehicles (or class
thereof) manufactured before the 1974 model year from subsec-
tion (a) (3) of this section l for the purpose of permitting modifi-
cations to the emission control device or system of such vehicle in
order to use fuels other than those specified in certification testing
under section 1857f—5 (a) (1) of this title, if the Administrator,
on the basis of information submitted by the applicant, finds that
such modification will not result in such vehicle or engine not
complying with standards under section 1857f—(1) of this title
applicable to such vehicle or engine. Any such exemption shall
identify (1) the vehicle or vehicles so exempted, (2) the specific
nature of the modification, and (3) the person or class of persons
to whom the exemption shall apply.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 203, as added Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.L.
89-272, Title I, § 101(8), 79 Stat. 993, Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L.
90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 499, amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604,
§§ 7(a), ll(a) (2) (A), 15 (c) (2), 84 Stat. 1693, 1705, 1713.
§ 1857f—3. Jurisdiction of district court to restrain violations;
actions brought by or in name of United States; territorial scope
of subpenas for witnesses
1 So in original
-------
50 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
(a) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdic-
tion to restrain violations of paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of
section 1857f—2 (a) of this title.
(b) Actions to restrain such violations shall be brought by and
in the name of the United States. In any such action, subpenas for
witnesses who are required to attend a district court in any dis-
trict may run into any other district.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 204, as added Oct. 20, 1965,
Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(8), 79 Stat. 994, Nov. 21, 1967,
Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 500, amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 7(b), 84 Stat. 1694.
§ 1857f—4. Penalties for violation; separate offenses
Any person who violates paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of
section 1857f—2 (a) of this title shall be subject to a civil penalty
of not more than $10,000. Any such violation with respect to
paragraph (1), (2), or (4) of section 1857f—2(a) of this title
shall constitute a separate offense with respect to each motor
vehicle or motor vehicle engine.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title II, § 205, as added Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.L.
89-272, Title I, § 101(8), 79 Stat. 994, Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L.
90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 500, amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §
7(c) 84 Stat. 1694.
§ 1857f—5. Motor vehicle and motor vehicle engine compliance
testing and certification—Testing and issuance of certificate of
conformity
(a) (1) The Administrator shall test, or require to be tested in
such manner as he deems appropriate, any new motor vehicle or
new motor vehicle engine submitted by a manufacturer to deter-
mine whether such vehicle or engine conforms with the regula-
tions prescribed under section 1857f—1 of this title. If such vehi-
cle or engine conforms to such regulations, the Administrator
shall issue a certificate of conformity upon such terms, and for
such period (not in excess of one year), as he may prescribe.
(2) The Administrator shall test any emission control system
incorporated in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine submitted
to him by any person, in order to determine whether such system
enables such vehicle or engine to conform to the standards re-
quired to be prescribed under section 1857f—1 (b) of this title. If
the Administrator finds on the basis of such tests that such vehicle
or engine conforms to such standards, the Administrator shall
issue a verification of compliance with emission standards for such
system when incorporated in vehicles of a class of which the tested
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 51
vehicle is representative. He shall inform manufacturers and the
National Academy of Sciences, and make available to the public,
the results of such tests. Tests under this paragraph shall be
conducted under such terms and conditions (including require-
ments for preliminary testing by qualified independent laborato-
ries) as the Administrator may prescribe by regulations.
Testing procedures; hearing; judicial review; additional evidence
(b) (1) In order to determine whether new motor vehicles or
new motor vehicle engines being manufactured by a manufacturer
do in fact conform with the regulations with respect to which the
certificate of conformity was issued, the Administrator is author-
ized to test such vehicles or engines. Such tests may be conducted
by the Administrator directly or, in accordance with conditions
specified by the Administrator, by the manufacturer.
(2) (A) (i) If, based on tests conducted under paragraph (1)
on a sample of new vehicles or engines covered by a certificate of
conformity, the Administrator determines that all or part of the
vehicles or engines so covered do not conform with the regulations
with respect to which the certificate of conformity was issued, he
may suspend or revoke such certificate in whole or in part, and
shall so notify the manufacturer. Such suspension or revocation
shall apply in the case of any new motor vehicles or new motor
vehicle engines manufactured after the date of such notification
(or manufactured before such date if still in the hands of the
manufacturer), and shall apply until such time as the Administra-
tor finds that vehicles and engines manufactured by the manufac-
turer do conform to such regulations. If, during any period of
suspension or revocation, the Administrator finds that a vehicle or
engine actually conforms to such regulations, he shall issue a cer-
tificate of conformity applicable to such vehicle or engine.
(ii) If, based on tests conducted under paragraph (1) on any
new vehicle or engine, the Administrator determines that such
vehicle or engine does not conform with such regulations, he may
suspend or revoke such certificate insofar as it applies to such
vehicle or engine until such time as he finds such vehicle or engine
actually so conforms with such regulations, and he shall not notify
the manufacturer.
(B) (i) At the request of any manufacturer the Administrator
shall grant such manufacturer a hearing as to whether the tests
have been properly conducted or any sampling methods have been
properly applied, and make a determination on the record with
respect to any suspension or revocation under subparagraph (A);
-------
52 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
but suspension or revocation under subparagraph (A) shall not
be stayed by reason of such hearing.
(ii) In any case of actual controversy as to the validity of any
determination under clause (i), the manufacturer may at any time
prior to the 60th day after such determination is made file a
petition with the United States court of appeals for the circuit
wherein such manufacturer resides or has his principal place of
business for a judicial review of such determination. A copy of the
petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the court to
the Administrator or other officer designated by him for that
purpose. The Administrator thereupon shall file in the court the
record of the proceedings on which the Administrator based his
determination, as provided in section 2112 of Title 28.
(iii) If the petitioner applies to the court for leave to adduce
additional evidence, and shows to the satisfaction of the court that
such additional evidence is material and that there were reasona-
ble grounds for the failure to adduce such evidence in the proceed-
ing before the Administrator, the court may order such additional
evidence (and evidence in rebuttal thereof) to be taken before the
Administrator, in such manner and upon such terms and condi-
tions as the court may deem proper. The Administrator may mod-
ify his findings as to the facts, or make new findings, by reason of
the additional evidence so taken and he shall file such modified or
new findings, and his recommendation, if any, for the modification
or setting aside of his original determination, with the return of
such additional evidence.
(iv) Upon the filing of the petition referred to in clause (ii),
the court shall have jurisdiction to review the order in accordance
with chapter 7 of Title 5 and to grant appropriate relief as pro-
vided in such chapter.
Inspection
(c) For purposes of enforcement of this section, officers or
employees duly designated by the Administrator, upon presenting
appropriate credentials to the manufacturer or person in charge,
are authorized (1) to enter, at reasonable times, any plant or
other establishment of such manufacturer, for the purpose of con-
ducting tests of vehicles or engines in the hands of the manufac-
turer, or (2) to inspect at reasonable times, records, files, papers,
processes, controls, and facilities used by such manufacturer in
conducting tests under regulations of the Administrator. Each
such inspection shall be commenced and completed with reasonable
promptness.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 53
Rules and regulations
(d) The Administrator shall be regulation establish methods
and procedures for making tests under this section.
Publication of test results
(e) The Administrator shall announce in the Federal Register
and make available to the public the results of his tests of any
motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine submitted by a manufac-
turer under subsection (a) of this section as promptly as possible
after December 31, 1970, and at the beginning of each model year
which begins thereafter. Such results shall be described in such
nontechnical manner as will reasonably disclose to prospective
ultimate purchasers of new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle
engines the comparative performance of the vehicles and engines
tested in meeting the standards prescribed under section 1857f—1
of this title.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 206, as added Oct. 20, 1965, Pub.L.
89-272, Title I, § 101(8), 79 Stat. 994, Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L.
90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 501, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604,
§8(a), 84 Stat. 1694.
§ 1857f—5a. Complaince by vehicles and engines in actual use
—Warranty
(a) Effective with respect to vehicles and engines manufactured
in model years beginning more than 60 days after December 31,
1970, the manufacturer of each new motor vehicle and new motor
vehicle engine shall warrant to the ultimate purchaser and each
subsequent purchaser that such vehicle or engine is (1) designed,
built, and equipped so as to conform at the time of sale with
applicable regulations under section 1857f—1, of this title, and
(2) free from defects in materials and workmanship which cause
such vehicle or engine to fail to conform with applicable regula-
tions for its useful life (as determined under section 1857f—l(d)
of this title).
Testing methods and procedures
(b) If the Administrator determines that (i) there are availa-
ble testing methods and procedures to ascertain whether, when in
actual use throughout its useful life (as determined under section
1857f—l(d) of this title), each vehicle and engine to which regu-
lations under section 1857f—1 of this title apply complies with the
emission standards of such regulations, (ii) such methods and
procedures are in accordance with good engineering practices, and
(iii) such methods and procedures are reasonably capable of being
-------
54 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
correlated with tests conducted under section 1857f—5 (a) (1) of
this title, then—
(1) he shall establish such methods and procedures by re-
gulation, and
(2) at such time as he determines that inspection facilities
or equipment are available for purposes of carrying out test-
ing methods and procedures established under paragraph (1),
he shall prescribe regulations which shall require manufac-
turers to warrant the emission control device or system of
each new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine to which
a regulation under section 1857f—1 of this title applies and
which is manufactured in a model year beginning after the
Administrator first prescribes warranty regulations under
this paragraph (2). The warranty under such regulations
shall run to the ultimate purchaser and each subsequent pur-
chaser and shall provide that if—
(A) the vehicle or engine is maintained and operated
in accordance with instructions under subsection (c) (3)
of this section,
(B) it fails to conform at any time during its useful
life (as determined under section 1857f—l(d) of this
title) to the regulations prescribed under section 1857f
—1 of this title, and
(C) such nonconformity results in the ultimate pur-
chaser (or any subsequent purchaser) of such vehicle or
engine having to bear any penalty or other sanction (in-
cluding the denial of the right to use such vehicle or
engine) under State or Federal law,
then such manufacturer shall remedy such nonconformity
under such warranty with the cost thereof to be borne by the
manufacturer.
Noncomforming vehicles; plan for remedying nonconformity;
instructions for maintenance and use
(c) Effective with respect to vehicles and engines manufactured
during model years beginning more than 60 days after December
31, 1970—
(1) If the Administrator determines that a substantial
number of any class or category of vehicles or engines, al-
though properly maintained and used, do not conform to the
regulations prescribed under section 1857f—1 of this title,
when in actual use throughout their useful life (as deter-
mined under section 1857f—l(d) of this title), he shall im-
mediately notify the manufacturer thereof of such noncon-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 55
formity, and he shall require the manufacturer to submit a
plan for remedying the nonconformity of the vehicles or en-
gines with respect to which such notification is given. The
plan shall provide that the nonconformity of any such vehi-
cles or engines which are properly used and maintained will
be remedied at the expanse of the manufacturer. If the manu-
facturer disagrees with such determination of nonconformity
and so advises the Administrator, the Administrator shall
afford the manufacturer and other interested persons an op-
portunity to present their views and evidence in support
thereof at a public hearing. Unless, as a result of such hear-
ing the Administrator withdraws such determination of non-
conformity, he shall, within 60 days after the completion of
such hearing, order the manufacturer to provide prompt noti-
fication of such nonconformity in accordance with paragraph
(2).
(2) Any notification required by paragraph (1) with res-
pect to any class or category of vehicles or engines shall be
given to dealers, ultimate purchasers, and subsequent pur-
chasers (if known) in such manner and containing such in-
formation as the Administrator may by regulations require.
(3) The manufacturer shall furnish with each new motor
vehicle or motor vehicle engine such written instructions for
the maintenance and use of the vehicle or engine by the ulti-
mate purchaser as may be reasonable and necessary to assure
the proper functioning of emission control devices and sys-
tems. In addition, the manufacturer shall indicate by means
of a label or tag permanently affixed to such vehicle or engine
that such vehicle or engine is covered by a certificate of con-
formity issued for the purpose of assuring achievement of
emissions standards prescribed under section 1857f—1 of this
title. Such label or tag shall contain such other information
relating to control of motor vehicle emissions as the Adminis-
trator shall prescribe by regulation.
Dealer costs borne by manufacturer
(d) Any cost obligation of any dealer incurred as a result of
any requirement imposed by subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this
section shall be borne by the manufacturer. The transfer of any
such cost obligation from a manufacturer to any dealer through
franchise or other agreement is prohibited.
Cost statement
(e) If a manufacturer includes in any advertisement a state-
526-701 O - 73 - 6
-------
56 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
ment respecting the cost or value of emission control devices or
systems, such manufacturer shall set forth in such statement the
cost or value attributed to such devices or systems by the Secre-
tary of Labor (through the Bureau of Labor Statistics). The
Secretary of Labor, and his representatives, shall have the same
access for this purpose to the books, documents, papers, and rec-
ords of a manufacturer as the Comptroller General has to those of
a recipient of assistance for purposes of section 1857J of this title.
Inspection after sale to ultimate purchaser
(f) Any inspection of a motor vehicle or a motor vehicle engine
for purposes of subsection (c) (1) of this section, after its sale to
the ultimate purchaser, shall be made only if the owner of such
vehicle or engine voluntarily permits such inspection to be made,
except as may be provided by any State or local inspection pro-
gram.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title II, § 207, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 8(a), 84 Stat. 1696.
§ 1857f—6. Reports, records, and information required; access
to and copying records; availability to public; disclosure of trade
secrets
(a) Every manufacturer shall establish and maintain such rec-
ords, make such reports, and provide such information, as the
Administrator may reasonably require to enable him to determine
whether such manufacturer has acted or is acting in compliance
with this part and regulations thereunder and shall, upon request
of an officer or employee duly designated by the Administrator,
permit such officer or employee at reasonable times, to have access
to an copy such records.
(b) Any records, reports, or information obtained under subsec-
tion (a) of this section shall be available to the public, except that
upon a showing satisfactory to the Administrator by any person
that records, reports, or information, or particular part thereof
(other than emission data), to which the Administrator has
access under this section if made public, would divulge meth-
ods or processes entitled to protection as trade secrets of such
person, the Administrator shall consider such record, report, or
information or particular portion thereof confidential in accord-
ance with the purposes of section 1905 of Title 18, except that
such record, report, or information may be disclosed to other
officers, employees, or authorized representatives of the United
States concerned with carrying out this chapter or when relevant
in any proceeding under this chapter. Nothing in this section shall
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 57
authorize the withholding of information by the Administrator or
any officer or employee under his control, from the duly authorized
committees of the Congress.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 208, formerly § 207, as added Oct.
20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, §101(8), 79 Stat. 994, amended
Nov. 21, 1967, Publ.L. 90-148. § 2, 81 Stat. 501, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 8(a), 10(a), 11 (a) (2)
(A), 15(c) (2), 84 Stat. 1694, 1700, 1705, 1713.
§ 1857f—6a. State standards
(a) No State or any political subdivision thereof shall adopt or
attempt to enforce any standard relating to the control of emis-
sions from new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines sub-
ject to this part. No State shall require certification, inspection, or
any other approval relating to the control of emissions from any
new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine as condition pre-
cedent to the initial retail sale, titling (if any), or registration of
such motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or equipment.
(b) The Administrator shall, after notice and opportunity for
public hearing, waive application of this section to any State
which has adopted standards (other than crankcase emission
standards) for the control of emissions from new motor vehicles
or new motor vehicle engines prior to March 30, 1966, unless he
finds that such State does not require standards more stringent
than applicable Federal standards to meet compelling and extraor-
dinary conditions or that such State standards and accompanying
enforcement procedures are not consistent with section 1857f—
l(a) of this title.
(c) Nothing in this part shall preclude or deny to any State or
political subdivision thereof the right otherwise to control, regu-
late, or restrict the use, operation, or movement of registered or
licensed motor vehicles.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title II, § 209, formerly § 208, as added Nov.
21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 501, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 8(a), ll(a) (2) (A),
15(c) (2), 84 Stat. 1694, 1705, 1713.
§ 185 7f—6b. Federal assistance in developing and maintaining
vehicle emission devices and systems inspection and emission test-
ing and control programs
The Administrator is authorized to make grants to appropriate
State agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost of devel-
oping and maintaining effective vehicle emission devices and sys-
-------
58 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
terns inspection and emission testing and control programs, except
that—
(1) no such grant shall be made for any part of any State
vehicle inspection program which does not directly relate to
the cost of the air pollution control aspects of such a pro-
gram;
(2) no such grant shall be made unless the Secretary of
Transportation has certified to the Administrator that such
program is consistent with any highway safety program de-
developed pursuant to section 402 of Title 23; and
(3) no such grant shall be made unless the program in-
cludes provisions designed to insure that emission control de-
vices and systems on vehicles in actual use have not been
discontinued or rendered inoperative.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 210, formerly § 209, as added Nov.
21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 502, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 8(a), 10(b), 84 Stat.
1694,1700.
§ 1857f—6c. Regulation of fuels—Authority of Administrator
to regulate
(a) The Administrator may be regulation designate any fuel or
fuel additive and, after such date or dates as may be prescribed by
him, no manufacturer or processor of any such fuel or additive
may sell, offer for sale, or introduce into commerce such fuel or
additive unless the Administrator has registered such fuel or addi-
tive in accordance with subsection (b) of this section.
Registration requirement
(b) (1) For the purpose of registration of fuels and fuel addi-
tives, the Administrator shall require—
(A) the manufacturer of any fuel to notify him as to the
commercial identifying name and manufacturer of any addi-
tive contained in such fuel; the range of concentration of any
additive in the fuel; and the purpose-in-use of any such addi-
tive ; and
(B) the manufacturer of any additive to notify him as to
the chemical composition of such additive.
(2) For the purpose of registration of fuels and fuel additives,
the Administrator may also require the manufacturer of any fuel
or fuel additive—
(A) to conduct tests to determine potential public health
effects of such fuel or additive (including, but not limited to,
carcinogenic, teratogenic, or mutagenic effects), and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 59
(B) to furnish the description of any analytical technique
that can be used to detect and measure any additive in such
fuel, the recommended range of concentration of such addi-
tive, and the recommended purpose-in-use of such additive,
and such other information as is reasonable and necessary to
determine the emissions resulting from the use of the fuel or
additive contained in such fuel, the effect of such fuel or
additive on the emission control performance of any vehicle
or vehicle engine, or the extent to which such emissions affect
the public health or welfare.
Tests under subparagraph (A) shall be conducted in conformity
with test procedures and protocols established by the Administra-
tor. The result of such tests shall not be considered confidential.
(3) Upon compliance with the provision of this subsection, in-
cluding assurances that the Administrator will receive changes in
the information required, the Administrator shall register such
fuel or fuel additive.
Control or prohibition of offending fuels and fuel additives
(c) (1) The Administrator may, from time to time on the basis
of information obtained under subsection (b) of this section or
other information available to him, by regulation, control or pro-
hibit the manufacture, introduction into commerce, offering for
sale, or sale of any fuel or fuel additive for use in a motor vehicle
or motor vehicle engine (A) if any emission products of such fuel
or fuel additive will endanger the public health or welfare, or (B)
if emission products of such fuel or fuel additive will impair to a
significant degree the performance of any emission control device
or system which is in general use, or which the Administrator
finds has been developed to a point where in a reasonable time it
would be in general use were such regulation to be promulgated.
(2) (A) No fuel, class of fuels, or fuel additive may be con-
trolled or prohibited by the Administrator pursuant to clause (A)
of paragraph (1) except after consideration of all relevant medi-
cal and scientific evidence available to him, including consideration
of other technologically or economically feasible means of achiev-
ing emission standards under section 1857f—1 of this title.
(B) No fuel or fuel additive may be controlled or prohibited by
the Administrator pursuant to clause (B) of paragraph (1) ex-
cept after consideration of available scientific and economic data,
including a cost benefit analysis comparing emission control de-
vices or systems which are or will be in general use and require
the proposed control or prohibition with emission control devices
or systems which are or will be in general use and do not require
-------
60 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
the proposed control or prohibition. On request of a manufacturer
of motor vehicles, motor vehicle engines, fuels, or fuel additives
submitted within 10 days of notice of proposed rulemaking, the
Administrator shall hold a public hearing and publish findings
with respect to any matter he is required to consider under this
subparagraph. Such findings shall be published at the time of
promulgation of final regulations.
(C) No fuel or fuel additive may be prohibited by the Adminis-
trator under paragraph (1) unless he finds, and publishes such
finding, that in his judgment such prohibition will not cause the
use of any other fuel or fuel additive which will produce emissions
which will endanger the public health or welfare to the same or
greater degree than the use of the fuel or fuel additive proposed to
be prohibited.
(3) (A) For the purpose of obtaining evidence and data to
carry out paragraph (2), the Administrator may require the man-
ufacturer of any motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine to furnish
any information which has been developed concerning the emis-
sions from motor vehicles resulting from the use of any fuel or
fuel additive, or the effect of such use on the performance of any
emission control device or system.
(B) In obtaining information under subparagraph (A), section
1847h—5 (a) of this title (relating to subpenas) shall be applica-
ble.
(4) (A) Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (B) or
(C), no State (or political subdivision thereof) may prescribe or
attempt to enforce, for purposes of motor vehicle emission control,
any control or prohibition respecting use of a fuel or fuel additive
in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine—
(i) if the Administrator has found that no control or prohi-
bition under paragraph (1) is necessary and has published
his finding in the Federal Register, or
(ii) if the Administrator has prescribed under paragraph
(1) a control or prohibition applicable to such fuel or fuel
additive, unless State prohibition or control is identical to the
prohibition or control prescribed by the Administrator.
(B) Any State for which application of section 1857f—6a(a) of
this title has at any time been waived under section 1857f—6a(b)
of this title may at any time prescribe and enforce, for the pur-
pose of motor vehicle emission control, a control or prohibition
respecting any fuel or fuel additive.
(C) A State may prescribe and enforce, for purposes of motor
vehicle emission control, a control or prohibition respecting the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 61
use of a fuel or fuel additive in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle
engine if an applicable implementation plan for such State under
section 1857c—5 of this title so provides. The Administrator may
approve such provision in an implementation plan, or promulgate
an implementation plan containing such a provision, only if he
finds that the State control or prohibition is necessary to achieve
the national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard
which the plan implements.
Penalty
(d) Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section or
the regulations prescribed under subsection (c) of this section or
who fails to furnish any information required by the Administra-
tor under subsection (b) of this section shall forfeit and pay to
the United States a civil penalty of $10,000 for each and every day
of the continuance of such violation, which shall accrue to the
United States and be recovered in a civil suit in the name of the
United States, brought in the district where such person has his
principal office or in any district in which he does business. The
Administrator may, upon application therefor, remit or mitigate
any forfeiture provided for in this subsection and he shall have
authority to determine the facts upon all such applications.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title II, § 211, formerly § 210, as added Nov.
21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 502, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 8(a), 9(a), 84 Stat.
1694, 1698, Nov. 18, 1971, Pub.L. 92-157, Title III, § 302(d), (e),
85 Stat. 464.
§ I857f—6d. Repealed. Pub.L. 91-604, § 8(a), Dec. 31, 1970, 84
Stat. 1694
§ 1857f—6e. Low-emission vehicles—Definitions
(a) For the purpose of this section—
(1) The term "Board" means the Low-Emission Vehicle
Certification Board.
(2) The term "Federal Government" includes the legisla-
tive, executive, and judicial branches of the Government of
the United States, and the government of the District of
Columbia.
(3) The term "motor vehicle" means any self-propelled ve-
hicle designed for use in the United States on the highways,
other than a vehicle designed or used for military field train-
ing, combat, or tactical purposes.
(4) The term "low-emission vehicle" means any motor ve-
hicle which—
(A) emits any air pollutant in amounts significantly
below new motor vehicle standards applicable under sec-
-------
62 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
tion 1857f—1 of this title at the time of procurement to
that type of vehicle; and
(B) with respect to all other air pollutants meets the
new motor vehicle standards applicable under section
1857f—1 of this title at the time of procurement to that
type of vehicle.
(5) The term "retail price" means (A) the maximum sta-
tutory price applicable to any class or model of motor vehicle;
or (B) in any case where there is no applicable maximum
statutory price, the most recent procurement price paid for
any class or model of motor vehicle.
Low-Emission Vehicle Certification Board; establishment; composition; ap-
pointment; Chairman; compensation; travel expenses; employment and
compensation of additional personnel; time and place of meetings; powers
(b) (1) There is established a Low-Emission Vehicle Certifica-
tion Board to be composed of the Administrator or his designee,
the Secretary of Transportation or his designee, the Chairman of
the Council on Environmental Quality or his designee, the Direc-
tor of the National Highway Safety Bureau in the Department of
Transportation, the Administrator of General Services, and two
members appointed by the President. The President shall desig-
nate one member of the Board as Chairman.
(2) Any member of the Board not employed by the United
States may receive compensation at the rate of $125 for each day
such member is engaged upon work of the Board. Each member of
the Board shall be reimbursed for travel expenses, including per
diem in lieu of subsistence as authorized by section 5703 of Title 5
for persons in the Government service employed intermittently.
(3) (A) The Chairman, with the concurrence of the members
of the Board, may employ and fix the compensation of such addi-
tional personnel as may be necessary to carry out the functions of
the Board, but no individual so appointed shall receive compensa-
tion in excess of the rate authorized for GS-18 by section 5332 of
Title 5.
(B) The Chairman may fix the time and place of such meetings
as may be required, but a meeting of the Board shall be called
whenever a majority of its members so request.
(C) The Board is granted all other powers necessary for meet-
ing its responsibilities under this section.
Determination by Administrator of models or classes of motor vehicles
qualifying as low-emission vehicles
(c) The Administrator shall determine which models or classes
of motor vehicles qualify as low-emission vehicles in accordance
with the provisions of this section.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 63
Certification by Board; specifications for suitable substitutes; criteria
for certification; term of certification; procedure for certification
(d) (1) The Board shall certify any class or model of motor
vehicles—
(A) for which a certification application has been filed in
accordance with paragraph (3) of this subsection;
(B) which is a low-emission vehicle as determined by the
Administrator; and
(C) which it determines is suitable for use as a substitute
for a class or model of vehicles at that time in use by agencies
of the Federal Government.
The Board shall specify with particularity the class or model of
vehicles for which the class or model of vehicles described in the
application is a suitable substitute. In making the determination
under this subsection the Board shall consider the following cri-
teria :
(i) the safety of the vehicle;
(ii) its performance characteristics;
(iii) its reliability potential;
(iv) its serviceability;
(v) its fuel availability;
(vi) its noise level; and
(vii) its maintenance costs as compared with the class or
model of motor vehicle for which it may be a suitable substi-
tute.
(2) Certification under this section shall be effective for a pe-
riod of one year from the date of issuance.
(3) (A) Any party seeking to have a class or model of vehicle
certified under this section shall file a certification application in
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Board.
(B) The Board shall publish a notice of each application re-
ceived in the Federal Register.
(C) The Administrator and the Board shall make determina-
tions for the purpose of this section in accordance with procedures
prescribed by regulation by the Administrator and the Board,
respectively.
(D) The Administrator and the Board shall conduct whatever
investigation is necessary, including actual inspection of the vehi-
cle at a place designated in regulations prescribed under subpara-
graph (A).
(E) The Board shall receive and evaluate written comments
and documents from interested parties in support of, or in opposi-
tion to, certification of the class or model of vehicle under consid-
eration.
-------
64 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(F) Within 90 days after the receipt of a properly filed certifi-
cation application, the Administrator shall determine whether
such class or model of vehicle is a low-emission vehicle, and within
180 days of such determination, the Board shall reach a decision
by majority vote as to whether such class or model of vehicle,
having been determined to be a low-emission vehicle, is a suitable
substitute for any class or classes of vehicles presently being pur-
chased by the Federal Government for use by its agencies.
(G) Immediately upon making any determination or decision
under subparagraph (F), the Administrator and the Board shall
each publish in the Federal Register notice of such determination
or decision, including reasons therefor and in the case of the
Board any dissenting views.
Acquisition by Federal government by purchase or lease;
procurement costs; contract provisions
(e) (1) Certified low-emission vehicles shall be acquired by
purchase or lease by the Federal Government for use by the Fed-
eral Government in lieu of other vehicles if the Administrator of
General Services determines that such certified vehicles have pro-
curement costs which are no more than 150 per centum of the
retail price of the least expensive class or model of motor vehicle
for which they are certified substitutes.
(2) In order to encourage development of inherently low-pollut-
ing propulsion technology, the Board may, at its discretion, raise
the premium set forth in paragraph (1) of this subsection to 200
per centum of the retail price of any class or model of motor
vehicle for which a certified low-emission vehicle is a certified
substitute, if the Board determines that the certified low-emission
vehicle is powered by an inherently low-polluting propulsion sys-
tem.
(3) Data relied upon by the Board and the Administrator in
determining that a vehicle is a certified low-emission vehicle shall
be incorporated in any contract for the procurement of such vehi-
cle.
Priority for purchase by procuring agency
(f) The procuring agency shall be required to purchase availa-
ble certified low-emission vehicles which are eligible for purchase
to the extent they are available before purchasing any other vehi-
cles for which any low-emission vehicle is a certified substitute. In
making purchasing selections between competing eligible certified
low-emission vehicles, the procuring agency shall give priority to
(1) any class or model which does not require extensive periodic
maintenance to retain its low-polluting qualities or which does not
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 65
require the use of fuels which are more expensive than those of
the classes or models of vehicles for which it is a certified sub-
stitute; and (2) passenger vehicles other than buses.
Waiver of statutory price limitations
(g) For the purpose of procuring certified low-emission vehicles
any statutory price limitations shall be waived.
Testing of emissions from certified low-emission vehicles purchased by
the Federal government; procedure; recertification
(h) The Administrator shall, from time to time as the Board
deems appropriate, test the emissions from certified low-emission
vehicles purchased by the Federal Government. If at any time he
finds that the emission rates exceed the rates on which certifica-
tion under this section was based, the Administrator shall notify
the Board. Thereupon the Board shall give the supplier of such
vehicles written notice of this finding, issue public notice of it, and
give the supplier an opportunity to make necessary repairs, ad-
justments, or replacements. If no such repairs, adjustments, or
replacements are made within a period to be set by the Board, the
Board may order the supplier to show cause why the vehicle in-
volved should be eligible for recertification.
Authorization of appropriations
(i) There are authorized to be appropriated for paying addi-
tional amounts for motor vehicles pursuant to, and for carrying
out the provisions of, this section, $5,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30,1971, and $25,000,000 for each of the two succeed-
ing fiscal years.
Promulgation by Board of implementing procedures
(j) The Board shall promulgate the procedures required to im-
plement this section within one hundred and eighty days after
December 31,1970.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 212, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 10(c), 84 Stat. 1700.
§ 1857f—7. Definitions
As used in this part—
(1) The term "manufacturer" as used in section 1857f—1,
1857f—2, 1857f—5, 1857f—6, and 1857f—6a of this title
means any person engaged in the manufacturing or assem-
bling of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, or
importing such vehicles or engines for resale, or who acts for
and is under the control of any such person in connection
with the distribution of new motor vehicles or new motor
-------
66 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
vehicle engines, but shall not include any dealer with respect
to new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines received
by him in commerce,
(2) The term "motor vehicle" means any self-propelled
vehicle designed for transporting persons or property on a
street or highway.
(3) Except with respect to vehicles or engines imported or
offered for importation, the term "new motor vehicle" means
a motor vehicle the equitable or legal title to which has never
been transferred to an ultimate purchaser; and the term
"new motor vehicle engine" means an engine in a new motor
vehicle or a motor vehicle engine the equitable or legal title to
which has never been transferred to the ultimate purchaser;
and with respect to imported vehicles or engines, such terms
mean a motor vehicle and engine, respectively, manufactured
after the effective date of a regulation issued under section
1875f—1 of this title which is applicable to such vehicle or
engine (or which would be applicable to such vehicle or en-
gine had it been manufactured for importation into the Un-
ited States).
(4) The term "dealer" means any person who is engaged in
the sale or the distribution of new motor vehicles or new
motor vehicle engines to the ultimate purchaser.
(5) The term "ultimate purchaser" means, with respect to
any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, the first
person who in good faith purchases such new motor vehicle or
new engine for purposes other than resale.
(6) The term "commerce" means (A) commerce between
any place in any State and any place outside thereof; and (B)
commerce wholly within the District of Columbia.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II,§ 213, formerly § 208, as added Oct.
20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(8) 79 Stat. 994, renum-
bered § 212 and amended Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81
Stat. 503, renumbered § 213 and amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, §§ 8(a), 10(d), 11 (a), (2) (A), 84 Stat. 1694, 1703,
1705.
§ I857f—8. Repealed. Pub.L. 89-675, § 2(b), Oct. 15- 1966, 80
Stat. 954
Part B.—Aircraft Emission Standards
§ 1857f—9. Establishment of standards—Study; report; hear-
ings; issuance of regulations
(a) (1) Within 90 days after December 31, 1970, the Adminis-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 67
trator shall commence a study and investigation of emissions of
air pollutants from aircraft in order to determine—
(A) The extent to which such emissions affect air quality
in air quality control regions throughout the United States,
and
(B) the technological feasibility of controlling such emis-
sions.
(2) Within 180 days after commencing such study and investi-
gation, the Administrator shall publish a report of such study and
investigation and shall issue proposed emission standards applica-
ble to emissions of any air pollutant from any class or classes of
aircraft or aircraft engines which in his judgment cause or con-
tribute to or are likely to cause or contribute to air pollution
which endangers the public health or welfare.
(3) The Administrator shall hold public hearings with respect
to such proposed standards. Such hearings shall, to the extent
practicable, be held in air quality control regions which are most
seriously affected by aircraft emissions. Within 90 days after the
issuance of such proposed regulations, he shall issue such regula-
tions with such modifications as he deems appropriate. Such regu-
lations may be revised from time to time.
Effective date of regulations
(b) Any regulation prescribed under this section (and any revi-
sion thereof) shall take effect after such period as the Administra-
tor finds necessary (after consultation with the Secretary of
Transportation) to permit the development and application of the
requisite technology, giving appropriate consideration to the cost
of compliance within such period.
Consultation with Secretary of Transportation
(c) Any regulations under this section, or amendments thereto,
with respect to aircraft, shall be prescribed only after consultation
with the Secretary of Transportation in order to assure appropri-
ate consideration for aircraft safety.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 231, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 11 (a), (1), 84 Stat. 1703.
§ 1857f—10. Enforcement of standards; regulations by Secre-
tary of Transportation; proceedings to amend, modify, suspend,
or revoke certificates
(a) The Secretary of Transportation, after consultation with
the Administrator, shall prescribe regulations to insure compli-
ance with all standards prescribed under section 1857f—9 of this
title by the Administrator. The regulations of the Secretary of
Transportation shall include provisions making such standards
-------
68 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
applicable in the issuance, amendment, modification, suspension,
or revocation of any certificate authorized by the Federal Aviation
Act or the Department of Transportation Act. Such Secretary
shall insure that all necessary inspections are accomplished, and,
may execute any power or duty vested in him by any other provi-
sion of law in the execution of all powers and duties vested in him
under this section.
(b) In any action to amend, modify, suspend, or revoke a certif-
icate in which violation of an emission standard prescribed under
section 1857f—9 of this title or of a regulation prescribed under
subsection (a) of this section is at issue, the certificate holder
shall have the same notice and appeal rights as are prescribed for
such holders in the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 or the Depart-
ment of Transportation Act, except that in any appeal to the
National Transportation Safety Board, the Board may amend,
modify, or revoke the order of the Secretary of Transportation
only if it finds no violation of such standard or regulation and that
such amendment, modification, or revocation is consistent with
safety in air transportation.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title II, § 232, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub. L.
91-604, § 11 (a) (1), 84 Stat. 1704.
§ 1857f—11. State standards and controls
No State or political subdivision thereof may adopt or attempt
to enforce any standard respecting emissions of any air pollutant
from any aircraft or engine thereof unless such standard is identi-
cal to a standard applicable to such aircraft under this part.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II, § 233, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub. L.
91-604, § 11 (a) (1), 84 Stat. 1704.
§ 1857f—12. Definitions
Terms used in this part (other than Administrator) shall have
the same meaning as such terms have under section 1301 of Title
49.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title II,§ 234, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 11 (a) (1), 84 Stat. 1705.
SUBCHAPTER III.—GENERAL PROVISIONS
§ 1857g. Administration—Regulations; delegation of powers of
Administrator
(a) The Administrator is authorized to prescribe such regula-
tions as are necessary to carry out his functions under this chap-
ter. The Administrator may delegate to any officer or employee of
the Environmental Protection Agency such of his powers and du-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 69
ties under this chapter, except the making of regulations, as he
may deem necessary or expedient.
Detail of Environmental Protection Agency personnel to
air pollution control agencies
(b) Upon the request of an air pollution control agency, person-
nel of the Environmental Protection Agency may be detailed to
such agency for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this
chapter.
Payments under grants; installments; advances or reimbursement
(c) Payments under grants made under this chapter may be
made in installments, and in advance or by way of reimbursement,
as may be determined by the Administrator.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 301, formerly § 8, as added Dec,
17, 1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 400, renumbered Oct. 20,
1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(4), 79 Stat. 992, Nov. 21, 1967,
Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat, 504, amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, §§3(b) (2),15(c) (2), 84 Stat. 1677, 1713.
§ 1857h. Definitions
When used in this chapter—
(a) The term "Administrator" means the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
(b) The term "air pollution control agency" means any of the
following:
(1) A single State agency designated by the Governor of
that State as the official State air pollution control agency for
purposes of this chapter;
(2) An agency established by two or more States and hav-
ing substantial powers or duties pertaining to the prevention
and control of air pollution;
(3) A city, county, or other local government health au-
thority, or, in the case of any city, county, or other local
government in which there is an agency other than the health
authority charged with responsibility for enforcing ordi-
nances or laws relating to the prevention and control of air
pollution, such other agency; or
(4) An agency of two or more municipalities located in the
same State or in different States and having substantial pow-
ers or duties pertaining to the prevention and control of air
pollution.
(c) The term "interstate air pollution control agency" means—
(1) an air pollution control agency established by two or
more States, or
-------
70 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(2) an air pollution control agency of two or more munici-
palities located in different States.
(d) The term "State" means a State, the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rice, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and
American Samoa.
(e) The term "person" includes an individual, corporation,
partnership, association, State, municipality, and political subdivi-
sion of a State.
(f) The term "municipality" means a city, town, borough,
county, parish, district, or other public body created by or pur-
suant to State law.
(g) The term "air pollutant" means an air pollution agent or
combination of such agents.
(h) All language referring to effects on welfare includes, but is
not limited to, effects on soils, water, crops, vegetation, manmade
materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility, and climate, dam-
age to and deterioration of property, and hazards to transporta-
tion, as well as effect on economic values and on personal comfort
and well-being.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 302, formerly § 9, as added Dec.
17, 1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 400, renumbered Oct. 20,
1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101 (4), 79 Stat. 992, Nov. 21, 1967,
Pub.L. 90-148,§ 2, 81 Stat. 504, amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, §15(a) (1), (c) (1), 84 Stat. 1710,1713.
§ 1857h—1. Emergency powers
Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Ad-
ministrator, upon receipt of evidence that a pollution source or
combination of sources (including moving sources) is presenting
an imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of per-
sons, and that appropriate State or local authorities have not acted
to abate such sources, may bring suit on behalf of the United
States in the appropriate United States district court to immedi-
ately restrain any person causing or contributing to the alleged
pollution to stop the emission of air pollutants causing or contrib-
uting to such pollution or to take such other action as may be
necessary.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 303, as added Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604, § 12(a), 84 Stat. 1705.
§ 1857h—2. Citizen suits—Establishment of right to bring suit
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, any
person may commence a civil action on his own behalf—
(1) against any person (including (i) the United States,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 71
and (ii) any other governmental instrumentality or agency to
the extent permitted by the Eleventh Amendment to the Con-
stitution) who is alleged to be in violation of (A) an emission
standard or limitation under this chapter or (B) an order
issued by the Administrator or a State with respect to such a
standard or limitation, or
(2) against the Administrator where there is alleged a
failure of the Administrator to perform any act or duty under
this chapter which is not discretionary with the Administra-
tor.
The district courts shall have jurisdiction, without regard to the
amount in controversy or the citizenship of the parties, to enforce
such an emission standard or limitation, or such an order, or to
order the Administrator to perform such act or duty, as the case
may be.
Notice
(b) No action may be commenced—
(1) under subsection (a) (1) of this section—
(A) prior to 60 days after the plaintiff has given no-
tice of the violation (i) to the Administrator, (ii) to the
State in which the violation occurs, and (iii) to any
alleged violator of the standard, limitation, or order, or
(B) if the Administrator or State has commenced and
is diligently prosecuting a civil action in a court of the
United States or a State to require compliance with the
standard, limitation, or order, but in any such action in a
court of the United States any person may intervene as a
matter of right.
(2) under subsection (a) (2) of this section prior to 60
days after the plaintiff has given notice of such action to the
Administrator,
except that such action may be brought immediately after such
notification in the case of an action under this section respecting a
violation of section 1857c—7(c) (1) (B) of this title or an order
issued by the Administrator pursuant to section 1857c—8 (a) of
this title. Notice under this subsection shall be given in such man-
ner as the Administrator shall prescribe by regulation.
Venue; intervention by Administrator
(c) (1) Any action respecting a violation by a stationary source
of an emission standard or limitation or an order respecting such
standard or limitation may be brought only in the judicial district
in which such source is located.
526-701 O - 73 - 7
-------
72 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(2) In such action under this section, the Administrator, if not
a party, may intervene as a matter of right.
Award of costs; security
(d) The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought
pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, may award costs of
litigation (including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees)
to any party, whenever the court determines such award is appro-
priate. The court may, if a temporary restraining order or prelim-
inary injunction is sought, require the filing of a bond or equiva-
lent security in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Proce-
dure.
Non-restriction of other rights
(e) Nothing in this section shall restrict any right which any
person (or class of persons) may have under any statute or com-
mon law to seek enforcement of any emission standard or limita-
tion or to seek any other relief (including relief against the Ad-
ministrator or a State agency).
Definition
(f) For purposes of this section, the term "emission standard or
limitation under this chapter" means—
(1) a schedule or timetable of compliance, emission limita-
tion, standard of performance or emission standard, or
(2) a control or prohibition respecting a motor vehicle fuel
or fuel additive,
which is in effect under this chapter (including a requirement
applicable by reason of section 1857f of this title) or under an
applicable implementation plan.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 304, as added Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604,§ 12(a), 84 Stat. 1706.
§ 1857h—3. Legal representation of Administrator and appear-
ance by Attorney General
The Administrator shall request the Attorney General to appear
and represent him in any civil action instituted under this chapter
to which the Administrator is a party. Unless the Attorney Gen-
eral notifies the Administrator that he will appear in such action
within a reasonable time, attorneys appointed by the Administra-
tor shall appear and represent him.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III.S 305, as added Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604, § 12(a), 84 Stat. 1707.
§ 1857h—4. Federal procurement—Contracts with violators pro-
hibited
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 73
(a) No Federal agency may enter into any contract with any
person who is convicted of any offense under section 1857c—8(c)
(1) of this title for the procurement of goods, materials, and
services to perform such contract at any facility at which the
violation which gave rise to such conviction occurred if such facil-
ity is owned, leased, or supervised by such person. The prohibition
in the preceding sentence shall continue until the Administrator
certifies that the condition giving rise to such a conviction has
been corrected.
Notification procedures
(b) The Administrator shall establish procedures to provide all
Federal agencies with the notification necessary for the purposes
of subsection (a) of this section.
Federal agency contracts
(c) In order to implement the purposes and policy of this chap-
ter to protect and enhance the quality of the Nation's air, the
President shall, not more than 180 days after December 31, 1970,
cause to be issued an order (1) requiring each Federal agency
authorized to enter into contracts and each Federal agency which
is empowered to extend Federal assistance by way of grant, loan,
or contract to effectuate the purpose and policy of this chapter in
such contracting or assistance activities, and (2) setting forth
procedures, sanctions, penalties, and such other provisions, as the
President determines necessary to carry out such requirement.
Exemptions; notification to Congress
(d) The President may exempt any contract, loan, or grant
from all or part of the provisions of this section where he deter-
mines such exemption is necessary in the paramount interest of
the United States and he shall notify the Congress of such exemp-
tion.
Annual report to Congress
(e) The President shall annually report to the Congress on
measures taken toward implementing the purpose and intent of
this section, including but not limited to the progress and prob-
lems associated with implementation of this section.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 306, as added Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604,§ 12(a), 84 Stat. 1707.
§ 1857H—5. Administrative proceedings and judicial review
(a) (1) x In connection with any determination under section
1857c—5 (f) of this title or section 1857f—1 (b) (5) of this title,
1 So in original. Subsec. (a) was enacted without a par. (2).
-------
74 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
or for purposes of obtaining information under section 1857f—
l(b) (4) or 1857f—6c (c) (3) of this title, the Administrator may
issue subpenas for the attendance and testimony of witnesses and
the production of relevant papers, books, and documents, and he
may administer oaths. Except for emission data, upon a showing
satisfactory to the Administrator by such owner or operator that
such papers, books, documents, or information or particular part
thereof, if made public, would divulge trade secrets or secret proc-
esses of such owner or operator, the Administrator shall consider
such record, report, or information or particular portion thereof
confidential in accordance with the purposes of section 1905 of
Title 18, except that such paper, book, document, or information
may be disclosed to other officers, employees, or authorized repre-
sentatives of the United States concerned with carrying out this
chapter, to persons carrying out the National Academy of Sci-
ences' study and investigation provided for in section 1857f—l(c)
of this title, or when relevant in any proceeding under this chap-
ter. Witnesses summoned shall be paid the same fees and mileage
that are paid witnesses in the courts of the United States. In case
of contumacy or refusal to obey a subpena served upon any person
under this subparagraph, the district court of the United States
for any district in which such person is found or resides or trans-
acts business, upon application by the United States and after
notice to such person, shall have jurisdiction to issue an order
requiring such person to appear and give testimony before the
Administrator to appear and produce papers, books, and docu-
ments before the Administrator, or both, and any failure to obey
such order of the court may be punished by such court as a
contempt thereof.
(b) (1) A petition for review of action of the Administrator in
promulgating any national primary or secondary ambient air qual-
ity standard, any emission standard under section 1857c—7 of
this title, any standard of performance under section 1857c—6 of
this title, any standard under section 1857f—1 of this title (other
than a standard required to be prescribed under section 1857f—
l(b) (1) of this title), any determination under section 1857f—
Kb) (5) of this title, any control or prohibition under section
1857f—6c of this title, or any standard under section 1857f—9 of
this title may be filed only in the United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia. A petition for review of the Admin-
istrator's action in approving or promulgating any implementation
plan under section 1857c—5 of this title or section 1857c—6(d) of
this title may be filed only in the United States Court of Appeals
for the appropriate circuit. Any such petition shall be filed within
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 75
30 days from the date of such promulgation or approval, or after
such date if such petition is based solely on grounds arising after
such 30th day.
(2) Action of the Administrator with respect to which review
could have been obtained under paragraph (1) shall not be subject
to judicial review in civil or criminal proceedings for enforcement.
(c) In any judicial proceeding in which review is sought of a
determination under this chapter required to be made on the
record after notice and opportunity for hearing, if any party ap-
plies to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence, and
shows to the satisfaction of the court that such additional evidence
is material and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure
to adduce such evidence in the proceeding before the Administra-
tor, the court may order such additional evidence (and evidence in
rebuttal thereof) to be taken before the Administrator, in such
manner and upon such terms and conditions as the court may
deem proper. The Administrator may modify his findings as to the
facts, or make new findings, by reason of the additional evidence
so taken and he shall file such modified or new findings, and his
recommendation, if any, for the modification or setting aside of
his original determination, with the return of such additional evi-
dence.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 307, as added Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604, § 12(a), 84 Stat. 1707, and amended Nov. 18, 1971,
Pub.L. 92-157, Title III, § 302(a), 85 Stat. 464.
§ 1857h—6. Mandatory licensing
Whenever the Attorney General determines, upon application of
the Administrator—
(1) that—
(A) in the implementation of the requirements of sec-
tion 1857c—6, 1857c—7 or 1857f—1 of this title, a right
under any United States letters patent, which is being
used or intended for public or commercial use and not
otherwise reasonably available, is necessary to enable
any person required to comply with such limitation to so
comply, and
(B) there are no reasonable alternative methods to
accomplish such purpose, and
(2) that the unavailability of such right may result in a
substantial lessening of competition or tendency to create a
monopoly in any line of commerce in any section of the coun-
try,
the Attorney General may so certify to a district court of the
United States, which may issue an order requiring the person who
-------
76 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
owns such patent to license it on such reasonable terms and condi-
tions as the court, after hearing, may determine. Such certification
may be made to the district court for the district in which the
person owning the patent resides, does business, or is found.
July 4, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 308, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L.
91-604, § 12(a), 84 Stat. 1708.
§ 1857h—7. Policy review
(a) The Administrator shall review and comment in writing on
the environmental impact of any matter relating to duties and
responsibilities granted pursuant to this chapter or other provi-
sions of the authority of the Administrator, contained in any (1)
legislation proposed by any Federal department or agency, (2)
newly authorized Federal projects for construction and any major
Federal agency action (other than a project for construction) to
which section 4332(2) (C) of this title applies, and (3) proposed
regulations published by any department or agency of the Federal
Government. Such written comment shall be made public at the
conclusion of any such review.
(b) In the event the Administrator determines that any such
legislation, action, or regulation is unsatisfactory from the stand-
point of public health or welfare or environmental quality, he shall
publish his determination and the matter shall be referred to the
Council on Environmental Quality.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, § 309, as added Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604,
§ 12(a), 84 Stat. 1709.
§ 1857i. Application to other laws; nonduplication of appropria-
tions
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this
chapter shall not be construed as superseding or limiting the au-
thorities and responsibilities, under any other provision of law, of
the Administrator or any other Federal officer, department, or
agency.
(b) No appropriation shall be authorized or made under section
241, 243, or 246 of this title for any fiscal year after the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1964, for any purpose for which appropriations
may be made under authority of this chapter.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title III, § 310, formerly § 10, as added Dec.
17, 1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 401, renumbered § 303, Oct.
20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(4), 79 Stat. 992, amended
Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148,§ 2, 81 Stat. 505, renumbered § 310
and amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 12(a), 15(c) (2),
84 Stat. 1705,1713.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 77
§ 1857J. Records and audit
(a) Each recipient of assistance under this chapter shall keep
such records as the Administrator shall prescribe, including rec-
ords which fully disclose the amount and disposition by such recip-
ient of the proceeds of such assistance, the total cost of the project
or undertaking in connection with which such assistance is given
or used, and the amount of that portion of the cost of the project
or undertaking supplied by other sources, and such other records
as will facilitate an effective audit.
(b) The Administrator and the Comptroller General of the Un-
ited States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, shall
have access for the purpose of audit and examinations to any
books, documents, papers, and records of the recipients that are
pertinent to the grants received under this chapter.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 311, formerly § 11, as added Dec.
17, 1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 401, renumbered § 304, Oct.
20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(4), 79 Stat. 992, amended
Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 505, renumbered § 311
and amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 12(a), 15(c) (2),
84 Stat. 1705,1713.
§ 1857J—1. Comprehensive economic cost studies
(a) In order to provide the basis for evaluating programs au-
thorized by this chapter and the development of new programs
and to furnish the Congress with the information necessary for
authorization of appropriations by fiscal years beginning after
June 30, 1969, the Administrator, in cooperation with State, inter-
state, and local air pollution control agencies, shall make a detailed
estimate of the cost of carrying out the provisions of this chapter;
a comprehensive study of the cost of program implementation by
affected units of government; and a comprehensive study of the
economic impact of air quality standards on the Nation's indus-
tries, communities, and other contributing sources of pollution,
including an analysis of the national requirements for and the cost
of controlling emissions to attain such standards of air quality as
may be established pursuant to this chapter or applicable State
law. The Administrator shall submit such detailed estimate and
the results of such comprehensive study of cost for the five-year
period beginning July 1, 1969, and the results of such other stud-
ies, to the Congress not later than January 10, 1969, and shall
submit a reevaluation of such estimate and studies annually there-
after.
(b) The Administrator shall also make a complete investigation
and study to determine (1) the need for additional trained State
-------
78 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
and local personnel to carry out programs assisted pursuant to
this chapter and other programs for the same purpose as this
chapter; (2) means of using existing Federal training programs
to train such personnel; and (3) the need for additional trained
personnel to develop, operate and maintain those pollution control
facilities designed and installed to implement air quality stand-
ards. He shall report the results of such investigation and study to
the President and the Congress not later than July 1, 1969.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 312, formerly § 305, as added
Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 505, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 12(a), 15(c) (2), 84
Stat. 1705,1713.
§ 1857J—2. Additional reports to Congress
Not later than six months after November 21, 1967, and not
later than January 10 of each calendar year beginning after such
date, the Administrator shall report to the Congress on measures
taken toward implementing the purpose and intent of this chapter
including, but not limited to, (1) the progress and problems asso-
ciated with control of automotive exhaust emissions and the re-
search efforts related thereto; (2) the development of air quality
criteria and recommended emission control requirements; (3) the
status of enforcement actions taken pursuant to this chapter; (4)
the status of State ambient air standards setting, including" such
plans for implementation and enforcement as have been devel-
oped; (5) the extent of development and expansion of air pollu-
tion monitoring systems; (6) progress and problems related to
development of new and improved control techniques; (7) the
development of quantitative and qualitative instrumentation to
monitor emissions and air quality; (8) standards set or under
consideration pursuant to subchapter II of this chapter; (9) the
status of State, interstate, and local pollution control programs
established pursuant to and assisted by this chapter; and (10) the
reports and recommendations made by the President's Air Quality
Advisory Board.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 313, formerly § 306, as added
Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 506, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 12(a), 15(c) (2), 84
Stat. 1705,1713.
§ 1857J—3. Labor standards
The Administrator shall take such action as may be necessary to
insure that all laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or
subcontractors on projects assisted under this chapter shall be
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 79
paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing for the same
type of work on similar construction in the locality as determined
by the Secretary of Labor, in accordance with the Act of March 3,
1931, as amended, known as the Davis-Bacon Act. The Secretary
of Labor shall have, with respect to the labor standards specified
in this subsection, the authority and functions set forth in Reorg-
anization Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 and section 276c of Title 40.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 314, formerly § 307, as added
Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat. 506, renumbered and
amended Dec. 31, 1970, Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 12(a), 15(c) (2), 84
Stat. 1705,1713.
§ 1857k. Separability of provisions
If any provision of this chapter, or the application of any provi-
sion of this chapter to any person or circumstance, is held invalid,
the application of such provision to other persons or circumstan-
ces, and the remainder of this chapter, shall not be affected
thereby.
July 14,1955, c. 360, Title III, § 308, formerly § 12, as added Dec.
17, 1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 401, renumbered § 305, Oct.
20, 1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(4), 79 Stat. 992, amended
and renumbered § 308, Nov. 21, 1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2, 81 Stat.
506, Section 308 of Act July 14, 1955, was renumbered section
315 by Pub.L. 91-604, § 12(a), Dec. 31, 1970, 84 Stat. 1705.
§ 18571. Appropriations
There are authorized to be appropriate to carry out this chap-
ter, other than sections 1857b(f) (3) and (d), 1857b—1, 1857f—
6e, and 1858a of this title, $125,000,000 for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1971, $225,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1972, and $300,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1973.
July 14, 1955, c. 360, Title III, § 316, formerly § 13, as added Dec.
17, 1963, Pub.L. 88-206, § 1, 77 Stat. 401, renumbered § 306, and
amended Oct. 20,1965, Pub.L. 89-272, Title I, § 101(4), (6), (7),
79 Stat. 992; Oct. 15, 1966, Pub.L. 89-675, § 2(a), 80 Stat. 954,
renumbered § 309, and amended Nov. 21,1967, Pub.L. 90-148, § 2,
81 Stat. 506, renumbered § 316, and amended Dec. 31, 1970,
Pub.L. 91-604, §§ 12(a), 13(b), 84 Stat. 1705, 1709.
-------
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 81
l.la AIR POLLUTION ACT OF JULY 14, 1955
P.L. 84-159, 69 Stat. 322
AN ACT
To provide research and technical assistance relating to air pollution control.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That in recognition of the
dangers to the public health and welfare, injury to agricultural crops
and livestock, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards
to air and ground transportation, from air pollution, it is hereby de-
clared to be the policy of Congress to preserve and protect the primary
responsibilities and rights of the States and local governments in
controlling air pollution, to support and aid technical research to
devise and develop methods of abating such pollution, and to provide
Federal technical services and financial aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies and other public or private agencies
and institutions in the formulation and execution of their air pollution
abatement research programs. To this end, the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service (under the supervision and direction of the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare) shall have the authority relating to air pollu-
tion control vested in them respectively by this Act.
Sec. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful investiga-
tion and in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State and
local government air pollution control agencies, with other public
and private agencies and institutions, and with the industries involved,
to prepare or recommend research programs for devising and develop-
ing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For the purpose
of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to make joint
investigations with any such agencies or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities
by State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of
air pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air
pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in
the Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State
and local government air pollution control agencies, and other public
and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; and (4)
make available to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, other public and private agencies and institutions, and in-
dustries, the results of surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and abatement
thereof.
-------
82 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may, upon request of any State or local
government air pollution control agency, conduct investigations and
research and make surveys concerning any specific problem of air
pollution confronting such State or local government air pollution
control agency with a view to recommending a solution of such
problem.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time to
time reports of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments made under the authority of this Act as he may consider
desirable, together with appropriate recommendations with regard to
the control of air pollution.
SEC. 5. (a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the five
fiscal years during the period beginning July 1,1955, and ending June
30,1960, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it to carry out its functions
under this Act and, in furtherance of the policy declared in the first
[p. 322]
section of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies, and other public and private
agencies and institutions, and to individuals, for research, training,
and demonstration projects, and (2) enter into contracts with public
and private agencies and institutions and individuals for research,
training, and demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and contracts
may be made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised
Statutes. Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid and contracts shall
remain available until expended, and shall be allotted by the Surgeon
General in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare.
SEC. 6. When used in this Act—
(a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the State
health authority, except that in the case of any State in which there
is a single State agency other than the State health authority charged
with responsibility for enforcing State laws relating to the abatement
of air pollution, it means such other State agency;
(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency" means
a city, county, or other local government health authority, except
that in the case of any city, county, or other local government in which
there is a single agency other than the health authority charged with
responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating to the abate-
ment of air pollution, it means such other agency; and
(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority of
any department or agency of the United States to conduct or make
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 83
grants-in-aid or contracts for research and experiments relating to air
pollution under the authority of any other law.
Approved July 14, 1955.
[p. 323]
l.la(l) SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
S. REP. No. 389, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955)
PROVIDING FOR RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL ASSIST-
ANCE RELATING TO AIR-POLLUTION CONTROL
MAY 27 (legislative day, MAY 2), 1955.—Filed under authority of the order of the
Senate of May 27 (legislative day, May 2), 1955 with amendments, and ordered
to be printed
Mr. CHAVEZ, from the Committee on Public Works, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 928]
The Committee on Public Works, to whom was referred the bill
(S. 928) to amend the Water Pollution Control Act in order to provide
for the control of air pollution, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with amendment and recommends that the bill,
as amended, do pass.
The amendments are indicated in the bill as reported by line type
and italics. The title of the bill has been amended to conform to
changes in language and to make clear the objectives of this measure.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL AS AMENDED
Within recent years it has become increasingly evident that the
health, comfort, and well-being of our people in many parts of the
country are affected by contamination of the atmosphere in which
they live. There is acknowledged need to determine the causes of air
pollution, the meteorological factors and chemical elements involved,
the effects, and possible preventive measures.
The purpose of this bill is to authorize the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, through the United States Public Health
Service, to utilize the resources of the Federal Government and to
-------
84 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
cooperate with State and local governments and educational institu-
tions in the preparation and execution of programs of research into
the problem of air contamination. The bill will make possible techni-
cal and financial aid for joint efforts and provides for the collection
and dissemination of information which would be valuable to local
agencies striving to abate pollution of the atmosphere.
tP.U
NEED FOR SUCH LEGISLATION
There is no doubt that the emission of fumes and particles into the
air above heavily populated communities and industrial centers is
causing a condition described in a variety of terms, including "smog"
and "smaze."
While a few areas have attracted unusual attention because of air
contamination the problem is rapidly becoming serious and causing
alarm in many places. Tragic results have followed unexplained occur-
rences of fumes, fog, and murkiness in the past, as in the Meuse Valley
in Belgium, in London, in Donora, Pa., and in Poza Rica, Mexico,
during present history.
Considerable publicity has been given to "smog" sieges in Los
Angeles and public officials have indicated fear that like conditions
may be developing in such widely separated cities as New York and
Cleveland.
Commendable efforts are being made in many communities to isolate
the causes of air contamination and bring about control for protection
of our people. However, the work underway at present is largely un-
coordinated and in need of both acceleration and technical assistance.
A solution of the problem is delayed by inadequate observations,
insufficient exchange of data, and limited know-how, facilities, and
funds.
FEDERAL ASSISTANCE POSSIBLE
There are a number of Federal agencies particularly qualified and
equipped to conduct research into the problem of air pollution. Among
these are the Weather Bureau, the Bureau of Mines, the Bureau of
Standards, the National Institutes of Health, the Agricultural Re-
search Service, and the Atomic Energy Commission.
It is the opinion of the committee that the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare can best coordinate efforts of Federal agencies
and cooperate with and aid other bodies, State and local, public and
private, in formulating and carrying out research programs directed
toward abatement of air pollution.
The laboratories of the Federal Government, the testing techniques,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 85
the records of weather conditions, the trained personnel, and the
apparatus and equipment now in existence cannot be duplicated
easily, quickly, or economically by any non-Federal agency seeking to
counteract the air contamination menace.
Consequently, it is the opinion of the committee that the Federal
Government should employ its resources to further the attack against
pollution of the atmosphere.
EXPLANATION OF THE BILL
It is the opinion of the committee that considerable time may be
needed to produce useful results. Therefore, this bill authorizes a
5-year program of research and cooperation. A lesser period would be
insufficient to test theories and make painstaking studies. In the opin-
ion of the committee, authorization for Federal participation in the
field of air-pollution research is of such great importance as to justify
a specific authorizing statute.
[p. 2]
The bill would authorize an annual appropriation, beginning July 1,
1955, and continuing until June 30, 1960, in an amount not to exceed
$3 million annually, for expenditure by the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare to carry on these functions. The money would
be available for technical services by other Federal departments or
agencies whose facilities and personnel are employed in the program,
and for grants-in-aid to State and local governmental bodies and public
and private educational institutions engaged in attempting to solve
the air-pollution problem through research.
The grants-in-aid would be provided through agreements whereby
qualified and experienced groups would undertake investigations and
experiments and would make available to the entire Nation the bene-
fits of their work.
The bill provides for a close integration of effort through an advisory
body which would evaluate suggestions about research projects and
provide a clearinghouse for data presently available. The Commission
would include both representatives of the Federal Government and
non-Federal members whose responsibilities, experience, and interest
make them particularly qualified to give counsel and guidance. The
President would have the right to select individuals from scientific
circles, from industries that might be most concerned, or from the
public at large.
REASONS FOR ACTION
The President has recognized the serious nature of the air-pollution
problem on several occasions. Already he has created an ad hoc
-------
86 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Advisory Committee on Community Air Pollution to canvass the
facilities of the Federal Government which might be utilized in attack-
ing it. In his state of the Union message last January he said he would
call on Congress to take appropriate action against this menace.
In his special health message, he stated:
As a result of industrial growth and urban development, the atmosphere over
some population centers may be approaching the limit of its ability to absorb air
pollutants with safety to health. I am recommending an increased appropriation
to the Public Health Service for studies seeking necessary scientific data and more
effective methods of control.
Thus the proposed measure will carry out recommendations from
many sources. During the hearings, the committee received testi-
mony in support of the bill from representatives of communities and
local governments in all parts of the Nation. The legislation has been
endorsed by the American Medical Association, the American Munic-
ipal Association, and representatives of county governments.
The committee recognizes that it is the primary responsibility of
State and local governments to prevent air pollution. The bill does
not propose any exercise of police power by the Federal Government
and no provision in it invades the sovereignty of States, counties, or
cities. There is no attempt to impose standards of purity.
At the same time, the program which would be made possible by
this legislation should stimulate State and local agencies as well as
aid them in dealing with phases of the problem with which they are
most immediately concerned. The problem of research into the causes
and ultimate elimination of air pollution is so complex and vast that
it is not realistic to expect a solution through uncoordinated efforts of
a multitude of agencies.
tP-3]
Reports from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
the Bureau of the Budget, Department of the Air Force, and the
Department of Agriculture, commenting on the provisions of S. 928
as introduced, are as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
Washington, B.C., April 21,1955.
Hon. DENNIS CHAVEZ,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in response to your request of February
4, 1955, for a report on S. 928, a bill to amend the Water Pollution Control Act
in order to provide for the control of air pollution.
The bill would add to the Water Pollution Control Act a new title on air-pollution
control. The new title would state the Federal policy to be to preserve and protect
the primary responsibilities and rights of the States and local government in con-
trolling air pollution, to support and aid technical research on methods of air-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 87
pollution abatement, and to provide technical services and financial aid to States,
local governments, and industries in the formulation and execution of air-pollution
abatement programs. The Surgeon General would be directed to prepare or adopt
comprehensive programs for air-pollution control and authorized to encourage
cooperative activities by State and local governments, encourage the enactment of
uniform State laws, collect and disseminate information, support and aid (through
grants, contracts, and otherwise) research, training, and demonstration projects by
non-Federal agencies, and furnish other assistance as appropriate in relation to the
control of air pollution.
The bill would authorize appropriations for these various activities for the 5
fiscal years beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960.
Within recent years, evidence has increased rapidly that air pollution is adversely
affecting the health and welfare of the population in many urban and industrialized
communities. The publicity given to certain areas in which the problems have
become critical only highlights a more general condition in many urban areas of our
country. While considerable success has been attained by municipalities in the
control of smoke discharges, the general problem of air pollution due to other forms
of particulate matter, vapors, and gases has increased in severity with the growth
and greater technical complexity of economic and community activities. The control
of air pollution is hampered by inadequate scientific knowledge concerning the
production, nature, interactions, effects, and atmospheric dispersal of air pollutants
and by lack of available control procedures in some cases.
There is, in our opinion, no question as to the desirability of legislation such as
that proposed by S. 928 to authorize a Federal program of broad research and
technical assistance on air pollution problems. The Public Health Service is currently
conducting and supporting air-pollution research under existing authorizations
relating to health. There is need, however, for a broader legislative authorization to
encompass related community aspects of air pollution, and need for future expansion
of research and studies to overcome the deficiencies in technical knowledge required
for effective control efforts.
The 5-year period authorized in the bill for the conduct of the program is con-
sidered a minimum for the production of major research findings. Some useful
results should be obtained in a briefer time; other studies, such as those related to
chronic health effects of air pollutants, are expected to require longer than a 5-year
period. We believe that at least 2 years' concentrated effort will be required to build
up to the desirable level of research activity after availability of initial appropriation.
Thus, while it is not considered feasible to accomplish the entire objectives of the
bill within the 5-year period of program authorized, the time limitation may serve
a useful purpose in providing the occasion for a reappraisal of program toward the
close of the 5-year period.
A number of Federal agencies now have responsibilities related to air pollution
but not directly concerned with a program designed to extend technical assistance
to States and local agencies for air-pollution control. These include the responsibility
of the Department of Agriculture for advice to farmers as to methods for overcoming
the effects of air pollutants on crops and livestock, the responsibility of the Depart-
ment of the Interior concerning health and safety conditions in coal mines, and the
responsibility of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Department of Defense and
other Federal agencies operating or controlling industrial establishments to control
the emission of pollutants therefrom. It is assumed that this bill does not intend to
limit or supersede such existing responsibilities, and the addition of a specific saving
clause to this effect would be appropriate.
[p. 4]
526-701 O - 73 - 8
-------
88 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Several other Federal agencies have facilities and competences which should be
used, rather than duplicated, in a comprehensive research program on air pollution.
These include the United States Weather Bureau, Department of Commerce, with
its extensive facilities for meteorological observations and studies, and the Bureau
of Mines, Department of the Interior, with its long background of studies on the
efficiency of combustion of fuels. If given the responsibilities proposed in this bill,
this Department would consider it desirable to use, under the provisions of the
Economy Act, the services of other Federal agencies to the fullest extent feasible
and appropriate. Therefore, since the provision in section 208 (b), authorizing the
use of officers and employees of other Federal agencies to assist in carrying out the
purposes of the bill would appear to be restrictive, we believe that it should be
deleted.
To provide a close relationship with the other agencies, the organization of an
interdepartmental advisory committee, with initial membership consisting of
representatives of the Federal agencies named in section 206 of the new title proposed
by the bill plus the Atomic Energy Commission, to assist in program planning and
cooperative action would be highly desirable. However, we believe that membership
on such an interdepartmental committee should not be rigidly specified in law and
that the committee can best be established by executive action. Such an inter-
departmental committee is now functioning on an ad hoc basis and its role can be
enlarged and strengthened upon passage of this legislation.
We would therefore suggest the deletion of the provision in section 206 for the
establishment of an Air Pollution Control Advisory Board. The proposed inter-
departmental advisory committee would fulfill many of the functions of such a
Board. Moreover, unlike the water-pollution field in which a similar board now
exists, instances of troublesome interstate air pollution are few in number and no
Federal legal control over interstate air pollution is currently proposed. It is believed
that the functions to be provided by the non-Federal representatives on the Board
can be furnished through the services of selected consultants.
We question the desirability of extending financial aid to industries in the formula-
tion and execution of their pollution abatement programs as provided in the "general
purpose" section of the bill (sec. 202) and note that no substantive provisions are
included to implement his purpose.
The reference to grants-in-aid to States at the beginning of clause (1) of section
207 (2) of the proposed new title is somewhat ambiguous and may be construed to
authorize formula grants to States for purposes other than research, training, and
demonstration projects. We recommend that this reference be deleted. The general
authorization for grants to and contracts with public (which would include "States")
and private agencies, institutions, and individuals for research, training, and
demonstration projects is adequate and more descriptive of the project grant type of
authority which is desirable in this area at this time.
We also believe that specific language authorizing the Public Health Service to
engage directly in research on air-pollution problems should be included as well as
supporting research by other organizations, in order to make entirely clear the
authority of the Public Health Service to conduct research in all the community
aspects of air pollution.
Many problems of community air pollution are of local character with pollutants
consequently affecting only the localities in which they arise. In other cases, larger
or regional areas may be affected. We would suggest, therefore, that the authoriza-
tion for preparing or adopting comprehensive programs be made permissive rather
than mandatory in order to obtain the flexibility of operations desirable.
This Department has no current plans for additional buildings and facilities as
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 89
included in section 207 (c) of the new title. However, in view of the complex nature of
community air pollution and the possibility of development of unforeseen problems
and of promising research leads which would require the use of facilities not now
available, it is suggested that the authorization remain in the bill with the authority
broadened to permit acquisition by other means as well as by new construction.
The provision in section 208 (a) of the proposed new title, for the appointment of
five officers in the regular corps of the Public Health Service above the grade of
senior assistant is not necessary, in view of existing authorizations which would
permit the appointment of officers required in conducting an air-pollution program.
[p. 5]
In summary, this Department is in agreement with the objectives of this bill and
with the proposal for a comprehensive program of research, technical assistance, and
necessary financial aid on the problems of community air-pollution control. We
recommend modification in certain sections of the proposed new title on air pollution
as follows:
1. Addition of a provision that the act would not supersede or limit existing
provisions of law pertaining to air pollution.
2. Deletion of section 208 (b) which would restrict the use of services of other
Federal agencies to utilization of their officers and employees on a loan basis.
3. Deletion of the provision in section 206 which would establish an Air Pollution
Control Advisory Board.
4. Deletion of the provision for financial assistance to industries included in
section 202.
5. Clarification of section 207 (a) to authorize grants to States only on a project
basis, the same as to other agencies, institutions, and individuals, for research,
training, and demonstrations.
6. Addition of a provision to authorize the Surgeon General to conduct research
and studies relating to air pollution and its prevention and abatement.
7. Permissive authorization rather than mandatory direction in section 203 (a)
for the Surgeon General to prepare or adopt comprehensive programs for eliminating
or reducing air pollution.
8. Deletion of the provision for five additional officers in the regular corps of the
Public Health Service.
We would recommend the enactment by the Congress of this legislation, modified
as suggested above.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that it perceives no objection to the sub-
mission of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
OVETA CULP HOBBY, Secretary.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., April 21,1955.
Hon. DENNIS CHAVEZ,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your letter of February 5,1955,
requesting the views of the Bureau of the Budget on S. 928, a bill to amend the Water
Pollution Control Act in order to provide for the control of air pollution.
This bill would amend the Water Pollution Control Act by adding a new title on
air pollution. The bill defines the Federal policy of supporting the primary responsi-
-------
90 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
bilities of the State and local governments in controlling air pollution. To this end
the proposed legislation authorizes the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
and the Surgeon General to support and aid technical research on methods of air-
pollution abatement and to provide technical assistance and financial aid to States,
local governments, and industries in the formulation and execution of abatement
programs. The bill would further direct the Surgeon General to prepare or adopt
comprehensive air-pollution control programs. In addition, the Surgeon General is
authorized to encourage cooperative activities with State and local governments, to
encourage the enactment of uniform State laws, collect and disseminate information,
and render other appropriate assistance. The bill also authorizes the support of
research, training, and demonstration projects by non-Federal agencies through
grants and contracts. Appropriations for the foregoing activities are authorized for a
5-year period commencing July 1, 1955.
It is recognized that the primary responsibility for the conduct of air-pollution
abatement programs rests with the States and local governments. The role of the
Federal Government has been and should be concerned primarily with the research
effort seeking necessary scientific data and more effective methods of control. In
support of this role, the President, in his budget, recommended increased funds for
the Public Health Service for research into the health aspects of the air-pollution
problem. To the extent that the subject bill would strengthen this policy by providing
broader research authority and by providing for increased cooperation between the
Federal Government and State and local authorities the Bureau of the Budget
believes its enactment would aid in solving problems of air pollution.
[p. 6]
The purpose of the bill as set forth in section 202 infers the need for providing
financial aid to States, local governments, and industries in the formulation and
execution of air-pollution abatement programs. It is our understanding that the
presently foreseen need in the area of air pollution is to make available only technical
assistance in the formulation of programs and therefore, it is recommended that this
section be modified accordingly. Consistent with this approach it is also recom-
mended that section 207 (a) (1) which appears to authorize general grants-in-aid for
operation be deleted and that section 207 (a) (2) be broadened to authorize grants
for research.
It is noted that the report of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare on
this bill recommends deletion of section 206, which provides for the establishment of
an Air Pollution Control Advisory Board. We concur in this recommendation. While
there is a need for overall coordination of efforts, it is believed that this may best be
accomplished administratively with sufficient flexibility to meet changing situations.
Section 203 makes mandatory the requirement that the Surgeon General prepare
or adopt comprehensive programs for eliminating air pollution. We agree with the
comments of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare that this provision
be made permissive. Further it is believed that in keeping with the Federal function,
the Surgeon General should be authorized only to recommend programs for pollution
abatement.
For technical reasons deletion of section 208 (a) providing for appointment of
certain commissioned officers, which authority already exists, and section 208 (b),
providing for utilization of employees of other agencies, a provision more broadly
covered under the Economy Act, is also recommended.
The authority contained in section 207 (c) for the erection of buildings to carry
out the purposes of the proposed legislation should, as proposed in the Secretary's
report, be revised to permit the acquisition of required facilities by such means as
may be practicable. It is noted that both subsections 207 (a) and (c) authorize
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 91
appropriations which would remain available until expended. This Bureau believes
that appropriations for the activities proposed in this measure should be treated in
the same manner as those of similar activities for which annual appropriations are
authorized. Should the need for construction funds arise, appropriate language could
provide for extended availability.
In general the Bureau of the Budget is in agreement with the objectives of this
bill and, subject to the modifications noted above, there would be no objection to
enactment of S. 928.
Sincerely yours,
DONALD R. BELCHER,
Assistant Director.
DEPARTMENT OF THE Am FORCE,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, April 27, 1955.
Hon. DENNIS CHAVEZ,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I refer to your request to the Secretary of Defense for the
views of the Department of Defense with respect to S. 928, 84th Congress, a bill to
amend the Water Pollution Control Act in order to provide for the control of air
pollution. The Secretary of Defense has delegated to this Department the responsi-
bility for expressing the views of the Department of Defense.
This bill would establish the policy of Congress toward the control of air pollution.
Provision is made for the use of Federal technical services and the giving of financial
aid to State and local government air-pollution agencies in the formulation and
execution of their air-pollution abatement programs. The bill vests authority and
responsibility in the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service, respectively, for implementation of Federal
support.
The Department of Defense recognizes the danger to public health and welfare
from air pollution and will support air-pollution abatement programs to the fullest
extent commensurate with military security. To this end, the Department will
cooperate in providing unclassified results of research which may be applicable and
of benefit in the general control of air pollution. Inasmuch as the declaration of the
responsibilities and rights of the States and local governments in controlling air
pollution might carry the implication that the States and local governments can
thereby control or deny the conduct of military research, development,
[P-7]
operations, it is believed that the legislative history of this bill should clearly show
that nothing therein is intended to control or prevent activities which the military
services consider necessary for the national defense. Subject to the foregoing, the
Department of Defense interposes no objection to the enactment of S. 928.
The Department of Defense is unable to estimate the fiscal effects of this bill.
This report has been coordinated within the Department of Defense in accordance
with procedures prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the submission
of this report.
Sincerely yours,
HAROLD E. TALBOTT.
-------
92 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, B.C., May 26, 1955.
Hon. DENNIS CHAVEZ,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate.
DEAR SENATOR CHAVEZ: This is in reply to your request of February 5, 1955,
for a report on S. 928, a bill To amend the Water Pollution Control Act in order to
provide for the control of air pollution.
In general, the Department is in agreement with the objectives of this bill and,
subject to the suggested changes noted below, there would be no objection to the
enactment of S. 928.
The bill would amend the Water Pollution Control Act as a means of providing
for the control of air pollution by placing the existing provisions of that act under
a title I—water-pollution control, and placing the air pollution provisions under
a title II—air pollution control. Title II would vest in the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service
responsibility and authority relating to air-pollution control and specify various
actions to be undertaken to achieve the objectives of the act. It would establish
within the Public Health Service an Air Pollution Advisory Board, one member of
which would be a representative of the Department of Agriculture designated by
the Secretary.
The Department of Agriculture has a general interest in community air pollution
to the extent that individuals who produce, handle, process, and market farm
products, and the animals and plants upon which this country depends for food,
fiber, and other agricultural materials, are affected adversely by air polluants.
Adverse effects include not only the impairment of health and comfort but the
retardation of normal growth and development, and changes in the constitution of
animals or plant products rendering them toxic, distasteful, or otherwise unfit
for human consumption or other purposes for which they were produced. When
air pollutants produce damaging agricultural effects, it becomes a concern of the
Department of Agriculture to ascertain the nature of the damage, to assess its
seriousness, and to seek means for eliminating or controlling it.
It is recommended that section 206, which provides for the establishment of an
Air Pollution Control Advisory Board, be deleted. We are of the opinion that
federally supported community air-pollution activities should receive leadership
from a single department, assisted by an interdepartmental advisory committee.
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is the most logical agency to
assume this role because of its concern in the problem and its established Federal-
State relations for dealing with health matters. Safeguarding the public health is the
most compelling reason for extending Federal assistance on community air pollution,
although economic losses and nuisance considerations also are important in the total
problem. While several other departments are interested and should aid in any
Federal program, the greatest portion of the work will be in the Public Health
Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Leadership by one depart-
ment makes possible the coordination necessary in an overall program while utilizing
the competencies of other agencies to the maximum extent feasible and appropriate.
Section 202 infers the need for providing financial aid to States, local governments,
and industries in the formulation and execution of air-pollution abatement programs.
We are of the opinion that the general role of the Federal Government should be to
provide supplementary support and assistance to State, local, and other agencies,
including private organizations, in technical and operational prob-
[p. 8]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 93
lems. This would include, among others, research and development by Federal
departments and agencies and the support of these activities through other qualified
organizations or individuals in the field of community air pollution, thus producing
new information concerning the production, nature, effects, and control of air
pollutants. For this reason it is also recommended that section 207 (a) 1, which
appears to authorize general grants-in-aid for operation, be deleted and that section
207 (a) 2 be broadened to authorize grants for research.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the submission of
this report.
Sincerely yours,
TRUE D. MORSE, Acting Secretary.
[p. 9]
l.la(2) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE
AND FOREIGN COMMERCE
H.R. REP. No. 968, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955)
PROVIDING RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
RELATING TO AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
JUNE 28, 1955.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. CARLYLE, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce, submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 928]
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was
referred the bill (S. 928) to provide research and technical assistance
relating to air pollution control, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill
as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
That in recognition of the dangers to the public health and welfare, injury to agri-
cultural crops and livestock, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards
to air and ground transportation, from air pollution, it is hereby declared to be the
policy of Congress to preserve and protect the primary responsibilities and rights of
the States and local governments in controlling air pollution, to support and aid
technical research to devise and develop methods of abating such pollution, and to
-------
94 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
provide Federal technical services and financial aid to State and local government
air pollution control agencies and other public or private agencies and institutions in
the formulation and execution of their air pollution abatement research programs.
To this end, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service (under the supervision and direction of the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare) shall have the authority relating to
air pollution control vested in them respectively by this Act.
SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful investigation and
in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State and local government air
pollution control agencies, with other public and private agencies and institutions,
and with the industries involved, to prepare or recommend research programs for
devising and developing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For the
purpose of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to make joint investiga-
tions with any such agencies or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities by State and
local governments for the prevention and abatement of air pollution, (2) collect and
disseminate information relating to air pollution and the prevention and abatement
thereof; (3) conduct in the Public Health Service, and support and
[p-1]
aid the conduct by State and local government air pollution control agencies, and
other public and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution, and (4) make available
to State and local government air pollution control agencies, other public and private
agencies and institutions, and industries, the results of surveys, studies, investiga-
tions, research, and experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and
abatement thereof.
SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may, upon request of any State or local government
air pollution control agency, conduct investigations and research and make surveys
concerning any specific problem of air pollution confronting such State or local
government air pollution control agency with a view to recommending a solution
of such problem.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time to time reports
of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and experiments made under the
authority of this Act, as he may consider desirable, together with appropriate
recommendations with regard to the control of air pollution.
SEC. 5. (a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the five fiscal years during the period
beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable
it to carry out its functions under this Act and, in furtherance of the policy declared
in the first section of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies, and other public and private agencies and
institutions, and to individuals, for research, training, and demonstration projects,
and (2) enter into contracts with public and private agencies and institutions and
individuals for research, training, and demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid
and contracts may be made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised
Statutes. Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid and contracts shall remain
available until expended, and shall be allotted by the Surgeon General in accordance
with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
SEC. 6. When used in this Act—
(a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the State health au-
thority, except that in the case of any State in which there is a single State agency
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 95
other than the State health authority charged with responsibility for enforcing State
laws relating to the abatement of air pollution, it means such other State agency;
(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency" means a city,
county, or other local government health authority, except that in the case of any
city, county, or other local government in which there is a single agency other than
the health authority charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws
relating to the abatement of air pollution, it means such other agency; and
(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority of any department
or agency of the United States to conduct or make grants-in-aid or contracts for
research and experiments relating to air pollution under the authority of any other
law.
PURPOSE OF BILL AS AMENDED
In recent years it has become increasingly evident that air pollution
constitutes a danger to the public health and welfare, to agricultural
crops and livestock, to property values, and to air and ground trans-
portation. There is a great need to support and aid technical research
to devise methods of abating air pollution.
The bill as amended recognizes that the control of air pollution is
the primary responsibility of State and local governments, and that
the role of the Federal Government should be limited to conducting
research and providing technical services for and giving financial aid
to those agencies and individuals who are concerned with air-pollution
research and control.
The bill, as amended, would authorize the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare, through the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service, in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State
and local government air-pollution-control agencies, and with
[p. 2]
other public and private agencies and institutions, to prepare and
recommend research programs for devising and developing methods
for eliminating or reducing air pollution.
The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities by
State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of air
pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air pollu-
tion and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in the
Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State and
local government air-pollution control agencies, and other public and
private agencies and institutions of technical research to devise and
develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; (4) make
available to State and local government air-pollution-control agencies,
and other public and private agencies and institutions the results of
surveys, studies, investigations, research, and experiments relating to
air pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof.
To enable it to carry out its function under this act, the bill as
-------
96 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
amended would authorize an appropriation of $5 million to the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the 5 fiscal
years beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960.
NEED FOR SUCH LEGISLATION
There is no doubt that the emission of fumes and particles into the
air above heavily populated communities and industrial centers is
causing a condition described in a variety of terms, including "smog"
and "smaze."
While a few areas have attracted unusual attention because of air
contamination the problem is rapidly becoming serious and causing
alarm in many places. Tragic results have followed unexplained occur-
rences of fumes, fog, and murkiness in the past, as in the Meuse Valley
Belgium, in London, in Donora, Pa., and in Poza Rica, Mexico, during
present history.
Considerable publicity has been given to "smog" sieges in Los
Angeles and public officials have indicated fear that like conditions
may be developing in such widely separated cities as New York and
Cleveland.
Commendable efforts are being made in many communities to
isolate the causes of air contamination and bring about control for
protection of our people. However, the work underway at present is
largely uncoordinated and in need of both acceleration and technical
assistance. A solution of the problem is delayed by inadequate ob-
servations, insufficient exchange of data, and limited know-how,
facilities, and funds.
FEDERAL ASSISTANCE POSSIBLE
There are a number of Federal agencies particularly qualified and
equipped to conduct research into the problem of air pollution. Among
these are the Weather Bureau, the Bureau of Mines, the Bureau of
Standards, the National Institutes of Health, the Agricultural Re-
search Service, and the Atomic Energy Commission.
It is the opinion of the committee that the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare can best coordinate efforts of Federal agencies
and cooperate with and aid other bodies, State and local, public and
[p. 3]
private, in formulating and carrying out research programs directed
toward abatement of air pollution.
The laboratories of the Federal Government, the testing techniques,
the records of weather conditions, the trained personnel, and the
apparatus and equipment now in existence cannot be duplicated
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 97
easily, quickly, or economically by any non-Federal agency seeking to
counteract the air contamination menace.
Consequently, it is the opinion of the committee that the Federal
Government should employ its resources to further the attack against
pollution of the atmosphere.
It is the opinion of the committee that considerable time may be
needed to produce useful results. Therefore, this bill authorizes a
5-year program of research and cooperation. A lesser period would be
insufficient to test theories and make painstaking studies. In the
opinion of the committee, authorization for Federal participation in
the field of air-pollution research is of such great importance as to
justify a specific authorizing statute.
PRESIDENT URGES FEDERAL ASSISTANCE
The President has recognized the serious nature of the air-pollution
problem on several occasions. In his state of the Union message last
January he said he would call on Congress to take appropriate action
against this menace. In his special health message, he stated:
As a result of industrial growth and urban development, the atmosphere over
some population centers may be approaching the limit of its ability to absorb air
pollutants with safety to health. I am recommending an increased appropriation
to the Public Health Service for studies seeking necessary scientific data and more
effective methods of control.
In the fall of 1954 the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare,
at the request of President Eisenhower, appointed an ad hoc Inter-
departmental Committee on Community Air Pollution, composed of
representatives of the Departments of Defense, Agriculture, Com-
merce, Interior, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the National
Science Foundation, in addition to the Department of Health. Dr.
Leonard A. Scheele, Surgeon General of the Public Health Service,
was Chairman of the Committee. The Committee recommended
legislation authorizing a broad Federal program of research and tech-
nical assistance in air pollution problems. The bill, as amended, is
substantially in line with the recommendations of the ad hoc Com-
mittee.
CONCLUSION
The committee recognizes that it is the primary responsibility of
State and local governments to prevent air pollution. The bill does
not propose any exercise of police power by the Federal Government,
and no provision in it invades the sovereignty of States, counties, or
cities. There is no attempt to impose standards of purity.
At the same time, the program which would be made possible by
-------
98 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
this legislation should stimulate State and local agencies as well as
aid them in dealing'with phases of the problem with which they are
most immediately concerned. The problem of research into the causes
and ultimate elimination of air pollution is so complex and vast that
it is not realistic to expect a solution through uncoordinated efforts of
a multitude of agencies.
[p-4]
CHANGES MADE BY BILL AS AMENDED
The bill as passed by the Senate would have limited the Public
Health Service to dealings with "educational institutions" in addition
to specified official agencies. The committee felt it desirable that the
authorization for such cooperation and support not be so limited but
be extended to "private agencies and institutions," in order to include,
for example, industry associations, research institutes and organiza-
tions, and foundations, since this would permit the use of additional
available competence in the research program. Furthermore, the bill,
as amended, includes specific language authorizing the Public Health
Service to engage directly in research on air pollution problems as well
as to support research by others.
The bill, as amended, would increase from $3 million to $5 million
the limitation in the authorization for appropriation.
The bill, as amended, also eliminates the advisory board provided
for in the bill as passed by the Senate because the committee agrees
with the comments of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare that overall coordination of Federal effort can be achieved
better by an interdepartmental committee established by executive
action rather than through the use of a larger statutory advisory
board. The functions of the non-Federal members of the advisory
board would be discharged by selective consultants.
In addition, several clarifying changes have been made in the bill,
as amended.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
June 21,1955.
Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in response to your request of June 3, 1955,
for a report on S. 928, a bill to provide research and technical assistance relating to
air-pollution control.
The bill would state the Federal policy to be to preserve and protect the primary
responsibility and rights of States and local governments in controlling air pollution,
to support and aid technical research on methods of air-pollution abatement, and to
provide technical services and financial aid to States, local governments, and public
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 99
or private educational institutions, in the formulation and execution of their air
pollution abatement research programs.
The Surgeon General would be authorized to prepare or recommend research
programs, in cooperation with other official agencies and public and private educa-
tional institutions, for eliminating or reducing air pollution; to make joint investiga-
tions with such agencies and institutions; to collect and disseminate information
relating to air pollution and its prevention and control; to support and aid (through
grants, contracts, and otherwise) technical research by State and local government
air-pollution-control agencies and public and private educational institutions; to
make studies of specific problems of air pollution at the request of State or local
government air-pollution-control agencies; and to publish reports of surveys,
studies, investigations, research, and experiments together with recommendations
with regard to the control of air pollution.
There would be established within the Public Health Service an Air Pollution
Control Advisory Board composed of representatives of designated Federal agencies,
and eight persons (not officers or employees of the Federal Government) to be
appointed by the President.
The bill would authorize the appropriation of not to exceed $3 million annually,
for these various activities for each of the 5 fiscal years in the period beginning
July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960.
Within recent years, air pollution has increased rapidly and is now affecting the
health, comfort, and welfare of the population in many urban and industrialized
[p. 5]
communities. The publicity given to certain areas in which the problem has become
critical only highlights a more general condition in many urban areas of the country.
While considerable success has been attained by municipalities in the control of
smoke, air pollution from other forms of particulate matter, vapors, and gases has
increased in severity with the growth and greater technical complexity of economic
and community activities. The control of air pollution is hampered by inadequate
scientific knowledge concerning the production, nature, interactions, effects and
dispersal of air pollutants, and by the lack of satisfactory control procedures in
some cases.
There is in our opinion no question as to the desirability of legislation such as
that proposed by S. 928, to authorize a broad Federal program of research and
technical assistance to support and aid the States and local governments in their
air-pollution-control activities. The Public Health Service is currently conducting
and supporting air-pollution research under existing authorizations relating to
health. There is need, however, for broader legislative authorization to encompass
related community aspects of air pollution and need for further expansion of research
and studies to overcome the deficiencies in technical knowledge required for effective
control efforts.
Several other Federal agencies have responsibilities related to air pollution but
not directly concerned with a program designed to extend technical assistance to
public and private agencies and institutions. This bill makes it clear that it is not
intended to supersede or limit these existing responsibilities.
To provide a close working relationship with these other agencies, we would
propose the establishment, by executive action, of an interdepartmental advisory
committee to assist in program planning and cooperative action. We believe that
the overall coordination of Federal effort can be achieved better by such an inter-
departmental committee than through the use of a larger statutory advisory board,
as authorized in section 5 of the bill. The functions of the non-Federal members of
-------
100 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
the advisory board could be furnished by services of selected consultants. For these
reasons, we suggest that section 5 of the bill, which would establish an Air Pollution
Advisory Board, be deleted.
The 5-year period of support authorized in the bill for the conduct of the program
is considered a minimum for the production of major research findings. Some useful
results could be obtained in a briefer time but other studies, such as those concerned
with the chronic health effects of air pollutants, are expected to require longer than
a 5-year period. At least 2 years of concentrated effort will be required to build up
to the desirable level of research activity. Thus while it is not considered feasible to
accomplish the entire objective of the bill within the 5-year period authorized, the
time limitation may serve a useful purpose in providing the occasion for a reappraisal
of program toward the close of the 5-year period.
The reference to grants-in-aid to States in clause (1) of section 6 (a) of the bill is
somewhat ambiguous and might be looked upon as authorizing formula grants to
States. We recommend the deletion of this reference. The general authorization for
grants to and contracts with State and local agencies, and other public agencies, and
individuals for research, training, and demonstrations is more descriptive of the
project grant type of authority which is desirable in this area at this time.
The authorizations in the bill for cooperation on air pollution research and for its
support through grants and contracts would limit the Public Health Service to
dealings with "educational institutions" in addition to specified official agencies. It
would be desirable that the authorization for such cooperation and support not be so
limited but be extended to include industry associations, research institutes, and
foundations, since this would permit the use of additional available competence in
the research program. It is suggested therefore that the limitation to educational
institutions be removed.
We also believe that specific language authorizing the Public Health Service to
engage directly in research on air-pollution problems should be included in order to
make entirely clear the congressional intention that the Public Health Service
conduct research in all the community aspects of air pollution, as well as make grants
for and support research by others.
Many problems of community air pollution are of local character with pollutants
consequently affecting only the localities in which they arise. In other cases, larger
or regional areas may be affected. We would suggest, therefore, that the authoriza-
tion for preparing or adopting comprehensive programs be made permissive rather
than mandatory in order to obtain the flexibility of operations desirable.
[p. 6]
The limitation of $3 million annually in the authorization for appropriation,
included in section 6, is not considered desirable. In the initial year of the program,
it is unlikely that such a sum could be utilized efficiently. On the other hand, the
overall research program will include many complex aspects involving the expendi-
ture of considerable sums of money and will include projects extending over a
considerable period of time such as those concerned with the chronic health effects
of air pollutants. We recommend, therefore, that no appropriation limitation be
included and that the financial control be exercised through the usual annual appro-
priation process.
In summary, this Department is in agreement with the purposes and principal
provisions of the bill. We would therefore recommend that the bill, modified as
suggested above, be enacted by the Congress.
For your convenience, there is enclosed a copy of an amended bill showing by
brackets and underscoring the amendments needed to effectuate the modifications
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 101
suggested above, together with a few other amendments of a technical or minor
nature.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that it perceives no objection to the submission
of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
OVETA GULP HOBBY, Secretary.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., June 21, 1955.
Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST,
Chairman, Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your letter of June 3, 1955,
requesting the views of the Bureau of the Budget on S. 928, a bill to provide research
and technical assistance relating to air-pollution control, and your earlier letters
requesting our views on H. R. 835, H. R. 2129, H. R. 2888, and H. R. 3680, identical
bills, to provide for intensified research into the causes, hazards, and effects of air
pollution including research in means and methods of abating or controlling such
pollution. The bills provide that such research may be undertaken cooperatively
with a State, a local government or with other nonprofit institutions. Four-year
research contracts are authorized with funds to be available for expenditure for a
5-year period. The Secretary would be required to disseminate, to industry and the
general public, the results of such research. The bills further authorize the Secretary
to utilize the facilities and personnel of other Federal and non-Federal agencies.
Appropriations of not to exceed $5 million to carry out the program are also au-
thorized.
S. 928 embodies objectives which are similar to those of the aforementioned
pressures. This proposal defines the Federal policy of supporting the primary
responsibilities of the State and local governments in controlling air pollution. To
this end the proposed legislation authorizes the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare and the Surgeon General to support and aid technical research on methods
of air pollution abatement and to provide technical assistance and financial aid to
State and local governments, educational institutions in the formulation and execu-
tion of their air-pollution-abatement research programs. The bill would direct the
Surgeon General to prepare or recommend comprehensive air-pollution-research
programs. In addition the Surgeon General is authorized to encourage cooperative
activities with State and local governments, to collect and disseminate information,
and render other appropriate assistance. The bill also authorizes the support of
research, training, and demonstration projects by State and local air-pollution-
control agencies and by educational institutions. The bill would provide for the
establishment of a 15-member Air Pollution Control Advisory Board to review and
make recommendations on the policies and programs provided for in this measure.
The proposal would authorize appropriations of not to exceed $3 million for each
of the 5 years provided for in this act.
It is recognized that the primary responsibility for the conduct of air-pollution-
abatement programs rests with the States and local governments. The role of the
Federal Government has been and should be concerned primarily with the research
effort seeking necessary scientific data and more effective methods of control. In
support of this role, the President, in his budget, recommended increased funds for
the Public Health Service for research into the health aspects of the air-pollution
problem. To the extent that this legislative proposal would strengthen this policy by
-------
102 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
providing broader research authority and by providing
[P. 7]
for increased cooperation between the Federal Government and State and local
authorities, the Bureau of the Budget believes that enactment would aid in solving
problems of air pollution.
There are, however, several recommended changes which we believe would serve
to better define the responsibilities of the Federal Government in the air-pollution
research program. In this regard your attention is called to the provisions of section
6 of S. 928 which authorize grants-in-aid to State and local government air-pollution-
control agencies. The concept of grant-in-aid usually involves the payment of
Federal moneys to all States based upon formula principle. Since the scope and
nature of air-pollution problems vary from State to State, the legislation should
clearly indicate that Federal grants would be made on the basis of specific project
proposals. We believe that a grant-in-aid program for all States, some of which may
have but limited interest or need, would be far less desirable than the more flexible
authority contained in clause (2) of section 6. To clarify this point, it is recommended
that clause (1) of section 6 be deleted and clause (2) amended to include grants in
addition to contracts. The project grants thus authorized in clause (2) of section 6
would include grants to State or local agencies and would facilitate a high degree of
cooperation and coordination without extending the scope of the Federal interest
to the financing local abatement programs.
With reference to section 5 of S. 928 which provides for the establishment of an
Air Pollution Control Advisory Board, this Bureau believes that while such a board
would assist in the overall coordination of efforts, its establishment may best be
accomplished administratively with sufficient flexibility to meet changing needs.
We recommend that appropriations for the activities proposed in these measures be
treated in the same manner as those of similar activities for which annual appropria-
tions are authorized. Thus, we recommend deletion of the provision for appropria-
tions to remain available until expended in section 6 of S. 928. Similarly, we would
question the need or advisability of the provisions of section 3 of H. R. 835, H. R.
2129, H. R. 2888, and H. R. 3680 which continues the availability of unexpended
balances for 5 years before being covered into the general funds of the Treasury.
Current Treasury practice, in conformity with the Surplus-Fund Certified Claims
Act of 1949, provides for transfer of unexpended balances 2 years after the end of
the fiscal year for which the appropriations were made.
In general, the Bureau of the Budget is in agreement with the objectives of these
bills and, subject to the modifications noted above, there would be no objection to
enactment of S. 928, H. R. 835, H. R. 2129, H. R. 2888, or H. R. 3680.
Sincerely yours,
DONALD R. BELCHER,
Assistant Director.
THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE,
Washington, June 7,1955.
Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in reply to your request of June 3, 1955, f6r
the views of this Department with respect to Senate 928, an act to amend the Water
Pollution Control Act in order to provide for the control of air pollution.
This Department feels that intensified research into the causes, hazards, and
effects of air pollution, and into means for its control and abatement is definitely
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 103
in order and should be undertaken. Although air pollution can be considered to be
a local problem in many cases, there are many instances when it affects a large section
of a State or becomes an interstate problem—even an international problem at
times. Because of its broad scope and importance it is essential that the Federal
Government organize and conduct a basic air-pollution investigation so that ap-
propriate advice for control of air pollution may be made available for dissemination
to interested agencies and individuals engrossed in air pollution problems. For these
reasons we recommend enactment of legislation for the purpose of Senate 928.
We have been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that it would interpose no
objection to the submission of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
SINCLAIR WEEKS, Secretary of Commerce.
[p. 8]
526-701 O - 73 - 9
-------
104
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
l.la (3) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 101 (1955)
l.la(3)(a) May 31: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 7248-7250
CONTROL OP AIR POLLUTION
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of Calendar No. 392,
Senate bill 928.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Secretary will state the bill by title.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (S.
928) to amend the Water Pollution Con-
trol Act in order to provide for the con-
trol of air pollution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from Texas.
The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill
which had been reported from the Com-
mittee on Public Works, with amend-
ments, * * *.
*****
So as to make the bill read:
[p. 7248]
Be it enacted, etc., That in recognition of the
dangers to the public health and welfare from air
pollution, it is hereby declared to be the policy of
Congress to preserve and protect the primary re-
sponsibilities and rights of the States and local
governments in controlling air pollution, to support
and aid technical research to devise and develop
methods of abating such pollution, and to provide
Federal technical services and financial aid to State
and local government air pollution control agencies
and public or private educational institutions in the
formulation and execution of their air pollution
abatement research programs. To this end, the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and
the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service
(under the supervision and direction of the Secre-
tary of Health, Education, and Welfare) shall have
the authority relating to air pollution control vested
in them respectively by this title.
Stc. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized
and directed after careful investigation and in co-
operation with other Federal agencies, with State
and local government air pollution control agencies,
with public and private educational institutions to
prepare or recommend research programs for elimin-
ating or reducing air pollution. For the purpose of
this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized
to make joint investigations with any such agencies
or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may encourage coopera-
tive activities by State and local governments for
the prevention and abatement of air pollution;
collect and disseminate information relating to air
pollution and the prevention and abatement there-
of; support and aid technical research by State
and local government air pollution control agencies,
public and private educational institutions, to de-
vise and develop methods of preventing and abating
air pollution; make available to State and local
government air pollution control agencies, public
and private educational institutions the results of
surveys, studies, investigations, research, and ex-
periments relating to air pollution and the preven-
tion and abatement thereof conducted by the Sur-
geon General and by authorized cooperating
agencies; and furnish such other assistance to State
and local Government air pollution control agencies,
public and private educational institutions, as may
be authorized by law in order to carry out the policy
of this act.
SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may, upon request
of any State or local government air pollution con-
trol agency conduct investigations and research
and make surveys concerning any specific problem
of air pollution confronting such State or local
government air pollution control agency with a view
to recommending a solution to such problem.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and
publish from time to time reports of such surveys,
studies, investigations, research, and experiments
made under the authority of this title as he may
consider desirable, together with appropriate rec-
ommendations with regard to the control of air
pollution.
SEC. 5. There is hereby established within the
Public Health Service an Air Pollution Control
Advisory Board (hereinafter referred to as the
"Board") to be composed as follows: The Surgeon
General or a sanitary engineer officer designated
by him, who shall be Chairman of the Board, a
representative of the Department of Defense, a
representative of the Department of the Interior, a
representative of the Department of Agriculture, a
representative of the Department of Commerce, a
representative of the Atomic Energy Commission,
and a representative of the National Science
Foundation, designated, respectively, by the Secre-
tary of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior, the
Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Com-
merce, the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, and the Director of the National Science
Foundation; and eight persons (not officers or em-
ployees of the Federal Government) to be appointed
annually by the President. One of the persons
appointed by the President shall be an engineer
who is an expert in air pollution control and pre-
vention, 1 shall be a person who has shown an
active interest in the field of air pollution, and,
except, as the President may determine that the
purposes of this title will be promoted by different
representation, 1 shall be a person representative
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
105
of State government, 1 shall be a person representa-
tive of municipal government, and 1 shall be a
person representative of local or county govern-
ment. The members of the Board who are not offi-
cers or employees of the United States shall be
entitled to receive compensation at a per diem rate
to be fixed by the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, together with an allowance for actual
and necessary traveling and subsistence expenses
while engaged in the business of the Board. The
Board shall meet at the call of the Surgeon General.
It shall be the duty of the Board to review the
policies and programs of the Surgeon General as
undertaken under authority of this act, and to
make recommendations th?reon in reports to the
Surgeon General. Such clerical and technical assist-
ance as may be necessary to discharge the duties
of the Board shall be provided from the personnel
of the Public Health Service.
Stc. 6. (a) There is hereby authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare for each of the five fiscal years
during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and end- !
ing June 30, 1960, not to exceed $3 million to
enable it to carry out its functions under this act
and to (1) make grants-in-aid to States, for ex-
penditure by or under the direction of their respec-
tive State and local government air pollution control
agencies, and to public and private educational
institutions for research, training, and demonstra-
tion projects, and (2) or to enter into contract with
public and private educational institutions for re-
search, training and demonstration projects. Such
grants-in-aid and contracts may be made without
regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised
Statutes. Sums appropriated pursuant to this sub-
section shall remain available until expended, and
shall be allotted by the Surgeon General in accord-
ance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare.
[p. 7249]
SEC. 7. When used in this act—
(a) the term "State air pollution control agency"
means the State health authority, except that in
the case of any State in which there is a single
State agency other than the State health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing State laws
relating to the abatement of air pollution, it means
such other State agency;
(b) the term "local government air pollution
control agency" means a city or other local govern-
ment health authority, except that in the case of
any city or other local government in which there
is a single agency other than the health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances
or laws relating to the abatement of air pollution,
it means such other agency; and
(c) the term "State" means a State or the District
of Columbia.
SEC. 8. Nothing contained in this act shall affect
any other law relating to air pollution unless such
other law is manifestly inconsistent with the pro-
visions of this act. Nothing contained in this act
shall limit the authority of any department or
agency of the United States to conduct research
and experiments relating to air pollution under
the authority of any other law.
The title was amended, so as to read:
"A bill to provide research and technical
assistance relating to air pollution con-
trol."
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I call the attention of the Senator
from Oklahoma [Mr. KERR] to the fact
that the unfinished business is Senate
bill 928.
Mr. KERR. Mr. President, Senate bill
928, as amended by the committee, au-
thorizes study and research with refer-
ence to air pollution. It seeks to promote
and encourage cooperation by the Federal
Government with States, municipalities,
and private agencies toward finding a
means to reduce, and then to prevent, the
pollution of air.
The bill was long considered by the
committee. It was unanimously reported
by the subcommittee and then by the
full committee, which recommends its
passage by the Senate.
I should like the junior Senator from
California [Mr. KUCHEL], who led in the
effort to secure appropriate study, inves-
tigation, discussion, and approval of the
bill by the committee, to give the Senate
his views on the subject at this time.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, the
problem of air pollution or air contami-
nation has become so widespread that
no section of the United States is im-
mune from it. It has posed a continually
growing danger to the health and com-
fort of our people, a serious and increas-
ing hazard to our Nation's agriculture,
and a threat to the orderly growth of
our industry.
I was most grateful to find in the state
of the Union message a request by the
President that the facilities of the Federal
Government be enlisted in the field of
research and technical study and as-
sistance with a view to finding what we
hope may be an early solution of the air-
pollution problem. This bill meets that
request with a $15 million authorization
extending over the next 5 years.
The people of the Nation are indebted
-------
106
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
to my friend the senior Senator from
Oklahoma [Mr. KERR] for the manner in
which, as chairman of the subcommittee
charged with the responsibility for the
bill, he held long hearings and heard
[p. 7249]
testimony from representatives of State,
county, and city governments across the
Nation; and also testimony from experts,
such as a representative of the Ameri-
can Medical Association—all of whom
urged Congress to enact legislation to
bring the facilities of the Federal Gov-
ernment into this fight against smog.
I wish to emphasize that it is not the
thought that Congress has anything to
do with control of air pollution through
the proposed legislation or through any
contemplated Federal legislation. That
problem remains where it ought to re-
main—in the States of the Union, and
in the cities and the counties of our
country.
The bill does provide a means of inte-
grating, under the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, all the
technical facilities available to the sev-
eral departments of Government, so that
there may be a cooperative effort upon
the part of the Government of the United
States in the field of research and devel-
opment with reference to this problem.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
committee amendments be agreed to en
bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
the committee amendments are agreed
to en bloc.
The bill is open to further amendment.
If there be no further amendment to
be proposed, the question is on the en-
grossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill (S. 928) was ordered to be en-
grossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed.
[p. 7250]
l.la(3)(b) July 5: Amended and passed House, pp. 9923-9925
RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL AS-
SISTANCE RELATING TO AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL
Mr. PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I move to
suspend the rules and pass the b'lll (S.
928) to provide research and technical
assistance relating to air pollution con-
trol, as amended.
*****
Mr. PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself 5 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, for quite some time the
Congress has been aware of the dangers
to the public health, to agriculture, and
livestock, to property values, and air and
ground navigation of what we know
broadly as air pollution.
A great deal of technical research is
necessary in order to be able to cope with
a problem that is as complex as this one
is. The bill that is reported today for
consideration is a bill passed by the other
body with an amendment adopted by the
Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce without any opposition.
Mr. Speaker, the bill first of all recog-
nizes that the control of air pollution
primarily is a State responsibility, is a
function of State and local governments.
The committee, however, having studied
this matter, not only during the current
session of Congress but in previous ses-
sions of Congress, feels also that the
Federal Government has a stake in this
question, that it may well conduct re-
search, provide technical services and
some financial aid to agencies and in-
dividuals concerned with the problem of
air pollution.
The pending bill as amended, would
do simply this. Mr. Speaker. It authorizes
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
107
the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, acting through the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service,
and in cooperation with other Federal
agencies and with State and local
governmental agencies and with other
public and private agencies or institu-
tions, to prepare, recommend, and carry
[p. 9923]
out a program in the study of air pollu-
tion. It authorizes an appropriation of
$5 million for each of 5 consecutive
years.
It was felt by the committee, on the
basis of studies our committee has made
in the past, that this is a program that
cannot be completed quickly. It is one
that will require a rather considerable
period of time. This $5 million appro-
priation may be allotted by the Surgeon
General to public or private institutions
or foundations or agencies of Govern-
ment for the purpose of doing research
in this field of air pollution under regu-
lations that shall be prescribed by the
Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare. Other Government agencies,
of course, are interested in this problem.
The Weather Bureau in recent months
has shown a great deal of interest in
the question of air pollution. The Depart-
ment of Agriculture, the Bureau of
Mines and Mining, the Atomic Energy
Commission, all of these agencies have
devoted some study to this complex
subject within recent months.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PRIEST. I yield to the gentleman
from Minnesota, my colleague on the
committee.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. May I
call the gentleman's attention to the fact
that the bill authorizes private industry
to participate in this problem, and of
course it is true that private industry has
spent a great deal of time and money in
the investigation in this field. They are
one of the elements that are to be con-
sidered in this study.
Mr. PRIEST. The gentleman is quite
correct. I was coming to that just a little
later in explaining the difference between
the House bill and the Senate bill, be-
cause the Senate bill did not provide for
industrial organizations that are inter-
ested in the problem and many of them
are greatly interested in doing something
about the growing problem. The House
bill does provide that they may be in-
cluded. However, it was felt, Mr.
Speaker, that in order to have a coordi-
nated program there should be one di-
recting agency of the Government, and
it was felt by the committee that the
Public Health Service should be that
directing agency.
It may take all of the 5-year period
before any recommendations are made
generally to the public and to industry
and to other governmental agencies. The
problem is a very complex and vast one.
It should not be attempted without a
coordinated effort by many different
agencies of both the Federal and the
State Governments and private agencies
and institutions who may have an interest
in the subject.
I should explain briefly the changes
from the Senate bill. The Senate bill
limited the Public Health Service to deal-
ing with educational institutions. The
House bill lifted that limitation and pro-
vided in addition that grants may be
made and technical help given to pri-
vate institutions and agencies or to in-
dustrial groups, and many of them face a
real problem in this respect.
The bill was amended by the House
committee to change the appropriation
from $3 million a year over a 5-year
period to $5 million a year over a 5-year
period, believing that the problem was of
sufficient importance to justify this addi-
tional amount.
The amendment, added by the House,
which struck out all after the enacting
clause of the Senate bill, also eliminated
a special advisory commission that had
been set up in the other bill. The reason
for that, as the House committee saw it,
was that we believe that an overall coor-
dination of Federal effort in the question
-------
108
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
of control of air pollution can best be
achieved by an interdepartmental com-
mittee of the agencies that are dealing
with this problem, that already have gi-
ven it some study, and that, therefore,
it is better to eliminate the advisory
board as it was contained in the bill
passed by the other body and simply rely
upon an interdepartmental committee or
board in making these plans.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PRIEST. I yield.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. I commend
my distinguished colleague from Tennes-
see and my friend on the fine statement
he has made on this bill, and for bring-
ing this important bill before the House.
It certainly is a very vital subject, one
in which we are vitally interested in some
areas of Tennessee, particularly in the
chemical industry area of our State. I
join in the gentlemen's remarks, and cer-
tainly hope this bill will receive favorable
consideration.
Mr. PRIEST. I thank my colleague.
I am aware of some difficulties in con-
nection with at least two chemical plants
which are located in the gentlemen's dis-
trict. One of these companies operates a
plant in my own district. That is true
throughout the United States. It is not
a local problem, it is a national problem.
We feel this modest appropriation of $5
million over a period of 5 years will help
to coordinate this study and to make it
really effective in meeting the problem
of air pollution.
Mr. BASS of Tennessee. Five million
dollars is certainly a nominal sum when
we think of the benefits that may come
in increased production in agriculture and
livestock, which is now being contami-
nated in certain areas.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Mr.
Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentle-
man from New York [Mr. RAY].
Mr. RAY. Mr Speaker, I am gland to
have a chance to support this bill to pro-
vide for research on the causes, hazards,
and control of air pollution and to bring
to Members of this body some informa-
tion about the experience of one congres-
sional district with the growing problem
of air pollution.
One-half of the district which I rep-
resent is Staten Island, the most south-
erly county in the State of New York
and also 1 of the 5 counties which con-
stitute the city of New York. Although
the whole island is in the city of New
York, we do have nurseries, vegetable
farms, and quite a few other uses of land
for agriculture by people who depend
on that for their living.
To the west, across a narrow strip of
water is the State of New Jersey. On
both sides of that strip of water are in-
dustrial plants. When the wind is from
the northwest, the smoke and all that is
in that smoke, comes over Staten Island.
When the wind blows from the east the
effects are felt in the opposite direction.
The stock of nurserymen has been dam-
aged and in many cases the entire crop
of the people who grow flowers for the
market has been destroyed. Vegetable
growers have often lost much of their
crops overnight.
It is very difficult to find out what
chemicals cause this damage. Moisture
affects it. The wind direction and velocity
affect it. Some of the pollutants come
from industrial plants and some from the
exhausts of automobiles, busses, trailer
trucks—and some from home oil burners
and incinerators, and so on. We have
been working on this problem for more
than 20 years without finding the answer.
Three years ago the House passed a
bill for research of this kind. It failed to
get unanimous consent in the other body
and did not pass there. I introduced a
similar bill in 1953 and a revised bill
drawn with the help of the Public Health
Service in the last session of Congress.
In this session of the Congress I have in-
troduced a bill very much like the one
that has now come out of the committee.
Companion bills were introduced by the
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. WILLI-
AMS] and the gentleman from New Jersey
[Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN].
Mr. TUMULTY. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. RAY. I yield.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
109
Mr. TUMULTY. I am a resident of
Jersey City, and our studies show that air
pollution generally comes from the State
of New York.
Mr. RAY. All I am trying to show is
that it is an interstate problem.
Mr. TUMULTY. That is quite agree-
able, but suppose you concede its origin.
Mr. RAY. I can make that concession
with respect to the north, but further
south the situation is different.
Mr. TUMULTY. Any way you want,
but the origin still remains the same.
Mr. RAY. The States of New York and
New Jersey have organized an inter-
state commission and authorized it to
make a preliminary study in the field.
There are local air-pollution boards in
New York and in cities on the Jersey
shore. But they cannot deal with the
whole problem, because interstate fea-
tures are involved. The States cannot
cross State lines, and the cities cannot
go outside their own jurisdiction.
Beyond that it is important to have co-
ordination of the work that is being dona
all over the country. There are many
places where research on air pollution is
underway. Industry has spent several
hundreds of millions of dollars in an
effort to find the causes and the possible
controls of air pollution.
Mr. Speaker, I hope this bill will pass
by a large majority.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. RAY. I yield.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. I com-
mend the gentleman on his interest in
this subject. I recall when the distin-
guished gentleman first came to Con-
[p. 9924]
gress he spoke to me because of the fact
I was a member of the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce, and
he told me of his great interest in the
problem as it affects his district, the State
of New York, and the State of New
Jersey, which is adjacent to his district.
I do know the gentleman has spent a
great deal of his personal time in in-
vestigating the problem in his district,
as it affects his district. I do know that
the gentleman has spent a great deal of
time in research and in efforts to get
legislative action on this bill. I want to
compliment the gentleman upon his real
and sincere interest in this problem.
Mr. RAY. I thank you, sir.
GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND REMARKS
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Mr.
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days
in which to extend their remarks in the
RECORD on the bill, S. 928.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Minnesota?
There was no objection.
Mr. VANIK. Mr. Speaker, I am indeed
happy to associate myself with the
remarks made by my colleagues in
support of this important legislation.
The 21st District of Ohio, which I
represent, is situated principally on the
east side of Cleveland, and my entire
district is subject to the tremendous pol-
lution of air which emanates from the in-
dustrial Cuyahoga River Valley in the
heart of Cleveland. This contamination
of air is general throughout the entire
eastern portion of the city and the down-
town area. The damage to public health
and property is beyond estimation.
Several years ago, in 1950, the South-
east Cleveland. Citizens Committee on
Air Pollution brought Dr. Clarence A.
Mills to the city to make a study as to
the deterrent effects of industrial con-
tamination of the air on the east side
of Cleveland. Dr. Mills was then on the
staff of the School of Experimental
Medicine of the University of Cincinnati.
Dr. Mills spent many weeks in Cleveland
and from a comprehensive study he made
on the vital statistics of cancer deaths
resulting from lung cancer, he concluded
that in the residential areas close to the
center of the city there were 240 more
deaths per year resulting from lung
cancer than there were in the cleaner
sections of the city. His information was
authoritative and was derived from a
careful study of the death records.
-------
110
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
At that time, as at present, the city
of Cleveland was endeavoring to enforce
an air pollution code which was directed
toward the reduction of fly ash and soot
fall in the Cleveland area. The code,
however, was ineffective as against the
industrial purveyors of fumes, and steps
are now being taken in Cleveland to
control the pollution of air by noxious
and harmful fumes which emanate from
the industries of the Cleveland area.
The problem of air pollution control
is beyond the customary power of city
governments. The pollution is difficult
to isolate as to source where there are
many industries contributing to the pol-
lution. In addition, there are vast con-
flicts of judgment concerning the cause,
abatement, and control of smoke and
fumes. The several cities are generally
operating independent of each other and
the programs of the cities must be co-
ordinated and accelerated. The technical
assistance and counsel of the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare would
go a long way toward facing this real
problem in the heavy industrialized cities
of our country.
It is my hope that the laboratories of
the Federal Government, the testing
techniques, and the weather experiences
will be effectively consolidated to bring
about a successful attack against the
hazards of air pollution. It is my sincere
hope that my city of Cleveland may be
one of the first project areas for
study.
Mr. HIESTAND. Mr. Speaker, this is
a measure of very vital importance not
only to every large city but to the people
living within a radius of 10 or 20 miles
of those cities.
Smoke abatement has generally been
well brought under control, but in recent
years industrial growth has loaded the
air in or near cities with fumes of not
only annoying but actually injurious
intensity.
All urban communities are affected.
Because Chicago, the windy city, has lots
of wind, air pollution is less serious there.
Los Angeles, with less wind has had a
disproportionate notoriety in this regard.
Most of us agree that air pollution
enforcement is a matter for local au-
thorities. But this is a nationwide prob-
lem. This bill as the committee presents
it, provides for national coordination and
cooperation under the direction of the
Surgeon General and the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare.
In this way all of the scientific studies
and research of all the cities, especially
Los Angeles, can be pooled and built
upon for the good of all.
The money authorization, $5 million, is
nominal and I urge the immediate pas-
sage of the bill.
Mr. PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I have no
further requests for time.
The SPEAKER. The question is, Will
the House suspend the rules and pass the
bill, as amended?
The question was taken; and (two-
thirds having voted in favor thereof) the
rules were suspended and the bill was
passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
[p. 9925]
l.la(3)(c) July 6: Senate concurs in House amendment, pp. 9984-9985
RESEARCH AND TECHNICAL AS-
SISTANCE RELATING TO AIR-
POLLUTION CONTROL
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I ask
that the Chair lay before the Senate a
message from the House of Representa-
tives regarding Senate bill 928. I wish
to say that I have discussed this matter
with the able senior Senator from Okla-
homa [Mr. KERB], the chairman of the
subcommittee, and with the distin-
guished acting majority leader and the
distinguished minority leader, all of
whom are in agreement with my request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
111
SCOTT in the chair) laid before the
Senate the amendment of the House of
Representatives to the bill (S. 928) to
provide research and technical assistance
relating to air-pollution control, which
was, to strike out all after the enacting
clause and insert:
That in recognition of the dangers to the public
health and welfare, injury to agricultural crops and
livestock, damage to and deterioration of property,
and hazards to air and ground transportation, from
air pollution, it is hereby declared to be the policy
of Congress to preserve and protect the primary
responsibilities and rights of the States and local
governments in. controlling air pollution, to support
and aid technical research to devise and develop
methods of abating such pollution, and to provide
Federal technical services and financial aid to State
and local government air pollution control agencies
and other public or private agencies and institu-
tions in the formulation and execution of their
air-pollution-abatement research programs. To this
end, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare and the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service (under the supervision and direction of the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare) shall
have the authority relating to air-pollution control
vested in them respectively by this act.
SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized,
after careful investigation and in cooperation with
other Federal agencies, with State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies, with other pub-
lic and private agencies and institutions, and with
the industries involved, to prepare or recommend
research programs for devising and developing
methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution.
For the purpose of this subsection the Surgeon
General is authorized to make joint investigations
with any such agencies or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage co-
operative activities by State and local governments
for the prevention and abatement of air pollution;
(2) collect and disseminate information relating to
air pollution and the prevention and abatement
thereof; (3) conduct in the Public Health Service,
and support and aid the conduct by State and local
government air pollution control agencies, and other
public and private agencies and institutions of,
technical research to devise and develop methods
of preventing and abating air pollution; and (4)
make available to State and local government air
pollution control agencies, other public and private
agencies and institutions, and industries, the re-
sults of surveys, studies, investigations, research,
and experiments relating to air pollution and the
prevention and abatement thereof.
SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may, upon request
of any State or local government air pollution con-
trol agency, conduct investigations and research
and make surveys concerning any specific problem
of air pollution confronting such State or local
government air pollution control agency with a
view to recommending a solution of such problem.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and
publish from time to time reports of such surveys,
studies, investigations, research, and experiments
made under the authority of this act as he may con-
sider desirable, together with appropriate recom-
mendations with regard to the control of air pollu-
tion.
SEC. 5. (a) There is hereby authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare for each of the 5 fiscal years
during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and end-
ing June 30,1960, not to exceed $5 million to enable
it to carry out its functions under this act and, in
furtherance of the policy declared in the first section
of this act, to (I) make grants-in-aid to State and
local government air pollution control agencies,
and other public and private agencies and institu-
tions, and to individuals, for research, training,
and demonstration projects, and (2 enter into con-
tracts with public and private agencies and institu-
tions and individuals for research, training, and
demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and con-
tracts may be made without regard to sections 3648
and 3709 of the Revised Statutes. Sums appropri-
ated for such grants-in-aid and contracts shall re-
main available until expended, and shall be allotted
by the Surgeon General in accordance with regula-
tions prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare.
SEC. 6. When used in this act—
(a) The term "State air pollution control agency"
means the State health authority, except that in
the case of any State in which there is a single
State agency other than the State health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing State laws
relating to the abatement of air pollution, it means
such other State agency;
(b) The term "local government air pollution
control agency" means a city, county, or other local
government health authority, except that in the
case of any city, county or other local government
in which there is a single agency other than the
health authority charged with responsibility for
enforcing ordinances or laws relating to the abate-
ment of air pollution it means the other agency;
and
(c) The term "State" means a State or the Dis-
trict of Columbia.
SEC, 7. Nothing contained in this act shall limit
the authority of any department, agency of the
United States to conduct, make grants-in-aid or
contracts for research and experiments relating to
air pollution under the authority of any other law.
Mr. CLEMENTS. Mr. President, will
the Senator from California yield to me?
Mr. KUCHEL. I yield to my friend
the Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. CLEMENTS. It is my under-
standing from the junior Senator from
California that he has discussed the
matter with the senior Senator from
Oklahoma [Mr. KERB], and that the
Senator from Oklahoma is in complete
-------
112
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
accord with the procedure proposed to
be followed in this instance.
Mr. KUCHEL. That is correct, I want
to say to the distinguished acting major-
ity leader. I have discussed this measure
with the senior Senator from Oklahoma
and the chairman of the subcommittee
which held hearings originally on Senate
Bill No. 928; and he is in complete accord
with the action which I propose, namely,
that the Senate concur in the amendment
of the House of Representatives.
Mr. President, I wish to say, by way of
introduction, that I am perfectly de-
lighted with the legislative action which
is about to transpire today in the Senate.
Ever since I first came to the United
States Senate, from the State of Cali-
fornia, 2>2 years ago, I have endeavored
to acquaint the Members of the Senate
and the Members of the House of Rep-
resentatives with the growing problem of
air pollution. From time to time I have
stood on this floor and have spoken with
respect to findings made by various
public officials, and agencies, and pro-
fessional groups regarding the increasing
hazards involved in air contamination
both in the United States and throughout
the world, not alone to human beings
and their very lives, but also to agricul-
ture and industry and to various kinds
of property.
During the 83d Congress, the Senate
accepted the recommendations which
had been made jointly by my colleague
from California [Mr. KNOWLAND], two
distinguished Senators from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. MARTIN and Mr. DUFF], the
distinguished senior Senator from New
York [Mr. IVES], the distinguished senior
Senator from Indiana [Mr. CAPEHART],
and other Senators, including myself,
and adopted a proposal to engage the
might of the Federal Government against
the growing problem of air pollution in
our land. I regret that the House of
Representatives did not see fit at that
time to concur in the judgment of the
Senate, and during the 83d Congress no
constructive action was taken on the
problem.
After the adjournment of the Congress,
the senior Senator from Indiana [Mr.
CAPEHART] and I wrote a letter to the
President of the United States in which
we urged that the President con-
[p. 9984]
sider the appointment of an interagency
committee to study the problem of air
pollution, with a view to the taking of
some constructive action in the 84th
Congress.
I was most happy to find that the
President of the United States thereafter
appointed an ad hoc committee, consist-
ing of representatives from appropriate
agencies of the Federal Government—
namely, the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, the Department
of Commerce, the Department of the
Interior, and others; and a study was
made of the possibility of Federal as-
sistance in combating, controlling, and
ultimately eliminating air pollution in
the United States.
In the state of the Union message
which President Eisenhower delivered to
the Congress last January, I was de-
lighted to note that he indicated that
prevention, control, and elimination of
air pollution constitute, in his judgment,
a matter of Federal interest; and it was
his recommendation that this Congress
take an interest in the subject and that it
consider the enactment of legislation in
this field.
Shortly thereafter, when a message
from the President on the question of
public health came to the Congress, once
again the administration indicated that
air pollution is a subject upon which
Congress might legislate to the benefit of
the 166 million American citizens.
I introduce Senate bill 928, along with
my able colleague from California [Mr.
KNOWLAND], the two distinguished Sena-
tors from Pennsylvania [Mr. MARTIN and
Mr. DUFF], and the distinguished senior
Senator from Indiana [Mr. CAPEHART].
Hearings were held before the Subcom-
mittee on Public Works, of which the
distinguished senior Senator from Okla-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
113
homa [Mr. KEER] was chairman. There-
after Senate bill 928 was favorably
reported from the subcommittee and the
full committee, came to the floor of the
Senate, and was passed by the Senate.
The House has considered Senate bill
928, and has adopted an amendment to
it. Let me outline the most important
features of the amendment.
First, the authorization in the bill, as
it was passed by the Senate, was for a
5-year study by the appropriate Federal
agencies, under the direction of the
Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare, or the Surgeon General; and at
that time the bill provided that during
that period, $3 million a year would be
authorized for expenditure, making a
total authorization, over a 5-year period,
of $15 million.
The House of Representatives has seen
fit to increase the authorization to one
of $5 million a year, thus providing a
maximum authorization for expenditure,
during the 5-year period, of $25 million.
Certainly that amendment will be en-
tirely acceptable to the Senate, and, I
am sure, to the administration.
Second, the bill, as passed by the
Senate, provided for the appointment by
the President of an advisory committee
on air pollution, to be composed of
various governmental officials and private
individuals, as well.
The House saw fit to delete that pro-
vision. In his comments yesterday in
the House the distinguished Member of
the House who was handling this measure
indicated it was the judgment of the
House committee which had jurisdiction
of the bill that an interagency committee,
perhaps similar to that which the
President himself appointed on an ad hoc
basis last year, was an appropriate
instrumentality for advice to the various
agencies of the Federal Government.
I do not quarrel with the decision of
the House in that regard. Neither does
my friend the distinguished senior
Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. KERR].
Thus we are united in not objecting to
the action of the House in this respect.
The remaining changes are relatively
minor in character. I think they improve
the proposed legislation in a number of
respects. So I am most happy that the
Senate, which I trust will approve the
House action in amending Senate bill
928, is now taking constructive action,
in conjunction with the House, toward
having the Congress of the United States
accept jurisdiction and responsibility
for technical assistance and advice to
State and local governments in a field
which has been of growing concern to
our people, namely, that of air con-
tamination and air pollution, which we
in California call smog.
Control of the problem will remain in
the State and local governments, where
it should be, but I think it is a grand
thing that, under the leadership of the
President of the United States, the Con-
gress now sees fit to accept responsi-
bility for research and technical assist-
ance in what we hope will be an effective
effort leading to the early elimination of
air contamination in this country.
On that basis, I respectfully ask my
brethren to approve the action of the
House. I move that the Senate concur in
the House amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from California.
The motion was agreed to.
[p. 9985]
-------
114 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Lib EXTENSION OF §5-a OF AIR POLLUTION ACT OF
JULY 14, 1955
September 22, 1959, P.L. 86-365, 73 Stat. 646
AN ACT
To extend the duration of the Federal air pollution control law, and for other
purposes
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That section 5 of the Act of
July 14, 1955 (42 U.S.C. 1857(d)), is amended—
(1) by striking out "(a)" after "SEC. 5.",
(2) by striking out "five fiscal years during the period beginning
July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960" and inserting in lieu
thereof "nine fiscal years during the period beginning July 1,
1955, and ending June 30, 1964",
(3) by inserting "for surveys and studies and" before "for
research" in clauses (1) and (2) of such first sentence, and
(4) by striking out "by the Surgeon General" in the last
sentence.
SEC. 2. Such Act is further amended by adding at the end thereof
the following new section:
"SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress that
any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any
building, installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable
and consistent with the interests of the United States and within any
available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency or any
State or local government air pollution control agency in preventing or
controlling the pollution of the air in any area insofar as the discharge
of any matter from or by such property may cause or contribute to
pollution of the air in such area."
Approved September 22, 1959.
[p.U
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 115
Lib (1) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN
COMMERCE
H.R. REP. No. 960, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959)
EXTENDING AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
AUGUST 20, 1959.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr, ROBERTS, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 7476]
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 7476) to extend for 2 additional years the
authority of the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service with
respect to air pollution control, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION
The purpose of H.R. 7476 is to extend the present Air Pollution
Control Act for 2 years.
The present act (Public Law 159, 84th Cong.), approved July 14,
1955, authorized appropriations of $5 million a year for 5 years to
assist in the formulation and execution of air pollution abatement and
research programs.
This act vests in the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service
and the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, specific author-
ity to conduct a program of research and technical assistance relating
to air pollution.
The present authorizations in this act expire on June 30, 1960.
Public Law 159, 84th Congress, authorized the appropriation of $5
million annually through fiscal year 1960 to enable the Secretary
and the Surgeon General to conduct the following programs:
1. Prepare and recommend research programs designed to reduce or
eliminate air pollution.
2. Collect and disseminate information relating to air pollution.
3. Conduct technical research in the Public Health Service, and
-------
116 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
support by grants-in-aid and by contract technical research programs
of both public and private agencies relating to air pollution.
[p.l]
4. On request of a State or local government air pollution control
agency, investigate and survey any specific air pollution problem
facing the requesting agency.
5. Prepare and publish reports or surveys, studies, investigations,
and research done under this law.
Under this authorized program, approximately $1.7 million was ex-
pended during fiscal year 1956; $2.7 million for 1957; $4.0 million for
each of 1958 and 1959; and the budget for fiscal year 1960 includes
$4,212,000.
POSITION OF AGENCIES
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Bureau
of the Budget favor extending Public Law 159, 84th Congress, on a
permanent basis, and eliminating the ceiling on appropriations. The
committee, however, is recommending a 2-year extension of the act,
without increasing the ceiling on appropriations. This will enable the
committee to review the program in the next Congress.
Agency comments will be found in letters included hereafter in an
appendix to this report.
ACTION BY COMMITTEE
Hearings were held by the Subcommittee on Health and Science on
May 19 and June 24,1959, on the subject of air pollution on the follow-
ing bills: H.R. 2347, by Congressman Lipscomb; H.R. 3183, by Con-
gressman McDonough; H.R. 3730, by Congressman Holifield; H.R.
4466, by Congressman Shelley; S. 441, to extend the duration of the
Federal air pollution control law; and H.R. 7476, by the chairman of
the Subcommittee on Health and Safety to extend for 2 additional
years the authority of the Surgeon General of the Public Health Ser-
vice with respect to air pollution control.
The following witnesses were heard in support of legislation to
extend the Federal program:
Dr. Theodore J. Bauer, Deputy Chief, Bureau of State Services,
Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare;
Hon. Florence P. Dwyer, Representative from New Jersey; Hon.
Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary, Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare; Hon. Chet Holifield, Representative from California;
Hon. Glenard P. Lipscomb, Representative from California; Vernon
G. MacKenzie, sanitary engineer, Bureau of State Services, Public
Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; Hon.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 117
Gordon L. McDonough, Representative from California; Dr. Richard
Prindle, Bureau of State Services, Public Health Service, Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare; Alexander Rihm, Jr., executive
secretary, New York State Air Pollution Control Board; Hon. John
F. Shelley, Representative from California; and Dr. Russell E. Teague,
commissioner of health, Kentucky State Department of Health.
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
In 1955, when Public Law 159 was enacted, it was clear that air
pollution as a national problem was growing faster than our Nation's
knowledge of how to control it. Today, the problem is still with us.
All apparent trends in our economic and social growth suggest
strongly that the problem of air pollution will remain with us for a
great many years to come.
[p. 2]
The most significant difference between the situation in 1955 and the
situation today is that now there are many obvious signs of greatly
accelerated activities in research and control among all levels of
government, industry, and the many private research and control
organizations contributing to solutions of the problem.
There is no doubt that the action of Congress in specifically author-
izing Federal participation in the search for solutions to the air pollu-
tion problem is responsible in a large measure for this important
change.
Air pollution is a national problem in its truest sense. It affects
the total human environment and requires that all affected interests
participate in seeking effective solutions among the many health,
social, economic, and other complex aspects of the problem.
Since 1955, the accelerated program of the Public Health Service
has assisted the various agencies and groups concerned in developing
information on the problems and in contributing to their solution.
Valuable information has been provided about the extent of air
pollution in the United States, and about practical means of measur-
ing, assessing, and controlling air pollution.
Data have been developed about many ways in which air pollution
subtly affects human health, including specific knowledge about the
effects of agents such as ozone and sulfur dioxide, which are directly
toxic and physiologically damaging, and certain olefin compounds
which can cause eye irritation in humans and serious toxic effects in
experimental animals.
States and communities have taken advantage of, and benefited by,
the technical assistance offered by the Public Health Service.
-------
118 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
This has led to the appraisal of many local and regional air pollution
problems and contributed toward appropriate local action.
STATES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES BENEFIT
States and communities, industry, and other private organizations
have benefited also through the training programs for technical per-
sonnel conducted or supported by this legislation and conducted by
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Progress has been made on all these fronts. The research and
assistance activities developed under the current act have produced
significant findings beneficial to all groups concerned with air pollution.
Specific information or indications have come out of some of the
research, particularly regarding health effects, that certain pollutants
in the air have affected health, as in the case of the drastic air pollu-
tion episodes in Donora, Pa., and London, England. These pollutants
have increased the death rates, particularly during the period of the
smog, and more particularly in old and debilitated people. But most
of the health effects of air pollutants are much more subtle than that.
They are long-term detractors of good health. In the hearings, the
subcommittee was told that it is known there are pollutants in the air
which cause cancer, particularly in laboratory animals, and that death
rates for certain types of cancer and respiratory conditions are greater
in urban areas where the smog is more common.
Furthermore, worthwhile results extend beyond the direct accom-
plishments of the program. Public Health Service efforts have served
to stimulate the activities and accomplishments of other organizations
which are encouraged and assisted by the Federal participation.
[P. 3]
A large number of research projects underway relate to the causes,
nature, extent, effects, and control of air pollution. The projects are
being conducted not only in the Public Health Service laboratories,
but also through contract and grant support of projects in other Fed-
eral agencies, in universities and research institutes, or wherever
specific competencies and facilities exist. There are nearly 200 of
these projects, involving the Public Health Service facilities and over
50 universities and other research organizations. In addition, one
project alone, the national air sampling network, involves over 160
local health and air pollution agencies in the sampling of air contami-
nants in all the States and Puerto Rico.
Although a number of opportunities arise for cooperative effort,
most Public Health Service research projects can be grouped into two
distinct categories: medical and engineering.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 119
Medical research is concerned not only with those well-known acute
air pollution episodes which resulted in sudden death—ranging from
20 fatalities in Donora (1948) to 4,000 or more in a single week in
London (1952)—but also with the potentially greater problem of long-
term cumulative injury to community populations from day-after-day
exposure to air pollution.
Two principal kinds of studies have been initiated: (1) statistical
and epidemiological studies designed to determine the extent to which
variations in community health are related to air pollution indexes;
and (2) laboratory studies to determine the effects on health of certain
constituents of polluted air—alone and in combination—known or
suspected to be potentially harmful. Thus, the health studies program
is divided into epidemiology and laboratory investigations, with such
activities as lung function testing falling into both groups.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as intro-
duced, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is
enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
PUBLIC LAW 159, 84TH CONGRESS
AN ACT To provide research and technical assistance relating to air pollution
control
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That in recognition of the
dangers to the public health and welfare, injury to agricultural crops
and livestock, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards
to air and ground transportation, from air pollution, it is hereby
declared to be the policy of Congress to preserve and protect the pri-
mary responsibilities and rights of the States and local governments
in controlling air pollution, to support and aid technical research to
devise and develop methods of abating such pollution, and to provide
Federal technical services and financial aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies and other public or private agencies
and institutions in the formulation and execution of their air pollution
abatement research programs. To this end, the Secretary of Health,
[p. 4]
Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service (under the supervision and direction of the Secretary of Health,
526-701 O - 73 - 10
-------
120 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Education, and Welfare) shall have the authority relating to air pollu-
tion control vested in them respectively by this Act.
SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful in-
vestigation and in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State
and local government air pollution control agencies, with other public
and private agencies and institutions, and with the industries involved,
to prepare or recommend research programs for devising and develop-
ing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For the purpose
of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to make joint
investigations with any such agencies or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities
by State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of
air pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air
pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in
the Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State
and local government air pollution control agencies, and other public
and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; and
(4) make available to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, other public and private agencies and institutions, and
industries, the results of surveys, studies, investigations, research,
and experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and
abatement thereof.
SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may, upon request of any State or
local government air pollution control agency, conduct investigations
and research and make surveys concerning any specific problem of air
pollution confronting such State or local government air pollution con-
trol agency with a view to recommending a solution of such problem.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time to
time reports of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments made under the authority of this Act as he may consider
desirable, together with appropriate recommendations with regard to
the control of air pollution.
SEC. 5. (a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the [five]
seven fiscal years during the period beginning July 1,1955, and ending
June 30, [1960] 1962, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it to carry
out its functions under this Act and, in furtherance of the policy de-
clared in the first section of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to
State and local government air pollution control agencies, and other
public and private agencies and institutions, and to individuals, for
research, training, and demonstration projects, and (2) enter into con-
tracts with public and private agencies and institutions and individuals
for research, training, and demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 121
and contracts may be made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709
of the Revised Statutes. Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid
and contracts shall remain available until expended, and shall be
allotted by the Surgeon General in accordance with regulations pre-
scribed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
SEC. 6. When used in this Act—
(a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the State
health authority, except that in the case of any State in which there is a
[P. 5]
single State agency other than the State health authority charged with
responsibility for enforcing State laws relating to the abatement of
air pollution, it means such other State agency;
(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency"
means a city, county, or other local government health authority,
except that in the case of any city, county, or other local government
in which there is a single agency other than the health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating
to the abatement of air pollution, it means such other agency; and
(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority of
any department or agency of the United States to conduct or make
grants-in-aid or contracts for research and experiments relating to air
pollution under the authority of any other law.
[p. 6]
APPENDIX
AGENCY RECOMMENDATIONS
The following letters were received and considered by the committee:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
June 30, 1959.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your request of June 4, 1959, for a
report on H.R. 7476, a bill to extend for 2 additional years the authority of the
Surgeon General of the Public Health Service with respect to air pollution control.
The bill would amend section 5 (a) of the act entitled "An act to provide research
and technical assistance relating to air pollution control," approved July 14, 1955
(42 TJ.S.C. 1857d), to extend for 2 years the authority to make annual appropriations
for these purposes in an amount not to exceed $5 million.
For the reasons stated in our May 19 report to your committee on H.R. 2347,
S. 441, and the related identical bills H.R. 3183, H.R. 3730, and H.R. 4466, and in
the statement presented by Dr. Theodore J. Bauer, of the Public Health Service,
and in my testimony, in hearings on these bills, we believe it would be preferable to
-------
122 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
extend the act on a permanent basis and without any ceiling on appropriations, as
proposed by the identical bills H.R. 3183, H.R. 3730, and H.R. 4466.
We also had suggested two amendments to those bills which we believe would
help to strengthen the present air pollution program of the Public Health Service—
amendments providing for the holding of public hearings in certain cases and for
the establishment of a statutory advisory committee. In response to your request of
May 26, draft language to carry out these recommendations was sent to you by
letter on June 8. However, as I indicated in my testimony before the Subcommittee
on Health and Safety of your committee on June 24, 1959, we have reconsidered the
suggestion for establishment of a statutory advisory committee, and would not press
for its adoption inasmuch as the Surgeon General can under existing law utilize the
services of groups of experts and consultants for the purposes intended to be served
by the statutory body.
Consequently, for the reasons stated in our earlier report, we recommend enact-
ment of the legislative proposals contained in the identical bills H.R. 3183, H.R.
3730, and H.R. 4466, amended as indicated above.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that it perceives no objection to the submission-
of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
ARTHUR S. FLEMMING, Secretary.
[p. 7]
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., August 5,1959.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, B.C.
MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of June 4, 1959, for
the views of the Bureau of the Budget on H.R. 7476, a bill to extend for 2 additional
years the authority of the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service with respect
to air pollution control.
This proposed legislation would authorize the continuation of the present 5-year
air pollution control program for an additional 2 years.
The Bureau of the Budget, on June 25, 1959, submitted to your committee its
views on similar legislation to extend the air pollution control program. In our letter
we pointed out that, while significant progress has been made in recent years in
developing and improving the techniques for controlling air pollution, there are
many areas in which more basic knowledge of the effects of air pollutants on humans
is needed. Therefore, we believe it appropriate that the existing terminal date
respecting the program be removed.
Progress in air pollution control should move forward in a logical orderly manner
consistent with the development of technical knowledge and trained manpower and
with appropriate consideration of overall budgetary requirements in the field of
health and in other areas. Thus, removal of the existing fixed authorization of $5
million would appear preferable.
Accordingly, the Bureau of the Budget while favoring the objectives of H.R.
7476, would recommend removal of a terminal date and elimination of specific
limitations on appropriations for the air pollution control programs.
Sincerely yours,
PHILLIP S. HUGHES,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference.
[p. 8]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 123
Lib (2) SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
-------
124 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
trolling air pollution from installations or property under their juris-
diction.
[p.l]
GENERAL STATEMENT
Public Law 159, 84th Congress, approved July 14, 1955, authorized
a program for research and technical assistance to obtain data and to
devise and develop methods for control and abatement of air pollu-
tion, by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the
Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. The act recognizes
the primary responsibilities and rights of the States, local governments,
and other public agencies in controlling air pollution, but provides
Federal grants-in-aid to those agencies concerned with air pollution
and control, to assist them in the formulation and execution of their
air pollution abatement research programs.
Under the provisions of the act, the Surgeon General is authorized
to prepare or recommend research programs, and to encourage co-
operative activities, collect and disseminate information, conduct and
support research, and to make available to all agencies the results of
surveys, studies, investigations, research, and experiments relating to
air pollution and abatement. Reports of such studies as considered
desirable may be published from time to time by the Surgeon General,
together with appropriate recommendations.
The act authorized an appropriation of $5 million annually for each
of the fiscal years 1956 through 1960, to make Federal grants-in-aid
to State and local government air pollution control agencies, and
other public and private agencies and institutions, and to individuals,
for research, training, and demonstration projects; and to enter into
contracts with such agencies for conducting those features. Sums
appropriated remain available until expended, and are allotted by the
Surgeon General in accordance with regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Under this authorized program, approximately $200,000 was ex-
pended in 1955; $1.7 million during fiscal year 1956; $2.7 million for
1957; $4.0 million for each of 1958 and 1959; and the budget for
fiscal year 1960 includes $4,212,000.
Public Law 159 will expire on June 30, 1960, unless extended. The
act has been very beneficial for conducting studies and research in
the field of air pollution control. Considerable progress has been made
in the several elements of the program. Much valuable data have been
assembled and distributed, yet there are many questions still un-
answered and a large amount of work remains to be done.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 125
The Federal effort has contributed materially to difficult problems
of sampling, identifying, and measuring airborne contaminants, such
as the improvement of the methods of analyzing gaseous contami-
nants, present in the atmosphere of virtually every city.
Appraisal has been made of some important modern sources of
urban air pollution such as oil refineries, automobile exhausts, and
combustion processes, which are inevitable results of our increasing
mechanization and industrialization.
Studies of chemical, meteorological, and physical influences and of
atmosphere reactions are making available new knowledge that must
ultimately be required for proper and economical procedures for con-
trolling air pollution.
Scientists have generally concurred that a major source of fumes
which are ingredients of smog and pollution in most cities is the motor
vehicle, and that phase of the problem is under intense study on all
[p-2]
fronts, including the automobile and petroleum industry. The Federal
Government has increased its work in this field, and will continue to
expedite the program for investigating the part that motor vehicle
exhaust and combustion play in the problem of atmospheric con-
tamination.
Health studies have developed evidence as to the effect of air
pollution on human health and well-being, creating much discomfort
from obstruction of breathing, and causing disease and even death.
The Federal Government is not carrying this entire program alone,
as many agencies are participating in the attack on the air pollution
problem. In the great concern for the health of the American people,
this very acute problem must be recognized, together with the fact
that increased urbanization and industrialization will undoubtedly
produce new air pollution problems in the future.
AMENDMENTS
S. 441, as introduced, would remove the time limitation and ceiling
on the authorization for annual appropriation, and delete the present
method of allotment of funds by the Surgeon General in accordance
with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare.
The committee recommends amendments to the bill which would
provide for extending the program for 4 additional years with an in-
crease in authorization for annual appropriations from $5 million to
-------
126 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
$7.5 million, and to delete the requirement for allotment of grants-in-
aid funds by the Surgeon General.
These amendments were adopted by the committee in the belief
that a statutory limit and a cutoff date on the authorization is desir-
able. It was felt that a periodic review of a program of this nature was
very advantageous, rather than its extension on a permanent basis.
It was recognized that control of appropriations would be exercised
by the Committees on Appropriations, but it was believed that an
increase of 50 percent in the statutory limit on the authorization for
annual appropriation would be adequate for the 4-year period ahead.
The committee realizes that these funds are not allotted on a
formula-type basis or apportioned to the several States in any manner,
as are many grants-in-aid funds, but are allotted to agencies and or-
ganizations by grants, project, and contract basis, where the need is
greatest and from which the most beneficial results will be derived.
While this is only a technical amendment, the committee believes
that the responsibility for allocation of these funds and direction of
the program should remain with the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare.
DISCUSSION
When Public Law 159 was enacted, the committee acknowledged
that the desired aims and objectives envisioned under the program
could not be enitrely accomplished within the authorized 5-year
period. It felt then, as it feels now, that a periodic review of the pro-
gram is highly desirable, and that an extension of the program for a
4-year period is adequate at the present time. The Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare, in his excellent letter of comments
[p. 3]
on the bill, suggests certain procedures that would improve the act.
As the program advances on an expedited scale, other conditions may
arise suggesting other changes, which should be studied and further
considered prior to expiration of the act.
The committee realizes that price levels have increased since enact-
ment of Public Law 159, and that further study and research will point
to additional activities, fields, problems, and developments, which
will require expansion and exploration. It believes that a statutory
limit on the authorization for annual appropriation is desirable, and
that such ceiling of $7.5 million will be sufficient to cover the 4-year
period, and that this ceiling would not prove restrictive in prosecuting
the research and technical assistance program under the act.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 127
The addition of surveys and studies to the authorized grants-in-aid
and contracts for research, training, and demonstration projects is
merely a clarifying amendment, since it was the intention that the
purposes authorized under the original act included surveys and
studies and other necessary activities to support the approved re-
search, training, and demonstration projects.
The committee sees no particular objection to the provisions of the
last sentence of section 5 of the existing law, but recommends deletion
of the Surgeon General from the chain of allotment, procedure, leaving
the allocation of funds to an officer of Cabinet rank. The Secretary
has the responsibility for prescribing the regulations under which sums
appropriated for grants-in-aid and contracts are allotted, and under
this responsibility can delegate certain authority. The committee
believes that such funds will be allotted in the manner that will pro-
duce the most beneficial results, consistent with air pollution and con-
trol problems of various areas, local and interstate, and population
and industrial growth, including future forecasts of such growth and
concentration that might produce new problems.
The intent of Congress declared in the provisions relating to the
cooperation of any Federal department or agency in preventing or
controlling air pollution from any installation or property under its
jurisdiction enacts into law present policy established by Executive
order.
The committee is cognizant of the fact that the authorized program
is primarily for research and assistance on a cooperative basis, with the
Federal Government as one partner in the vast undertaking. No con-
struction is involved, other than that of demonstration projects or
pilot plants. When proper methods of constructing measures for elimi-
nating or alleviating air pollution are determined, or laws or ordinances
are found advisable, their adoption will be the responsibility of local
governmental entities.
With the large increase in numbers of motor vehicles, particularly
in and adjacent to our urban areas, the committee is very much in
favor of increasing the technical aspects of the automotive studies.
The Federal Government is vitally interested in removing a menace
which is estimated to cause $3 billion damage annually to our Nation,
and which constitutes an environmental health hazard to large seg-
ments of our population. The committee heartily approves this mea-
sure for increasing the basic knowledge of, and developing and im-
proving the techniques for, abating and controlling air pollution, and
recommends enactment of S. 441.
tP-4]
The comments of the Bureau of the Budget, the Secretary of Health,
-------
128 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Education, and Welfare, and the General Services Administration on
S. 441 are as follows:
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., April 6, 1959.
Hon. DENNIS CHAVEZ,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works, U.S. Senate,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of Janu-
ary 20, 1959, for the views of the Bureau of the Budget on S. 441,
a bill to extend the duration of the Federal air pollution control law,
and for other purposes.
The bill would extend indefinitely the present 5-year Air Pollution
Abatement Act and would remove the $5 million authorization for
appropriations in favor of an authorization for the appropriation of
"such sums as may be necessary." It would declare the intent of
Congress that any Federal agency shall cooperate with the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare and any State, interstate, or
local agency in preventing or controlling air pollution. Certain other
technical and clarifying provisions are also included in the bill.
In recognition of the need for emphasis on the problem of air pollu-
tion abatement the budget for 1960 provides for an expanding program
of research and technical assistance to State and local government.
The 1960 budget requests an appropriation of over $4 million for these
activities compared to less than $200,000 expended in 1955.
While significant progress has been made in recent years in develop-
ing and improving the techniques for controlling air pollution, there
are many areas in which more basic knowledge of the effects of air
pollutants on humans is needed. We believe it is appropriate that the
air pollution control program of the Public Health Service be made a
permanent part of that agency's responsibilities for the surveillance
and improvement of the overall environmental health.
Accordingly, the Bureau of the Budget would have no objection to
the enactment of S. 441.
Sincerely yours,
PHILLIP S. HUGHES,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 129
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
April 7, 1959.
Hon. DENNIS CHAVEZ,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : This letter is in response to your request of
January 20, 1959, for a report on S. 441, a bill to extend the duration
of the Federal air pollution control law, and for other purposes.
The bill would amend the act of July 14.. 1955 (69 Stat. 322-323),
which provides broad authority for the Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public Health
[p-5]
Service for research and technical assistance relating to air pollution
control. The proposed amendments are as follows:
1. The removal of the time limitation on the authorization for
annual appropriations;
2. The removal of the $5 million ceiling on annual appropria-
tions;
3. The addition, in section 5, of "surveys and studies" to the
purposes for which grants-in-aid and contracts are authorized.
The existing act now authorizes such grants-in-aid and contracts
for research, training, and demonstration projects;
4. The deletion of the final clause of the last sentence of sec-
tion 5, requiring allotment by the Surgeon General of funds ap-
propriated for grants-in-aid and contracts in accordance with regu-
lations prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare;
5. The addition of a new section 8, declaring it to be the intent
of Congress that any Federal department or agency having juris-
diction over any building, installation, or other property shall,
to the extent practicable and consistent with the interests of the
United States, cooperate with the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, and appropriate State and local authorities,
in preventing or controlling air pollution caused or contributed to
by discharge from such property.
At the time the present act was pending in the 84th Congress, this
Department made clear its opinion that the objectives could not be
entirely accomplished within the 5-year period authorized. The activi-
ties of the Public Health Service to date have provided useful in-
formation about the extent of air pollution in the United States,
physiological and other health effects, and practical means for measur-
ing, assessing, and controlling air pollution. Technical assistance to
-------
130 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
States and communities has been provided on the appraisal of air
pollution problems and establishment of control programs. The Service
has also conducted and supported training of technical personnel
needed to deal with these problems. Although considerable progress
has been made, much still remains to be accomplished nationally in
both research and control activities. In addition, it has now become
increasingly clear that future population and industrial growth, and
their concentration in urban areas, will produce new air pollution
problems. The limitations of the atmosphere for dispersal of air con-
taminants without harmful effects are at times exceeded in some areas
now, and the potential for such excessive pollution and consequent
health hazards will undoubtedly continue to increase with urban
growth and development. Control agencies will be required to give
more and more attention to these problems. Continued research and
technical assistance will be required to develop and apply the technical
knowledge which will be increasingly needed by States and localities
for dealing with air pollution. For these reasons, therefore, we believe
that the program authorizations of the present act should be extended
on a permanent basis.
Removal of the statutory limit on the annual appropriation authori-
zation would be highly desirable. In the air pollution program to date,
important leads have been developed in research, particularly with
respect to the effects of air pollutants on health. Any important
breakthrough in this field undoubtedly will require a substantial ex-
[p. 6]
pansion of activities to further its development and exploitation.
Furthermore, we believe that an appropriation ceiling is not generally
desirable in legislation authorizing a research and technical assistance
program. Such a ceiling may serve as an undesirable restriction at
times, and at other times tend to encourage requests larger than con-
sistent with overall circumstances and fiscal policy. We believe that
fiscal control can best be exercised through the usual annual appropria-
tion process.
The amendment which would add "surveys and studies" to the
purposes for which grants-in-aid and contracts are authorized would
make no substantive addition to present authority. It has been our in-
terpretation that such surveys and studies are included within the
authorization in the present act for grants-in-aid and contracts in sup-
port of "research, training, and demonstration projects." However,
in order to make this point entirely clear, we believe this proposed
amendment would be desirable.
The proposed deletion of the provision in the current act requiring
the allotment by the Surgeon General of sums for grants and contracts
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 131
is a technical amendment. This requirement for allotment of grant
and contract funds apparently remained in the 1955 act by error.
The original bill included provisions, later deleted, which could be
construed as authorizing formula-type general grants-in-aid funds and
the allotment requirement would have been appropriate thereto. Such
allotment procedures are unnecessary for project-type grants and con-
tracts authorized by the present act. We believe, therefore, that the
allotment requirement should be deleted.
The provision of the bill relating to the prevention and control of
air pollution arising from any installation or other property under the
jurisdiction of any Federal department or agency would confirm what
is now established Federal executive policy, as outlined in Executive
Order 10779. We believe that the inclusion of this provision would
strengthen that policy and make clear the intent of Congress on this
subject.
In addition to the amendments proposed by S. 441, we believe it
would be desirable to provide for exercising Federal leadership in
dealing with air pollution problems of broad significance or which are
interstate in character. The Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare could, we believe, make a significant contribution to such
leadership through the development and publication of recommenda-
tions based on the evaluation of data developed by the Department
or presented by others, as well as a full consideration of the points
of view of all parties having a significant interest in such problems.
Some of these problems, although essentially local in character, man-
ifest themselves in many communities throughout the Nation. Others
involve pollution from sources within one State which, through the
movement of air masses, affect communities in other States. Both
types of problems can be expected to increase in number and extent
with further urbanization, and the development of solutions for them
may in many cases transcend the capabilities of local agencies, and
even of State control authorities.
With these considerations in view, we therefore recommend specific
legislative authority to make investigations and hold public hearings
in situations of the two types described above. The recommendations
resulting from such hearings would not be binding upon the partici-
[P-7]
pants in the hearings or anyone else; the purpose of the hearings would
be simply to develop such recommendations as a means of focusing
public attention on and developing support for the most carefully
considered solutions to the problems which occasioned the hearings.
We also recommend statutory establishment of an advisory council
or committee on air pollution problems. In addition to performing the
-------
132 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
usual advisory functions, such a committee or council could make a
particularly important contribution in connection with situations
which might call for the holding of a public hearing.
We hope that the committee will agree with us that the above sug-
gestions would make a significant improvement in the act. We would
be glad to explain them in more detail whenever convenient to your
committee and, if you should so desire, to provide technical assistance
in drafting the necessary amendments to the bill.
We would therefore recommend that the bill, modified as suggested
above, be enacted by the Congress.
In compliance with Public Law 801, 84th Congress, there is enclosed
a statement of cost estimates and personnel requirements which would
be entailed by enactment of S. 441.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that it perceives no objection to
the submission of this report to your committee, insofar as it relates
to S. 441, as introduced. With respect to the amendments, suggested
above, to provide for public hearings and a statutory advisory com-
mittee, the Bureau of the Budget believes that the need for and de-
sirability of such amendments require further study.
Sincerely yours,
ARTHUR S. FLEMMING, Secretary.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
April 9, 1959.
Hon. DENNIS CHAVEZ,
Chairman, Committee on Public Works,
U.S. Senate.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your letter of January
20, 1959, requesting the views of the General Services Administration
concerning S. 441, a bill to extend the duration of the Federal air
pollution control law, and for other purposes.
The essential purpose of this measure is indicated in its title. Its
enactment would declare it to be the intent of the Congress that any
Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any building,
installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable and
consistent with the interests of the United States and within any
available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency or any State
or local government air pollution control agency in preventing or con-
trolling the pollution of the air in any area insofar as the discharge of
any matter from or by such property may cause or contribute to pollu-
tion of the air in such area.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 133
GSA is in accord with the objectives of the underlying legislation
and favors its extension and amendment as contemplated in S. 441.
We are not in position at this time to estimate the increase, if any,
in the fiscal requirements of GSA which would result from the enact-
ment of section 2 of the bill.
' IP- 8]
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to
the submission of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
FRANKLIN FLOETE, Administrator.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with subsection (4) of rule XXIX of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as re-
ported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is
enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
Public Law 159—84th Congress
Chapter 360—1st Session
S. 928
AN ACT
To provide research and technical assistance relating to air pollution control
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That in recognition of the
dangers to the public health and welfare, injury to agricultural crops
and livestock, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards
to air and ground transportation, from air pollution, it is hereby
declared to be the policy of Congress to preserve and protect the pri-
mary responsibilities and rights of the States and local governments
in controlling air pollution, to support and aid technical research to
devise and develop methods of abating such pollution, and to provide
Federal technical services and financial aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies and other public or private agencies
and institutions in the formulation and execution of their air pollution
abatement research programs. To this end, the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service (under the supervision and direction of the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare), shall have the authority relating
to air pollution control vested in them respectively by this Act.
SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful inves-
-------
134 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
tigation and in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State
and local government air pollution control agencies, with other public
and private agencies and institutions, and with the industries involved,
to prepare or recommend research programs for devising and develop-
ing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For the purpose
of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to make joint
investigations with any such agencies or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities
by State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of
air pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air
pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in
the Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State
and local government air pollution control agencies, and other public
[p. 9]
and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; and (4)
make available to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, other public and private agencies and institutions, and in-
dustries, the results of surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and abatement
thereof.
SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may, upon request of any State or local
government air pollution control agency, conduct investigations and
research and make surveys concerning any specific problem of air
pollution confronting such State or local government air pollution
control agency with a view to recommending a solution of such
problem.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time to
time reports of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments made under the authority of this Act as he may consider
desirable, together with appropriate recommendations with regard to
the control of air pollution.
SEC. 5. [(a)] There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare [for each of the five
fiscal years during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June
30, 1960, not to exceed $5,000,000] for each of the four fiscal years
during the period beginning July 1, 1960, and ending June 30, 1964,
not to exceed $7,500,000 to enable it to carry out its functions under
this Act and, in furtherance of the policy declared in the first section
of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to State and local government
air pollution control agencies, and other public and private agencies
and institutions, and to individuals, for surveys and studies and for
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 135
research, training, and demonstration projects, and (2) enter into
contracts with public and private agencies and institutions and in-
dividuals for Surveys and studies and for research, training, and
demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and contracts may be
made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised Statutes.
Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid and contracts shall remain
available until expended, and shall be allotted [by the Surgeon
General] in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare.
SEC. 6. When used in this Act—
(a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the State
health authority, except that in the case of any State in which there
is a single State agency other than the State health authority charged
with responsibility for enforcing State laws relating to the abatement
of air pollution, it means such other State agency;
(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency"
means a city, county, or other local government health authority,
except that in the case of any city, county, or other local government
in which there is a single agency other than the health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating
to the abatement of air pollution, if means such other agency; and
(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority of
any department or agency of the United States to conduct or make
grants-in-aid or contracts for research and experiments relating to
air pollution under the authority of any other law.
[p. 10]
SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress that any
Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any building,
installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable and consistent
with the interests of the United States and within any available appro-
priations, cooperate with the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, and within any interstate agency or any State or local govern-
ment air pollution control agency in preventing or controlling the pollution
of the air in any area insofar as the discharge of any matter from or by
such property may cause or contribute to pollution of the air in such area.
[p. 11]
526-701 O - 73 - 11
-------
136 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
l.lb(3) COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
H.R. REP. No. 1187,86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959)
EXTENSION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
SEPTEMBER 14, 1959.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. HARRIS, from the committee of conference, submitted the
following
CONFERENCE REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 7476]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 7476) to
extend for two additional years the authority of the Surgeon General
of the Public Health Service with respect to air pollution control,
having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend
and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment as follows:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate amend-
ment insert the following: That section 5 of the Act of July 14, 1955
(42 U.S.C. 1857(d)), is amended—
(1) by striking out "(a)" after "SEC. 5.",
(2) by striking out "five fiscal years during the period beginning
July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960" and inserting in lieu
thereof "nine fiscal years during the period beginning July 1, 1955,
and ending June 30,1964",
(3) by inserting "for surveys and studies and" before "for research"
in clauses (1) and (2) of such first sentence, and
(4) by striking out "by the Surgeon General" in the last sentence.
SEC. 2. Such Act is further amended by adding at the end thereof the
following new section:
"SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress that any
Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any building, in-
stallation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable and consistent
with the interests of the United States and within any available appropria-
tions, cooperate with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 137
and with any interstate agency or any State or local government air pollu-
tion control agency in preventing or controlling the pollution of the air in
[p.l]
any area insofar as the discharge of any matter from or by such property
may cause or contribute to pollution of the air in such area."
And the Senate agree to the same.
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of
the Senate to the title of the bill and agree to the same.
OREN HARRIS,
KENNETH A. ROBERTS,
GEORGE M. RHODES,
PAUL G. ROGERS,
JOHN B. BENNETT,
PAUL F. SCHENCK,
SAMUEL DEVINE,
Managers on the Part of the House.
DENNIS CHAVEZ,
ROBERT KERR,
PAT MCNAMARA,
THOS. E. MARTIN,
JOHN SHERMAN COOPER,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
[p-2]
STATEMENT OF THE MANAGERS ON THE PART OF THE
HOUSE
The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate
to the bill (H.R. 7476) to extend for 2 additional years the authority
of the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service with respect to
air pollution control, submit the following statement in explanation
of the effect of the action agreed upon by the conferees and recom-
mended in the accompanying conference report:
This legislation proposes to amend section 5 of the act of July 14,
1955, entitled "An act to provide research and technical assistance
relating to air pollution control."
This section reads as follows at present:
SEC. 5. (a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of
the five fiscal years during the period beginning July 1, 1955,
and ending June 30, 1960, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it
-------
138 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
to carry out its functions under this Act and, in furtherance of
the policy declared in the first section of this Act, to (1) make
^nts-in-aid to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, and other public and private agencies and institutions,
and to individuals, for research, training, and demonstration
projects, and (2) enter into contracts with public and private
agencies and institutions and individuals for research, training,
and demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and contracts
may be made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the
Revised Statutes. Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid and
contracts shall remain available until expended, and shall be
allotted by the Surgeon General in accordance with regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
The bill as passed by the House amended section 5 so as to authorize
the appropriation of not to exceed $5,000,000 for each of 2 additional
fiscal years, namely, the fiscal year ending June 30, 1961, and the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1962.
The Senate amendments struck out all after the enacting clause of
the House bill and inserted a substitute.
The substitute language inserted by the Senate did the following
things:
(1) It corrected a purely technical error in section 5 of the present
law, merely striking out "(a)" which was included by error.
(2) It provided for extending the appropriation authorization of
such section 5 for 4 fiscal years (in lieu of 2 years as provided for in
the House bill), and also fixed at $7,500,000 the maximum amount
authorized to be appropriated for each such fiscal year.
[p. 3]
(3) It made amendments to that part of the first sentence of such
section 5 which authorizes the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare, in carrying out the policy declared in the first section of
the 1955 act, to make grants-in-aid to enter into contracts for research,
training, and demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid may be
made to State and local government air pollution control agencies and
other public and private agencies and institutions and to individuals,
and such contracts may be entered into with public and private
agencies and institutions and individuals. The amendments made
by the Senate would add language specifically authorizing such grants-
in-aid and contracts to be made also for "surveys and studies." it is
our understanding that these language changes were not intended to
make any substantive change in the authority as granted and exer-
cised under the language of the law as presently in effect, but are
merely clarifying.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 139
(4) It struck out the reference to the Surgeon General in the last
sentence of such section 5. The effect of this would be that allotments
of appropriated funds would be made in accordance with regulations
prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare in-
stead of by the Surgeon General as at present. However, the Secretary
could, of course, delegate this function to the Surgeon General to
such extent as he deems appropriate.
(5) It provided for adding to the 1955 act, a new section as follows:
SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress
that any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over
any building, installation, or other property shall, to the extent
practicable and consistent with the interests of the United States
and within any available appropriations, cooperate with the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare, and with any inter-
state agency or any State or local government air pollution con-
trol agency in preventing or controlling the pollution of the air in
any area insofar as the discharge of any matter from or by such
property may cause or contribute to pollution of the air in such
area.
The substitute agreed to by the committee of conference is the same
as the substitute inserted by the Senate amendment with one excep-
tion, namely, the appropriation authorization for the additional 4-year
period would be not to exceed $5,000,000 per annum.
OREN HARRIS,
KENNETH A. ROBERTS,
GEORGE M. RHODES,
PAUL G. ROGERS,
JOHN B. BENNETT,
PAUL F. SCHENCK,
SAMUEL DEVINE,
Managers on the Part of the House.
IP-4]
-------
140
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
l.lb(4) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 105 (1959)
l.lb(4)(a) Sept. 1: Passed House, pp. 17584-17586
EXTENDING AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL ACT
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I move
to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 7476) to extend for 2 additional
years the authority of the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service with
respect to air pollution control.
The Clerk read as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled. That section 5(a) of the Act entitled
"An Act to provide research and technical assistance
relating to air pollution control", approved July
14, 1955 (42 U.S.C. 1857d), is amended (1) by
striking out "five" and inserting in lieu thereof
"seven" and (2) by striking out "June 30, 1960"
and inserting in lieu thereof "June 30, 1962".
The SPEAKER. Is a second de-
manded?
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, I
demand a second.
The SPEAKER. Without objection,
a second will be considered as ordered.
[p. 17584]
There was no objection.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, carrying
out the suggestion of the Speaker of a
few moments ago, which I thought
appropriate, we shall take only a very
few minutes of the 40 minutes granted
under the rule.
This bill merely extends for 2 addi-
tional years the authority of the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service with
respect to air pollution control. We have
had such a program for the past 4 years
which expires with the end of this year.
Consequently it was felt advisable to
extend this program for an additional
period of time.
The Subcommittee on Health and
Safety conducted hearings, considered
this bill at length and reported to the
committee. It has done an excellent job.
I want to compliment the gentleman
from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS], the chair-
man of the subcommittee, and the mem-
bers of the subcommittee for the fine
work they have done in reporting this
legislation.
The Federal program for assistance
-in the control of air pollution was set
up by Public Law 159 of the 84th Con-
gress. Under that act the Public Health
Service is authorized to conduct a pro-
gram of research, technical assistance,
and training.
The act, passed in 1955, provided for
a 5-year program and authorized appro-
priations of $5 million a year for that
period, so that authority for appropria-
tions expires with this fiscal year. Passage
of the pending legislation would permit
appropriations at the rate of $5 million
a year for 2 additional years.
Public Law 159 specifically declares it
to be the policy of Congress to preserve
and protect the primary responsibility
and rights of the States and local govern-
ments in controlling air pollution.
This problem, however, does not
always respect local and State bound-
aries. Air pollution has become a national
problem in which we need the guidance
and assistance of scientists in the Public
Health Service.
The Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare recommended to the com-
mittee that the Surgeon General be given
permanent authority to conduct the air
pollution program and that the ceiling
on appropriations be eliminated. The
committee, however, is recommending a
2-year extension to give the appropriate
committees an opportunity to review the
program in the next Congress.
As the committee report shows, the
Public Health Service spent approxi-
mately $1.7 million during fiscal year
1956; $2.7 million in 1957; $4 million for
each of 1958 and 1959; and has budgeted
$4,212,000 for the current fiscal year.
Thus, a continuation of the $5 million
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
141
annual limitation should impose no
hardships in continuing this program.
The quality of the air we breathe
affects all of us. With the increased con-
centration of our people in urban areas,
the harmful effects of air pollution
threatens more and more of our popu-
lation.
In carrying out the directive of Con-
gress, the Public Health Service has set
up a large number of research projects
to investigate the causes, nature, extent,
effects, and control of air pollution. The
projects are being conducted in Public
Health Service laboratories but also
through contract and financial support
of projects in other Federal agencies, in
universities and research institutes, or
wherever specific competencies and
facilities exist. There are nearly 200 of
these projects, involving the facilities of
the Public Health Service and over 50
universities and other research organi-
zations. In addition, one project alone,
the national air sampling network,
involves over 160 local health and air
pollution agencies in sampling of air
contaminants in all the States and
Puerto Rico.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
chairman of the subcommittee, the
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS].
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, the
purpose of this legislation is to extend
the present Federal air pollution control
program for 2 years.
Under Public Law 159, 84th Congress,
approved July 14, 1955, appropriations
of $5 million a year were authorized for
5 years to assist in the formulation and
execution of air pollution abatement and
research programs. Authority for ap-
propriations expire this fiscal year.
This act vests in the Surgeon General
of the Public Health Service and the
Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare, specific authority to conduct a
program of research and technical as-
sistance relating to air pollution.
The law authorizes the Surgeon Gen-
eral to conduct the following programs:
First. Prepare and recommend re-
search programs designed to reduce or
eliminate air pollution.
Second. Collect and disseminate in-
formation relating to air pollution.
Third. Conduct technical research in
the Public Health Service and support,
by grants-in-aid and by contract, tech-
nical research programs of both public
and private agencies relating to air pollu-
tion.
Fourth. On request of a State or local
government air pollution control agency,
investigate and survey any specific air
pollution problem facing the requesting
agency.
Fifth. Prepare and publish reports or
surveys, studies, investigations, and re-
search done under this law.
Under this program, approximately
$1.7 million was expended during fiscal
year 1956; $2.7 million for 1957; $4
million for each of 1958 and 1959; and
the budget for the current fiscal year is
$4,212,000.
The Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare and the Bureau of the
Budget favor extending Public Law 159,
84th Congress, on a permanent basis,
and eliminating the ceiling on appropria-
tions. The committee, however, is recom-
mending a 2-year extension of the act,
without increasing the ceiling on ap-
propriations.
While significant progress has been
made in recent years in developing and
improving the techniques for controlling
air pollution, more basic knowledge of
the effects of air pollutants on humans
is needed in many areas. We need, also,
to know more about the effect of air
pollutants on agriculture. It is estimated
that in the Los Angeles area alone that
air pollution results in a loss of $5 million
a year to agriculture.
No one, of course, expects that the
problems confronting us can be solved in
2 years, but a 2-year extension will
enable the committee to review the pro-
gram in the next Congress and to go
into more detail regarding recommenda-
tions made by the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and others
-------
142
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
concerned about the problem of air
pollution.
Air pollution is a national problem. It
affects the total human environment.
All affected interests must cooperate in
seeking effective solutions.
Since 1955, the accelerated program of
the Public Health Service has assisted
the various agencies and groups con-
cerned in developing information on the
problems and in contributing to their
solution.
Valuable information has been pro-
vided about the extent of air pollution in
the United States, and about practical
means of measuring, assessing, and con-
trolling air pollution.
Specific information or indications
have come out of some of the research
that certain pollutants in the air have
affected health, as in the case of the
drastic air pollution episodes in Donora,
Pa., and London, England. These pollu-
tants have increased the death rates,
particularly during the period of the
smog, and more particularly in old and
debilitated people. But most of the health
effects of air pollutants are much more
subtle than that. They are long-term
detractors of good health. In the hearings,
the subcommittee was told that it is
known there are pollutants in the air
which cause cancer, particularly in
laboratory animals, and that death rates
for certain types of cancer and respira-
tory conditions are greater in urban
areas where the smog is more common.
Valuable information has been de-
veloped about ways in which air pollu-
tion subtly affects human health,
including specific knowledge about the
effects of agents such as ozone and sulfur
dioxide, which are directly toxic and
physiologically damaging, and certain
olefin compounds which can cause eye
irritation in humans and serious toxic
effects in experimental animals.
States and communities have taken
advantage of, and benefited by, the tech-
nical assistance offered by the Public
Health Service.
This has led to the appraisal of many
local and regional air pollution problems
and contributed toward appropriate
local action.
Many research projects under way
relate to the causes, nature, extent,
effects, and control of air pollution. The
projects are being conducted not only in
the Public Health Service laboratories,
but also through contract and grant
support of projects in other Federal
agencies, in universities and research
institutes, or wherever specific com-
petencies and facilities exist. There are
nearly 200 of these projects, involving
the Public Health Service facilities and
over 50
[p. 17585]
universities and other research organiza-
tions, in addition, one project alone, the
national air sampling network, involved
over 160 local health and air pollution
agencies in the sampling of air con-
taminants in all the States and Puerto
Rico.
Medical research is concerned not only
with those well-known acute air pollu-
tion episodes which resulted in sudden
death—ranging from 20 fatalities in
Donora—1948—to 4,000 or more in a
single week in London—1952—but also
with the potentially greater problem of
long-term cumulative injury to com-
munity populations from day-after-day
exposure to air pollution.
Two principal kinds of studies have
been initiated, first, statistical and epi-
demiological studies designed to deter-
mine the extent to which variations in
community health are related to air
pollution indexes; and, second, laboratory
studies to determine the effects on
health of certain constituents of polluted
air—alone and in combination—known
or suspected to be potentially harmful.
Thus, the health studies program is
divided into epidemiology and laboratory
investigations, with such activities as
lung function testing falling into both
groups.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
143
The Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce recommends enact-
ment of this legislation so that additional
appropriations can be made for this
important work by the Surgeon General
during fiscal years 1961 and 1962.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, our
Subcommittee on Health and Safety con-
ducted rather extensive hearings on this
bill. I believe the bill has great merit
and urge its approval.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. GROSS. This is getting to be a
pretty expensive program, is it not? I
totaled up the figures and including the
budget for the fiscal year 1960, it runs to
some $12 J^ million actual spending. Is
that correct or are my figures wrong?
Mr. SCHENCK. I do not have my
figures at hand; does the gentleman
mean for the past programs?
Mr. GROSS. For the past programs
and for the fiscal year 1960.
Mr. SCHENCK. This legislation
merely extends the present authorized
program for a 2-year period beginning
July 1, 1960. It is necessary to do that
in order for the Public Health Service to
make its case before the Committee on
Appropriations early in the next session
of Congress.
Mr. GROSS. The appropriation for this
purpose is going up all the time. It went
up from $4 million for 2 years, 1953 and
1959, to $4,212,000 for fiscal year 1960
alone. Can the gentleman foresee any
end to this?
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I. yield.
Mr. ROBERTS. I will say to the gen-
tleman from Iowa that this is a most
modest approach that has been made.
The other body passed a bill calling for
4 years at the rate of $7£ million a year.
The budget said that there should be
no ceiling on the appropriation and the
committee took the view that we could
hold it down to $5 million a year. I will
say to the gentleman further that the
matter of air pollution is growing, but
we do not want to authorize more than is
needed to accomplish the desired results
in handling the problem of air pollution.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I yield.
Mr. GROSS. I am not very much im-
pressed, I will say to the gentleman, by
the fact that the other body asked for a
much higher expenditure for this pur-
pose. It seems to me all the Members
are pretty well acquainted with the fact
that the other body is notorious for up-
ping appropriations and spending money
for purposes of this kind. I still have no
answer to my question as to how long this
is going on and how much money is
going to be spent in this connection?
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, may I
say in answer to my colleague from Iowa
that this is an authorization bill not to
exceed $5 million each for 2 years, and
that it will be entirely up to the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare
to justify its own request, and that we, as
Members of the Congress, will have full
opportunity to study the budget or the
Appropriation Committee recommenda-
tions at the proper time.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I yield.
Mr. HARRIS. I think the RECORD
should show, I will say to the gentleman
from Iowa, that there are certain areas
in the United States where this problem
is extremely serious. For example, on
the coast of California, it has been
brought to the attention of the committee
that it is growing more and more serious
all the time. In the State of Pennsylvania,
there are certain areas that have the
same problem. There are other areas of
the United States that have this problem.
It is those areas where there is such a
serious problem concerning the health
and welfare of the people that have
brought this problem to our committee
-------
144
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
and caused the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare to make this
request.
The SPEAKER. The question is: Will
the House suspend the rules and- pass the
bill?
The question was taken; and (two-
thirds having voted in favor thereof) the
rules were suspended and the bill was
passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
[p. 17586]
l.lb(4) (b) Sept. 9: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 18733-18734
AIR POLLUTION
The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill (H.R. 7476) to extend for 2 addi-
tional years the authority of the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service with
respect to air pollution.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, there is
an amendment at the desk which repre-
sents the text of the air-pollution legisla-
tion as it passed the Senate several
months ago. The amendment is offered
on behalf of the able senior Senator from
New Mexico, the able senior Senator
from Oklahoma, and myself, all of whom
desire, if there is no objection by the cal-
endar committees, to substitute the lan-
guage of the previously passed Senate
bill for the language of the House bill.
I shall be glad to discuss it.
Mr. ENGLE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. KUCHEL. I yield.
Mr. ENGLE. I desire to join my col-
league in this amendment. The House
passed a simple extension of the act.
The Senate bill is a much more compre-
hensive and a much better worked-out
piece of legislation. We desire to sub-
stitute the language of the Senate bill
which previously passed the Senate, and
send the bill back to conference.
Mr. KUCHEL. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, all of us recognize the
merit of the Air Pollution Control Act
which was enacted in 1955. This act au-
thorized a program for research and tech-
nical assistance to obtain data and to
devise and develop methods for control
and abatement of air pollution. The
Secretary of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, and the Surgeon General of the
Public Health Service, were charged with
the responsibility of its administration.
In April of this year, this body ap-
proved Senate bill 441, as amended, ex-
tending the present 5-year act for a period
of 4 years and increased the authoriza-
tion for annual appropriations from $5
million to $7.5 million. A short time ago
the other body approved H.R. 7476, ex-
tending the act 2 additional years with
no change in the authorized appropria-
tions of $5 million a year.
Both committees clearly recognized
that air pollution is a national problem
and, as yet, still unsolved. While sub-
stantial progress toward solution has been
made on all levels of government and
industry, the committees were fully aware
that the problem of air pollution will re-
main with us for a good many years to
come, notwithstanding the effective and
outstanding work already accomplished
under the auspices of this act.
Mr. President, I believe there is no
doubt in this body that it is in the na-
tional interest to continue the Air Pollu-
tion Control Act. Both committees after
intensive study were of this opinion. The
only question remaining then is the term
of this continuance.
This is not a partisan issue. This is
not a sectional nor an economic issue.
This is in the nature of a scientific prob-
lem. We must look to the scientists, the
air pollution experts, if we are to arrive
at a reasoned logical answer.
What say the scientists? Dr. Theodore
Bauer, of the Department of Health, Ed-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
145
ucation, and Welfare, in his testimony
before a subcommittee of the Interstate
and Foreign Commerce Committee of the
House of Representatives on May 19,
1959, made the following observations:
1. That, to date, the development of air pollution
problems has outpaced the accumulation of scien-
tific knowledged needed to deal with them.
2. In the future it appears inevitable, in addition
to increasing urbanization, that new technology
will produce greater potential for total air pollution,
both in quantity and in variety.
3. Continued research and application of its re-
sults will be needed to keep abreast of these prob-
lems.
4. The air pollution program authorization should
be extended without any specific termination date.
I am not a scientist, but these observa-
tions and recommendations of the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare make good sense. Research in any
field should not be unduly hampered if it
is to be of maximum effectiveness. Some
types of projects take years to complete.
By definition, basic, original research is
incompatible with a time boundary. The
breakthrough may come tomorrow, next
year, 5 years, 50 years, or nsver. Air
pollution and its solution involves this
type of research and study.
Therefore, it follows that we should
use a "maximum" type of approach
rather than a "minimum" type in ex-
tending this act. If the Congress desires
reports from time to time, this can be
accomplished by other means.
It would be most foolish, and contrary
to the national interest, to force the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare and the Surgeon General to observe
a 2-year deadline in planning and execut-
ing research and study projects.
Likewise with the trend towards great-
er urbanization of our population and
the increasing incidence of air pollution
we should liberalize the amount of funds
to be expended toward the solution of
one of modern civilization's most vexing
problems. The Senate Public Works
[p. 18733]
Committee and the Senate as a body
recognized this need. In addition, the in-
crease provided by S. 441 acknowledged
the fact that our dollar buys less today
than it did 5 years ago.
Mr. President, at the very least we
should insist upon the enactment of S.
441. To do less would be a tragic dis-
service to the great majority of our people
who live and work in the cities of
America.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment offered by the Senator from
California for himself and other Senators
will be stated.
The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed on
page 1 to strike out lines 3 through 8 and
insert in lieu thereof the following:
That section 5 of the Act of July 14, 1955 (42
U.S.C. 1857(d)), is amended—
(1) by striking out "(a)" after "SEC. 5.",
(2) after $5,000,000 in the first sentence insert a
comma and the following "and for each of the four
fiscal years during the period beginning July 1,1960,
and ending June 30,1964, not to exceed $7,500,000",
(3) by inserting "for surveys and studies and"
before "for research" in clauses (1) and (2) of such
first sentence, and
(4) by striking out "by the Surgeon General"
in the last sentence.
SBC. 2. Such Act is further amended by adding at
the end thereof the following new section:
"SBC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of
the Congress that any Federal department or agen-
cy having jurisdiction over any building, installation
or other property shall, to the extent practicable
and consistent with the interests of the United
States and within any available appropriations co-
operate with the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare, and with any interstate agency or
any State or local government air pollution control
agency in preventing or controlling the pollution of
the air in any area insofar as the discharge of any
matter from or by such property may cause or
contribute to pollution of the air in such area."
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The amendment was ordered to be
engrossed and the bill to be read a third
time. The bill was read the third time,
and passed.
The title was amended so as to read:
"An act to extend the duration of the
Federal air pollution control law, and
for other purposes."
[p. 18734]
-------
146
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Lib(4) (c) Sept. 10, 11: House and Senate ask for conference,
pp. 18997, 19046
EXTENDING AUTHORITY OP SUR-
GEON GENERAL OVER AIR POL-
LUTION CONTROL
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 7476) to
extend for 2 additional years the author-
ity of the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service with respect to air pollu-
tion control, with a Senate amendment
thereto, disagree to the Senate amend-
ment, and request a conference with the
Senate.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Arkan-
sas? The Chair hears none, and appoints
the following conferees: Messrs. HARRIS,
ROBERTS, RHODES of Pennsylvania,
ROGERS of Florida, BENNETT of
Michigan, SCHENCK, and DEVINE.
[p. 18997]
EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY OF
SURGEON GENERAL WITH RE-
SPECT TO AIR POLLUTION CON-
TROL
The PRESIDING OFFICER laid be-
fore the Senate a message from the House
of Representatives announcing its dis-
agreement to the amendment of the Sen-
ate to the bill (H.R. 7476) to extend for
2 additional years the authority of the'
Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service with respect to air pollution con-
trol, and requesting a conference with
the Senate on the disagreeing votes of
the two Houses thereon.
Mr. CHAVEZ. I move that the Senate
insist upon its amendment, agree to the
request of the House for a conference,
and that the Chair appoint the conferees
on the part of the Senate.
The motion was agreed to; and the
Presiding Officer appointed Mr. CHAVEZ,
Mr. KERR, Mr. MCNAMARA, Mr. MAR-
TIN, and Mr. COOPER conferees on the
part of the Senate.
[p. 19046]
l.lb(4) (d) Sept. 14: House and Senate agree to conference report,
pp. 19704-19705, 19434-19435
EXTENSION OF AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL ACT
Mr. HARRIS submitted the following
conference report and statement on the
bill (H.R. 7476) to extend for 2 additional
years the authority of the Surgeon Gen-
eral of the Public Health Service with
respect to air pollution control:
CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REFT. No. 1187)
The committee of conference on the disagreeing
votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the
of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 7476) to extend for
two additional years the authority of the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service with respect
to air pollution control, having met, after full and
free conference, have agreed to recommend and do
recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
That the House recede from its disagreement to
the amendment of the Senate and agree to the same
with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter
proposed to be inserted by the Senate amendment
insert the following: "That section 5 of the Act of
July 14, 1955 (42 U.S.C. 1857(d)), is amended—
"(1) by striking out '(a)' after 'SEC. 5.',
"(2) by striking out 'five fiscal years during the
period beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30,
I960' and inserting in lieu thereof 'nine fiscal years
during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and end-
ing June 30, 1964',
"(3) by inserting 'for surveys and studies and'
before 'for research' in clauses (1) and (2) of such
first sentence, and
"(4) by striking out 'by the Surgeon General'
in the last sentence.
"SEC. 2. Such Act is further amended by adding
at the end thereof the following new section:
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
147
" 'SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of
the Congress that any Federal department or agen-
cy having jurisdiction over any building, installa-
tion, or other property shall, to the extent practic-
able and consistent with the interests of the United
States and within any available appropriations,
cooperate with the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency or
any State or local government air pollution control
agency in preventing or controlling the pollution of
the air in any area insofar as the discharge of any
matter from or by such property may cause or
contribute to pollution of the air in such area.' "
—And the Senate agreed to the same.
That the House recede from its disagreement to
the amendment of the Senate to the title of the bill
and agree to the same.
ORBN HARRIS,
KENNETH A. ROBERTS,
GEORGE M. RHODES,
PAUL G. ROGERS,
JOHN B. BENNETT,
PAUL F. SCHBNCK,
SAMUEL L. DEVINE,
Managers on the Part of the House.
DENNIS CHAVEZ,
ROBERT S. KERR,
PAT MCNAMARA,
THOMAS E. MARTIN,
JOHN SHERMAN COOPER,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
STATEMENT
The managers on the part of the House at the
conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill
(H.R. 7476) to extend for 2 additional years the
authority of the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service with respect to air pollution control,
submit the following statement in explanation of
the effect of the action agreed upon by the conferees
and recommended in the accompanying conference
report:
This legislation proposes to amend section 5 of
the act of July 14, 1955, entitled "An act to provide
research and technical assistance relating to air
pollution control."
This section reads as follows at present:
"SEC. 5. (a) There is hereby authorized to be
appropriated to the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare for each of the five fiscal years
during the period beginning July 1,1955, and ending
June 30, 1960, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it
to carry out its functions under this Act and, in
furtherance of the policy declared in the first sec-
tion of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to State
and local government air pollution control agencies,
and other public and private agencies and institu-
tions, and to individuals, for research, training,
and demonstration projects, and (2) enter into con-
tracts with public and private agencies and institu-
tions and individuals for research, training, and
demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and con-
tracts may be made without regard to sections 3648
and 3709 of the Revised Statutes. Sums appro-
priated for such grants-in-aid and contracts shall
remain available until expended, and shall be al-
lotted by the Surgeon General in accordance with
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare."
The bill as passed by the House amended section
5 so as to authorize the appropriation of not to
exceed $5 million for each of 2 additional fiscal
years, namely, the fiscal year ending June 30, 1961,
and the fiscal year ending June 30, 1962.
The Senate amendments struck out all after the
enacting clause of the House bill and inserted a
substitute.
The substitute language inserted by the Senate
did the following things:
(1) It corrected a purely technical error in section
5 of the present law, merely striking out "(a)"
which was included by error.
(2) It provided for extending the appropriation
authorization of such section 5 for 4 fiscal years
(in lieu of 2 years as provided for in the House bill),
and also fixed at $7,500,000 the maximum amount
authorized to be appropriated for each such fiscal
year.
(3) It made amendments to that part of the first
sentence of such section 5 which authorizes the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, in
carrying out the policy declared in the first section
of the 1955 act, to make grants-in-aid to enter into
contracts for research, training, and demonstration
projects. Such grants-in-aid may be made to State
and local government air pollution control agencies
and other public and private agencies and institu-
tions and to individuals, and such contracts may be
entered into with public and private agencies and
institutions and individuals. The amendments made
by the Senate would add language specifically
authorizing such grants-in-aid and contracts to be
made also for "surveys and studies." It is out under-
standing that these language changes were not in-
tended to make any substantive change in the
authority as granted and exercised under the lan-
guage of the law as presently in effect, but are
merely clarifying.
(4) It struck out the reference to the Surgeon
General in the last sentence of such section 5.
The effect of this would be that allotments of appro-
priated funds would be made in accordance with
regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare instead of by the Surgeon
General as at present. However, the Secretary could,
of course, delegate this function to the Surgeon
General to such extent as he deems appropriate.
(5) It provided for adding to the 1955 Act, a
new section as follows:
"SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of
the Congress that any Federal department or agen-
cy having jurisdiction over any buiiding, installa-
tion, or other property shall, to the extent practic-
able and consistent with the interests of the United
States and within any available appropriations,
cooperate with the Department of Health, Educa-
-------
148
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
tion, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency
or any State or local government air pollution con-
trol agency in preventing or controlling the pollu-
tion of the air in any area insofar as the discharge
of any matter from or by such property may cause
or contribute to pollution of the air in such area."
The substitute agreed to by the committee of
conference is the same as the substitute inserted by
the Senate amendment with one exception, namely,
the appropriation authorization for the additional
4-year period would be not to exceed $5,000,000 per
annum.
OREN HARRIS,
KENNETH A. ROBERTS,
GEORGE M. RHODES,
PAUL G. ROGERS,
JOHN B. BENNETT,
PAUL P. SCHENCK,
SAMUEL L. DEVINE,
Managers on the Part of the House.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask un-
animous consent for the immediate con-
sideration of the conference report just
filed.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Arkan-
sas?
There was no objection.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I call up
the conference report on the bill (H.R.
7476) to extend for 2 additional years
the authority of the Surgeon General of
the Public Health Service with respect to
air pollution control and ask unanimous
consent that the statement of the man-
agers on the part of the House be read
in lieu of the report.
The Clerk read the statement.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, the legis-
lation agreed to in conference extends
for 4 years the Federal air pollution con-
trol program set up by Public Law 159,
84th Congress, which authorized appro-
priations of $5 million a year for five
years.
[p. 19704]
As passed by the House H.R. 7476,
proposed a 2-year extension. The Senate
amendment proposed to extend the pro-
gram for 4 years and to increase the
ceiling on appropriations to $7,500,000
annually. The Senate amendment also
included clarifying language explained in
the statement of managers just read.
The conferees accepted the 4-year ex-
tension proposed by the Senate, with the
maximum annual authorization retained
at $5 million. During fiscal years 1956
through 1959, the total appropriations
were $12,475,000, against a total authori-
zation of $20 million. For the current
fiscal year the appropriation is $4,212,000
or nearly $800,000 short of the maximum
authorized.
The Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare and the Bureau of the Bud-
get recommended that the terminal date
be removed and the program continued
indefinitely with no fixed limitation on
appropriations. The Department sug-
gested removal of the limitation on appro-
priations on the grounds that a major
breakthrough in the research field might
bring about a need for an appropriation
in excess of the $5 million limitation.
The conferees felt, however, that in case
appropriations in excess of the $5 million
are necessary, the Department should
come to the appropriate legislative com-
mittees and justify legislation to remove
or increase the limitation.
The Senate bill contains language in-
serting authority for the Surgeon Gen-
eral to make surveys and studies. Wit-
nesses for the Department in the hear-
ings held by the Subcommittee on Health
and Safety took the position that this
language does not confer any additional
authority on the Surgeon General but
merely clarifies the present law.
The position of the Department is ex-
plained in the following quotation from
the testimony of Hon. Arthur S. Flem-
ming, Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare before the subcommittee:
Well, in reporting on those proposed amendments,
we took the position that in our judgment they did
not make any substantive addition to the present
authority. We said that it has been our interpreta-
tion that such surveys and studies are included
within the authorization in the present act for
grants-in-aid, and contracts in support of research,
training, and demonstration projects.
However, in order to make this point entirely
clear, we believe that the amendment would be
desirable. But we wouldn't interpret it as giving us
authority to go beyond what we have been doing
under existing law.
Section 2 of the Senate amendment
adds a new section 8 to the act declaring
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
149
it to be the intent of Congress that any
Federal department or agency shall to
the extent practicable and consistent with
the interests of the Unitsd States and
within available appropriations cooperate
in preventing or controlling air pollution.
The committee was advised that this
merely enacts into law a present policy
established by Executive order.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my remarks
at this point in the RECORD.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Ala-
bama?
There was no objection.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, as chair-
man of the Subcommittee on Health and
Safety, which conducted hearings on this
legislation, I am glad to approve the
conference report. The conference agree-
ment extending the Federal air pollution
program 4 years will permit the continua-
tion of important research into a growing
national problem.
My bill, H.R. 7476, as introduced, pro-
posed a 2-year extension of the program.
The extension was limited to 2 years
not because of any doubt in my mind
regarding the importance of this program
and the need for its continuation. It was
my thought that by extending the act
for 2 years, the committee in the next
Congress could take a look at the pro-
gram to make sure that the Public Health
Service carries out the intent of Congress
to press forward with its activities in this
field as rapidly as possible. Also, we could
study the need for revising and broaden-
ing the act.
However, the Legislative Reorganiza-
tion Act gives the Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce ample juris-
diction to conduct an investigation into
any phase of the program at any time.
Furthermore, if a need to broaden the
program develops, appropriate legisla-
tion can be presented and considered.
Therefore, it was agreeable for me to
yield to the Senate conferees when they
insisted on a 4-year extension of the act.
The present act authorized appropria-
tions of not to exceed $5 million a year
through fiscal year 1960. My bill did not
increase that ceiling. The Senate amend-
ment increased the ceiling to $7,500,000
a year. Testimony presented in the hear-
ings held by the Subcommittee on Health
and Safety show appropriations as fol-
lows: $1.7 million for fiscal year 1956;
$2.7 million for 1957; $4 million each for
1958 and 1959; and $4,212,000 for fiscal
1960. Therefore, I could see no reason at
this time for increasing the ceiling above
the present $5 million annual limitation
and approve the conferences agreement
to retain the present $5 million annual
limitation.
The Department urged the committee
to remove the ceiling entirely on the
grounds that new developments growing
out of present studies might result in a
need for appropriations in excess of $5
million a year. However, if there is any
need to exceed the present ceiling, the
Department can come to the committee
and justify lifting or removing the ceiling.
The Senate amendment contains lan-
guage with reference to survey and
studies. In our hearings, some apprehen-
sion was expressed that the Department
might construe the addition of such lan-
guage as broadening the scope of the
program. The Department favors the lan-
guage of the Senate amendment as clari-
fying the act. We were assured by
Secretary Flemming that the Department
would not interpret such language as giv-
ing the Surgeon General authority to go
beyond what is being done under existing
law.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the conference report.
The conference report was agreed to,
and a motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
[p. 19705]
EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY OF
SURGEON GENERAL WITH RE-
SPECT TO AIR POLLUTION CON-
TROL—CONFERENCE REPORT
Mr. CHAVEZ. Mr. President, I sub-
mit a report of the committee of confer-
ence on the disagreeing votes of the two
-------
150
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Houses on the amendments of the Sen-
ate to the bill (H.R. 7476) to extend for
2 additional years the authority of the
Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service with respect to air pollution con-
trol. I ask unanimous consent for the
present consideration of the report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The re-
port will be read for the information of
the Senate.
The legislative clerk read the report.
(For conference report, see House pro-
ceedings of today.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the present consideration of
the report?
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I am
grateful for the courtesy of the gracious
Senator from New Mexico ,the chairman
of the Committee on Public Works, in
providing me the privilege of making a
few observations and directing some
questions in reference to the report.
Mr. President, the report includes sec-
tion 8, which was adopted by the Senate
on April 29, 1959.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, a par-
liamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state it.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, has the
conference report been made the pending
business?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
conference report is not yet under con-
sideration.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, is there
any objection?
Mr. RANDOLPH. I have no objection.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, may
the Senate proceed to consider the re-
port?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there objection to the present considera-
tion of the report?
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the conference
report.
The Senator from West Virginia may
continue.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I
have in my hand the report of April 15
from the Committee on Public Works in
reference to the matter of the extension
of the Federal air pollution control law.
I invite the attention of our esteemed
colleague [Mr. CHAVEZ], the chairman of
the committee, to the language in the
report:
The provision of the bill relating to the prevention
and control of air pollution arising from any
installation or other property under the jurisdiction
of any Federal department or agency would confirm
what is now established Federal executive policy, as
outlined in Executive Order 10779. We believe that
the inclusion of this provision would strengthen
that policy and make clear the intent of Congress
on this subject
I presume the reference is to section 8.
Mr. CHAVEZ. To section 8.
Mr. RANDOLPH. My reason for re-
questing this opportunity to discuss the
problem with our chairman is that we
who represent West Virginia in the Senate
serve the people of the largest bituminous
coal producing State in the Nation, and
we hope for a clarification of the intent of
the conferees.
I am bringing to the Senator's atten-
tion our desire for a clarification of the
language, because I am hopeful there will
be no indication, in regard to any Federal
installation, of an inclination in the opera-
tion of the Federal building or facility to
discriminate in any way against the use
of bituminous coal for heating purposes.
[p. 19434]
Mr. CHAVEZ. I am very happy that
the able Senator from West Virginia is
so alert in regard to the use of our na-
tural resources. Particularly, the Senator
has keen observation of their use and
preservation in the State of West Vir-
ginia, and great understanding of what
it means to the economy of that fine
State.
I will say to the Senator from West
Virginia, since he is talking about bitu-
minous coal, that the Senator from New
Mexico represents a State which has pos-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
151
sibly the largest deposits of bituminous
coal in the entire West. We also have
anthracite coal, which is the hard coal.
All that is intended by the section
cited is to cover any nuisance which may
be brought about to make the air un-
pleasant. We provided that something
would be done, not by preventing the use
of bituminous coal, but in the manner
taken with respect to what was done in
St. Louis some years ago.
Mr. RANDOLPH. And in Pittsburgh.
Mr. CHAVEZ. There was no intention
whatsoever to deprive any State of its
right to produce coal, and no intention to
prevent the industries in the States or
the States themselves from using bitu-
minous coal produced in West Virginia,
Pennsylvania, in New Mexico, in Colo-
rado, and in a number of other States.
Mr. CLARK. And Pennsylvania.
Mr. CHAVEZ. I mentioned Pennsyl-
vania.
Mr. RANDOLPH. And in Kentucky,
Illinois, and other States
Mr. CHAVEZ. Yes.
The language of the proposed legisla-
tion is the result of the history of the use
of bituminous coal. There is not a refer-
ence to the fact that coal is consumed,
but there is a provision to take care of a
nuisance. It would be possible to do what
was done in Pittsburgh and also in St.
Louis.
Another part of the proposed legisla-
tion is to make sure that if the Federal
agencies in any way create a nuisance, by
polluting the air, then they themselves
will be held responsible. That is why we
say:
It is hereby declared to be the intent of the
Congress that any Federal department or agency
having jurisdiction over any building, installation,
or other property shall, to the extent practicable
and consistent with the interests of the United
States and within any available appropriations,
cooperate with the Department of Health, Educa
tion, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency
or any State or local government air pollution
control agency in preventing or controlling the
pollution of the air in any area insofar as the dis-
charge of any matter from or by such property may
cause or contribute to pollution of the air in such
area
That was done with the idea of placing
responsibility upon the Federal agencies.
We do not want to make the private
industries comply with the law and then
have a Federal agency violate the law.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, the
assurance given by the Senator from New
Mexico is not only comforting but, I am
sure, is factual, and indicates a very sin-
cere desire to treat this subject-matter
fairly.
Mr. CHAVEZ. That is correct.
Mr. RANDOLPH. The Senator always
conducts himself in that manner with re-
gard to all such matters.
Mr. CHAVEZ. I thank the Senator.
Mr. RANDOLPH. The always dili-
gent senior Senator from Pennsylvania
[Mr. CLARK], who now stands beside me,
knows that in Pennsylvania, as well as
in West Virginia, we must be careful and
alert to make sure that language is not
incorporated which might be interpreted
as excluding use of bituminous coal rather
than correcting pollution. I am sure that
in this respect I speak not only for my-
self but also for my esteemed colleague
from West Virginia [Mr. BYRD] and the
Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. CLARK].
Mr. CHAVEZ. There is no such in-
tention whatever.
Mr. RANDOLPH. We know that on
Capitol Hill, in the past, in connection
with the construction of office buildings,
there has been some indication of a desire
to eliminate the possible use of coal as a
fuel.
Mr. CHAVEZ. That is correct.
Mr. RANDOLPH. We know there are
improved methods of stoking, as well as
modern mechanical and electrostatic dust
collector and precipitator installations,
which frankly bring coal not only into
competition with other fuels from the
standpoint of long range overall cost but,
also, to the point where the use of bitu-
minous coal has no worse effect in regard
to air pollution than the use of oil. That
is very important. Coal, in most major
use areas, has met the antipollution re-
quirements adequately and admirably.
Perhaps other fuels might need to be
placed to the same test if air pollution
control is to be thorough and uniform.
526-701 O - 73 - 12
-------
152
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Proper control equipment can be up to
99 percent effective in curbing pollution
from any fuel.
Mr. CHAVEZ. I am in complete agree-
ment with what the Senator from West
Virginia has said.
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. CHAVEZ. I yield.
Mr. CLARK. I should like to associate
myself with the comments made by my
good friend from West Virginia. I hope
that there is a great future ahead for
heating with bituminous coal, which is
produced not only in my State and his
State, but elsewhere throughout the
country.
Mr. CHAVEZ. Efforts are being made
every day in the week, in every line of
endeavor, to learn how to do the job
better; and I am sure that that is true in
the case of bituminous coal.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, about
to be adopted is one of the most impor-
tant pieces of domestic legislation con-
fronting the present Congress. It is a
continuation of the air pollution research
legislation originally enacted in 1955, a
piece of legislation of which, incidentally,
I was very happy to be the author.
I congratulate the senior Senator from
New Mexico for bringing back a wise and
effective conference report. With great
regret I observed that the House of
Representatives chopped in two what we
had done. The House of Representatives
said, "We will continue this proposed 5-
year program for another 2 years." It
bordered on the ridiculous to assume that
in the next 2 years we could make satis-
factory progress in air pollution control.
The able senior Senator from New
Mexico was able to negotiate a 4-year
extension, and I congratulate him for it.
With respect to the language upon which
the Senator from West Virginia [Mr.
RANDOLPH] had some questions, it has
been indicated that we want Federal
buildings or Federal installations to be
operated on the basis that what should
be done will be done, in cooperation with
air pollution control agencies created un-
der local government. Is that correct?
Mr. CHAVEZ. The Senator is correct.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. CHAVEZ. I yield.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I share the view
expressed by the energetic Senator from
California. The questions raised, and
which I indicated were important to
those of us representing the bituminous
coal-producing States, have been an-
swered. There is no desire to thwart the
valuable efforts of the Senate and House
conferees. I merely wished reassurance, as
it were, and that has been given in the
affirmative.
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. CHAVEZ. I yield.
Mr. CLARK. I should like to associate
myself with the remarks of my good
friend from California. In his State, as
well as in my State, people have died as a
result of air pollution.
It is of the greatest possible importance
that this legislation be enacted. I am
just as much interested in controlling air
pollution as in any of the other aspects of
the bill, or even more interested. In indi-
cating my advocacy of the additional use
of bituminous coal, I did not intend to
indicate anything other than complete
support of what the Senator from New
Mexico has done. Also, I salute my friend
from California for his leadership in this
connection.
Mr. KUCHEL. I thank the Senator.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the conference
report.
The report was agreed to.
[p. 19435]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 153
l.lc MOTOR VEHICLE EXHAUST STUDY ACT OF JUNE 8, 1960
P.L. 86 §493, 74 Stat. 1625
AN ACT
To authorize and direct the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to
make a study and report to Congress, from the standpoint of the public health,
of the discharge of substances into the atmosphere from the exhausts of motor
vehicles
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Surgeon General of
the Public Health Service (hereinafter referred to as the "Surgeon
General") shall conduct a thorough study for the purpose of deter-
mining, with respect to the various substances discharged from the
exhausts of motor vehicles, the amounts and kinds of such sub-
stances which, from the standpoint of human health, it is safe for
motor vehicles to discharge into the atmosphere under the various
conditions under which such vehicles may operate.
SEC. 2. As soon as practicable, but not later than two years after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Surgeon General shall sub-
mit to Congress a report on the results of the study conducted pur-
suant to the first section of this Act, together with such recommenda-
tions, if any, based upon the findings made in such study, as he may
deem to be necessary for the protection of the public health.
SEC. 3. As used in this Act the term "motor vehicles" means vehicles
propelled by mechanical power and used for transporting passengers
or property on a highway.
Approved June 8, 1960.
[p. i]
-------
154 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
l.lc(l) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE
AND FOREIGN COMMERCE
H.R. REP. No. 814, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959)
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE SURGEON GENERAL OF THE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE TO MAKE A STUDY AND REPORT TO
CONGRESS, FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH, OF
THE DISCHARGE OF SUBSTANCES INTO THE ATMOSPHERE FROM
THE EXHAUSTS OF MOTOR VEHICLES
AUGUST 10, 1959.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. ROBERTS, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 8238]
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 8238) to prohibit the introduction into com-
merce of new motor vehicles which discharge substances in amounts
found by the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to be
dangerous to human health, having considered the same, report fa-
vorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill do
pass.
The amendments are as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
That the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service (hereinafter referred to as
the "Surgeon General") shall conduct a thorough study for the purpose of deter-
mining, with respect to the various substances discharged from the exhausts of
motor vehicles, the amounts and kinds of such substances which, from the stand-
point of human health, it is safe for motor vehicles to discharge into the atmosphere
under the various conditions under which such vehicles may operate.
SEC. 2. As soon as practicable, but not later than two years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Surgeon General shall submit to Congress a report on
the results of the study conducted pursuant to the first section of this Act together
with such recommendations, if any, based upon the findings made in such study,
as he may deem to be necessary for the protection of the public health.
SEC. 3. As used in this Act the term "motor vehicles" means vehicles propelled
by mechanical power and used for transporting passengers or property on a highway.
[p.l]
Amend the title of the bill to read:
A bill to authorize and direct the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 155
to make a study and report to Congress, from the standpoint of the public health,
of the discharge of substances into the atmosphere from the exhausts of motor
vehicles.
PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION
The purpose of this legislation, as amended by the committee, is to
direct the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to conduct a
study of the effect on human health of substances discharged into the
atmosphere by the exhausts of motor vehicles.
The Surgeon General would be required to submit a report to Con-
gress within 2 years, with such recommendations, if any, he deems
necessary to protect human health.
HISTORY OF THE LEGISLATION
Air pollution is a national problem. It is a public health problem.
Federal, State, and local governments have spent vast sums to study
and control this problem. Industry likewise has spent millions on
research and abatement. Great progress has been made but the prob-
lem is far from solved. In fact, the blight of air pollution, especially
resulting from automotive exhaust gases, has become a real menace
to all urban areas.
This problem has been under consideration by the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce for many years. In 1955, your
committee reported favorably on legislation for Federal aid in air-
pollution control. This legislation (Public Law 159, 84th Cong.) di-
rects the Public Health Service to conduct and support research and
to provide technical services to State and local governments and to
private agencies. The law provides for a 5-year program and authorized
total expenditures of $25 million.
In 1956, the Special Subcommittee on Traffic Safety of this com-
mittee made a study of noxious, toxic, and harmful motor vehicle
exhaust fumes in connection with a comprehensive investigation of
highway traffic safety. Testimony was taken and research activities
of the industry were studied on visits to manufacturing plants.
The danger to automobile drivers and occupants resulting from ex-
posure to exhaust fumes in traffic was called forcefully to the attention
of the Traffic Safety Subcommittee in the 1956 hearings at Dayton,
Ohio, by Dr. Robert E. Zipf, president of the Ohio State Coroner's
Association, who urged that a research program be set up to study
this problem (hearings, "Traffic Safety, 1956," p. 722).
Legislation proposed to provide standards
After consideration of the data gathered in the subcommittee study.
Congressman Schenck on July 20, 1957, introduced H.R. 9368, 85th
Congress, to prohibit the use in commerce of any motor vehicle which
-------
156 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
discharged unburned hydrocarbons in an amount found by the Surgeon
General to be dangerous to human health.
That bill directed the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service
to prescribe and publish, not later than 6 months after enactment of
the legislation, standards as to the amount of unburned hydrocarbons
[p. 2]
which are safe, from the standpoint of human health (with particular
reference to the carcinogenic nature of unburned hydrocarbons), for
a motor vehicle to discharge into the atmosphere.
The bill provided criminal penalties for any person using in com-
merce in the Territories or the District of Columbia, in interstate
commerce, or in commerce with foreign nations, a motor vehicle which
discharged unburned hydrocarbons in amounts in excess of the stand-
ards set by the Surgeon General.
Hearings on this bill were held March 17,1958, by the Special Sub-
committee on Traffic Safety. Leading experts in the field were heard
and a comprehensive record of 180 pages published, which is available
from the committee.
At the beginning of the present session, Congressman Schenck
introduced H.R. 1346, a modification of his bill in the previous Con-
gress. Congressman McDonough introduced H.R. 1297, also dealing
with the problem of motor exhausts. The bill H.R. 8238, here reported
with amendments, was similar to H.R. 1346 but with modifications
referred to below.
Because agency reports on H.R. 1346 and H.R. 1297 were discussed
by the committee in detail in connection with consideration of H.R.
8238, and the adoption of the committee substitute, the text of these
two bills and the agency reports thereon are printed hereafter in an
appendix to this report.
Hearings held on air pollution legislation
Hearings on air pollution legislation were held May 19 and June 24,
1959, by the Subcommittee on Health and Safety. At that time
valuable information on the problem of unburned hydrocarbons was
presented by representatives of the Public Health Service and others.
These hearings have been printed and are available from the
committee.
Additional hearings were held July 7, 8, and 9 by the subcommittee
to consider automobile safety legislation, including the problem of
unburned hydrocarbons.
Following the hearings, the legislation was considered by the sub-
committee. Certain amendments were adopted to H.R. 1346, chiefly
to section 2 to eliminate the objection raised by the Bureau of the
Budget and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, that
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 157
as written this section would necessitate the creation of a Federal
enforcement organization in an area traditionally under State and
local jurisdiction. Congressman Schenck thereafter introduced a new
bill to incorporate the amendments adopted in the subcommittee
and this became H.R. 8238, the bill considered by the entire
committee.
In addition to the above objection, the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, while agreeing that the provisions of H.R.
1346 relating to standards "are technically feasible of ultimate accom-
plishment," also opposed enactment of the legislation as introduced
on other grounds set out in detail in a letter addressed to the chairman
of this committee, included hereafter in an appendix to this report.
After considering these objections and other aspects of the problem,
the committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute
for the purpose of accelerating research into the problem. As outlined
above, the committee substitute calls for a comprehensive study and
report by the Surgeon General.
[p. 3]
NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
Automobile exhaust research now is being conducted by the Public
Health Service. In the hearings on May 19 and June 24 the scope
and progress of this research was explored by the subcommittee.
The committee is concerned about the general problem of air pollu-
tion but desires to emphasize here the importance of giving the highest
priority to an investigation of the role of motor vehicle exhaust gases,
especially in view of the testimony in the record regarding the im-
portant part motor vehicle exhaust gases play in contributing to air
pollution in major metropolitan areas.
Also, harmful toxic effects upon drivers of motor vehicles who inhale
exhaust fumes may be an important contributory cause of automobile
accidents, as pointed out by Dr. Zipf in the 1956 subcommittee hear-
ings mentioned above.
Clearly, more information is needed about the part that unburned
hydrocarbons play in contributing to air pollution in general, with the
attendant ill effects on human health and comfort.
We need information on how to eliminate and control harmful,
toxic, and irritating motor vehicle exhaust fumes. We need more
information regarding the harmful effects of these fumes on public
health.
In the May 19, 1959, hearings on air pollution control legislation,
the subcommittee was told that scientists know there are pollutants
in the air which cause cancer, particularly in laboratory animals, and
that death rates from certain types of cancer and respiratory condi-
-------
158 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
tions are higher in urban areas where air pollution is greater. Statistics
were cited which show that lung cancer rates are twice as high for
the largest cities than in rural areas. Agriculture also suffers extensive
damage from air pollution.
Extensive study of problem needed
The committee feels that extensive study of carcinogens (cancer-
producing agents) which may be present in motor vehicles exhausts is
urgent. In that connection, the following excerpt from a statement
regarding air pollution research submitted by the Public Health
Service in connection with the May 19 hearings (p. 32) is of interest:
In something less than 4 years of effort in this field, several
important and significant findings have emerged from medical
research on air pollution and its effects on man. Evidence strongly
suggests that the slowly progressive and subtle changes that
may result from air pollution cause much of the distress and dis-
ability of our aging population. Certain air pollutants found in
our cities are known to be experimentally carcinogenic for animals,
and there is evidence that death rates for certain causes of death
increase markedly with urbanization. Specifically, these causes
include cancer of the lung, trachea, and bronchus, cancer of the
stomach and esophagus, arterio-sclerotic heart disease, and myo-
cardial degeneration. Incomplete evidence suggests that the dis-
[p.4]
tribution of cancer mortality within cities is related to the
distribution of air pollution intensity. Further medical research
on the effects of air pollution is needed in order to help delineate
those factors which affect human comfort, health, and life spans,
so that effective and practical control efforts may be undertaken.
In the hearings on H.R. 9368, 85th Congress, March 17, 1958, the
subcommittee was told in a statement submitted by the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare (hearings, p. 120):
It has been shown that auto exhausts contain substances which,
when supplied to suitable experimental animals under appropriate
conditions, will increase the frequency of cancer.
Reports of studies on exhuast fumes
The committee also considered the following memorandum from
the Acting Surgeon General, dated July 14, 1959, submitted by the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, in response to a request
from the subcommittee chairman:
The following information is provided in response to the re-
quest of Representative Kenneth A. Roberts, chairman, Sub-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 159
committee on Health and Safety, concerning the possible effects
on health of automotive exhaust fumes.
Automotive exhaust fumes, and the products that result after
these fumes enter the atmosphere, include numerous groups of
compounds of which the unburned and partially burned hydro-
carbons are only one. To our knowledge, the only pertinent
studies thus far undertaken that involve the deliberate exposure
of human subjects to known mixtures, or constituents, of auto-
motive exhausts, are the studies concerned with its effect in
producing eye irritation.
Our presently available information, therefore, is limited to
knowledge obtained from controlled laboratory exposures of ex-
perimental animals to constituents of automotive exhaust. The
results of two such studies, conducted by Dr. Paul Kotin and
his associates at the University of Southern California, have been
reported in Cancer (vol. 9, No. 5,1956, and vol. 10, No. 6,1957).
These studies involved the exposure of both tumor-susceptible
and tumor-resistant mice to ozonized gasoline, a form of unburned
hydrocarbon. The exposures induced an increase in lung tumors
of 100 percent in the tumor-susceptible mice, and produced lung
tumors in 10 percent of the tumor-resistant mice. Other effects
reported included higher death rates, lighter body weights and
some reduction in fertility. Dr. Kotin, in his conclusion, states:
"Differences in tumor rates and the production of hyperplastic
and metaplastic changes in the bronchial epithelium in a highly
refractory inbred strain warrant the consideration of polluted
atmosphere characterized primarily by oxidation products of
aliphatic hydrocarbons as a factor in human pulmonary
carcinogenesis."
In our opinion, these studies justify the conclusion that con-
stituents of automotive exhaust fumes can produce
[p. 5]
carcinogenic and other undesirable physiological effects in mice,
and therefore might produce these effects in human beings.
Whether they do so, however, cannot now be stated.
Discussions at Conference on Air Pollution
The need for extensive study of the contribution of motor-vehicle
exhaust fumes to air pollution in metropolitan areas is indicated in
papers prepared for presentation at the National Conference on Air
Pollution in Washington, November 18, 1958.
Dr. Leslie A. Chambers, director of research, Los Angeles County
Air Pollution Control District, said:
-------
160 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Few sources of air pollution have been under such close scrutiny
in recent years as the automobile and other petroleum fueled
vehicles. This attention is well deserved on the basis of the firmly
established major role of vehicular exhausts in the production
of smog in Los Angeles, and the inevitable inference that auto-
mobile exhausts are contributing heavily to air pollution in other
metropolitan areas.
Dr. Paul Kotin, associate professor of pathology, University of
Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles, said:
Certain epidemiological facets of the increasing incidence of
lung cancer suggest that the atmospheric environment may be
casually associated with this observed increase.
Dr. Lester Breslow, chief, Bureau of Chronic Disease, California
State Department of Health, said:
The findings of the several investigations briefly reported here
add up to a substantial justification for concern about the long-
term effect of repeated exposure to air pollution. Evidence is
gradually accumulating which suggests that air pollution of
various types chemically and physically, may be involved in such
important lung conditions as chronic bronchitis, asthma, emphy-
sema, and lung cancer.
Dr. Thomas F. Mancuso, chief, division of industrial hygiene, Ohio
State Department of Health, Columbus, said:
* * * I believe that air pollution represents a highly probable
and important factor in the excess of lung cancer in urban areas,
acting directly and augmenting the occupational exposures of
men so that carcinogenic and cocarcinogenic agents of both en-
vironments may be involved.
Recommendations of National Conference
The National Conference on Air Pollution recommended additional
research to devise effective control methods for various types of emis-
sions, with particular attention to problems of automobile exhausts.
In a summary of the highlights of that conference, published by the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (Public Health Service
Publication No. 648), it is stated (p. 14):
The transportation industry's greatest pollution problem is the
exhaust emitted from the tailpipe of the automobile. Although
the public is more aware of the smoke and odors
[p. 6]
emitted from diesel engine buses, trucks and trains, these are
relatively minor sources as compared to automobile exhausts.
The most significant emissions from automobile exhausts are
carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, and organic substances.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 161
The latter two are the major cause of the Los Angeles smog and
are a problem of growing importance in many other cities. There
are probably several thousand organic components involved,
which have varying effects on eye irritation, toxicity, plant dam-
age and visibility. More needs to be known about the individual
components of exhaust emissions and the meteorological factors
which govern the formation of reaction products. Satisfactory
methods of reducing this pollution have yet to be developed,
although the automobile industry has made some progress in
achieving better combustion and thus reducing the amount of
fuel that escapes into the air.
Studies of fumes in metropolitan areas
In the hearings March 17, 1958, on H.R. 9368, 85th Congress,
Dr. Clarence A. Mills, professor of experimental medicine, University
of Cincinnati, presented three exhibits giving some very interesting
results of his study of air pollution problems. His testimony indicates
the urgent need for further study of the part motor-vehicle exhaust
fumes play in contributing to air pollution in metropolitan areas.
In his statement he had the following to say regarding his exhibit C,
an article from the November 1957 issue of Cancer Research (hearings,
p. 75):
Now, exhibit C, the tobacco smoking, motor exhaust fumes
and general air pollution in relation to lung-cancer incidence,
represents a very serious effort to assay the various factors at
work in the amazing and very alarming rise in lung-cancer in-
cidence in American cities, much more in the cities than in the
country districts, and the finger of suspicion has been pointed
very strongly at tobacco smoking, there had been some suspicion
of general urban air pollution being a factor also, but there had
been no real serious effort at separate evaluation of those factors
in this lung-cancer situation.
This report, exhibit C, presents my findings there which, in
essence, indicate tobacco smoking, and primarily cigarette smok-
ing, as the major etiological causative factor in lung-cancer
incidence, but that tobacco-smoking effect is more than doubled
for those urban residents who drive more than 12,000 miles a
year on an average in urban traffic.
It is still higher for those tobacco smokers who drive that much
and then live in the dirtiest part of the city.
So we have there a very first strong hint that motor-exhaust
fumes are a significant factor, mathematically significant also,
in the incidence of lung cancer.
The committee recognizes the urgent need for additional and ex-
-------
162 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
panded research on the problem to determine how motor vehicle
exhausts contribute to air pollution and the harmful levels of concen-
tration endangering human health. This research is necessary to
establish criteria upon which engineers can develop better control
methods.
[p. 7]
In a letter to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health and
Safety, dated July 16, 1959, Hon. Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare said:
It should be pointed out that the role of the Public Health
Service in the auto exhaust problem is essentially one of research
related to the characterization of exhaust components and to
their effect.
Comprehensive study necessary
In making the study called for in this legislation, it is expected that
the Surgeon General will consult with and make use of the atuomobile
manufacturing industry, members of appropriate professional societies,
other medical and scientific organizations, specialists in the Bureau of
Standards and other Federal agencies, and all others in a position to
contribute to the solution of the many problems involved. The auto-
mobile manufacturing industry has been working on this problem
many years and has spent large sums of money on research and
development. The committee was assured that the industry would
welcome any assistance the Surgeon General and his staff can give.
The following statement by Secretary Flemming (printed hearings
p. 80) in response to a question asked in the hearings June 24, 1959,
by Congressman Rogers of Florida outlines procedure which might be
followed in carrying out the purposes of the reported bill:
Now, I am not sure, as an individual, at this time as to how
much responsibility we should place on the automobile industry
for the situation that confronts us at the present moment. But I
would like very much to have the Surgeon General in a position
where he could appoint a hearing board that could sit and receive
evidence from the automobile industry, receive evidence from the
other side based on the research that had been conducted up to
the present time, and then after having listened to the evidence
on both sides, come out with some firm conclusions, at least as
firm conclusions as the evidence would justify up to this par-
ticular point.
He might very well say, "Here are three things, for example,
that I have concluded. I don't think there is any question about
them. Here is a fourth matter that I think requires additional
research before we can arrive at a conclusion, and I think we
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 163
ought to focus our resources on this particular area and get this
research underway in order to see whether or not we can get an
answer to the question."
It seems to me the Federal Government is fortified by a pro-
cedure of this kind. If back of its leadership is a procedure of this
kind, its leadership will be accepted more widely than would
otherwise be the case, because it has certainly made every effort
to get the facts on both sides, and then having made that effort,
it states a conclusion or a series of conclusions.
Now, I think that if the Surgeon General or the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare state some definite conclu-
sions following a fair and open hearing of this kind—of course
my idea would be these would be public hearings—that then the
parties concerned are almost sure to pay atten-
IP-8]
tion to it even though we don't have any enforcement authority
at all, and I don't think we should have at this point.
Problem recognized in highway safety report
The importance of the problem was recognized by the Secretary of
Commerce in a report entitled "The Federal Role in Highway Safety,"
submitted to Congress March 3, 1959 (H. Doc. 93, 86th Cong., 1st
sess.) in the following discussion of air pollution beginning on page 45:
Exhaust systems of current motor vehicles are far from ade-
quate, both with respect to durability and their production of
unburned hydrocarbons. The toxic effects of a faulty exhaust
system can contribute directly or indirectly to an accident. The
need to replace a muffler of a new car after only a few thousand
miles and within the first year of use is not unusual, especially
for cars used primarily for short trips within the city. The
corrosive vapors from the engine and the effects of salt used on
streets for ice control can cause rapid deterioration of vital parts
of the exhaust system. This type of failure, which can be pre-
vented or delayed by use of better materials in the muffler and
other parts of the exhuast system, bring carbon-monoxide con-
centrations in the vicinity of the passenger compartment, and
under certain conditions can cause car occupants to become
drowsy, experience eye irritation, headaches or nausea, or actually
endanger their lives, depending on the length of exposure and,
of course, the concentrations.
The report goes on to state:
Beyond the individual effects of failures in the exhaust system,
and the hazard it may have for those in the immediate vicinity,
lies the mass problem of air pollution. The magnitude of motor
-------
164 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
vehicle air pollutions have only in recent years been widely
appreciated by the affected public and by industry. Manifest
chiefly in Los Angeles, where other normal sources of air pollution
have already been put under strict control, and where climatic
conditions aggravate the effects, motor vehicle air pollution was
the subject of a bill (H.R. 9368) introduced in the 85th Congress,
2d session. As the evidence at a hearing on this bill indicated, the
public jurisdictions and the industry have spent extensive sums
in working toward a practical solution of the ozone-smog problem,
which will undoubtedly become more acute in other large cities.
Control devices for motor-vehicle exhausts, usually designed as
afterburners, have been developed and tested but no wholly
satisfactory solution has been reached. Because of the menace to
general health as well as to safety in highway transportation,
growing interest in air pollution can be expected.
[p- 9]
APPENDIX
TEXT OF H.R. 1346, 86TH CONGRESS
A BILL To prohibit the use in commerce of any motor vehicle which discharges substances in amounts
which are found by the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to be dangerous to human health
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That (a) the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the "Surgeon General"), shall, after
conducting such research as he may deem to be necessary but not later than twelve
months after the date of enactment of this Act, prescribe and publish in the Federal
Register, standards as to the amounts of substances which he considers to be safe,
from the standpoint of human health, for a motor vehicle to discharge into the
atmosphere under the various conditions under which the vehicles may operate; such
standards shall be prescribed and published for those substances on which sufficient
scientific information is available to permit judgment as to the adverse effect upon
human health which may be produced.
(b) Standards prescribed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section may be re-
vised from time to time by the Surgeon General and shall be enlarged by the Surgeon
General from time to time by the inclusion of standards for additional exhaust com-
ponents, as adequate technical information concerning their health effects becomes
available. Such revised or enlarged standards shall be published in the Federal
Register.
SEC. 2. (a) No person shall use any motor vehicle in commerce which discharges
substances in amounts in excess of the standards prescribed by the Surgeon General
pursuant to the first section of this Act: Provided, That the Surgeon General finds
that a reasonable method of controlling such discharges within the specified standard
is available.
(b) Whoever violates this section shall be fined not more than $500, or imprisoned
not more than one year, or both.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 165
SEC. 3. As used in this Act—
(1) The term "commerce" means commerce among the several States, with foreign
nations, in any Territory, or in the District of Columbia, or between any Territory
and a foreign nation, or between the District of Columbia and any State;
(2) The term "Territory" includes the Territories and possessions of the United
States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and
(3) The term "motor vehicle" means any vehicle propelled by mechanical power
and used for transporting passengers or freight whether on a fixed track or on a
highway.
[p. 11]
SEC. 4. Section 2 (a) of this Act shall take effect one year after the date on which
standards are first prescribed and published in the Federal Register pursuant to sub-
section (a) of the first section of this Act and thereafter any standards which are
revised pursuant to subsection (b) of this section of this Act shall take effect one
year after the date on which they are published in the Federal Register.
TEXT OF H.R. 1297, 86TH CONGRESS
A BILL To prohibit the manufacture, sale, or use in commerce of any motor vehicle which discharges
unburned hydrocarbons and other noxious gases in amounts dangerous to human health
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That (a) the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service (hereafter in this Act referred to as the "Surgeon General"), shall, after
conducting such research as he may deem necessary, but not later than six months
after the date of enactment of this Act, prescribe and publish in the Federal Register
standards as to the amounts of unburned hydrocarbons and other noxious gases
harmful to human health which are safe, from the standpoint of human health (with
particular reference to the carinogenic nature of such unburned hydrocarbons and
other gases) for a motor vehicle to discharge into the atmosphere.
(b) Standards prescribed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section may be re-
vised from time to time by the Surgeon General. Such revised standards shall be
published in the Federal Register.
SEC. 2. (a) The manufacture for sale, the sale, the offering for sale, the use in
commerce, or the importation into the United States of any motor vehicle which
discharges unburned hydrocarbons or other noxious gases harmful to human health
in amounts in excess of the standards prescribed by the Surgeon General pursuant
to the first section of this Act, shall be unlawful.
(b) Whoever violates this section shall be fined not more than $1,000, or im-
prisoned not more than one year, or both.
SEC. 3. As used in this Act—
(1) The term "commerce" means commerce among the several States, with foreign
nations, in any Territory, or in the District of Columbia, or between any Territory
and a foreign nation, or between the District of Columbia and any State;
(2) The term "Territory" includes the Territories and possessions of the United
States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and
(3) The term "motor vehicle" means any vehicle propelled by mechanical power
and used for transporting passengers or freight whether on a fixed track or on a
highway.
SEC. 4. Section 2 (a) of this Act shall take effect one year after the date on which
standards are first prescribed and published in the Federal Register pursuant to
subsection (a) of the first section of this Act and thereafter any standards which are
-------
166 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
revised pursuant to subsection (b) of the first section of this Act shall take effect
one year after the date on which they are published in the Federal Register.
[p. 12]
LETTERS FROM EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
The following letters were received and considered by the committee:
THE SECRETARY or HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
Washington, July 16, 1959.
Hon. KENNETH A. ROBERTS,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Health and Safety,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your letter of June 29, 1959, regarding my
testimony before your Subcommittee on Health and Safety. I appreciated the
opportunity to present the interest of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare in the very important legislation related to the extension of the Federal Air
Pollution Research and Technical Assistance Act.
In response to your request, I am enclosing material which describes the projects
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is conducting or supporting
which relate to the control of auto exhaust emissions.
It should be pointed out that the role of the Public Health Service in the auto-
exhaust problem is essentially one of research related to the characterization of
exhaust components and to their effects. In this way the Public Health Service
will provide the basic information that may be required ultimately in the develop-
ment of control measures for substances which may be proven to be harmful. We feel
that the development of actual control measures is largely the responsibility of in-
dustry. The Public Health Service is also sponsoring fundamental studies concerned
with catalytic and noncatalytic afterburners, with the role of engine maintenance
and fuel composition, and other approaches to the problem. In all of its activities
in this area, the Public Health Service is cooperating fully with industry and others
concerned.
If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call on us.
Sincerely yours,
ARTHUR S. FLEMING, Secretary.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., July 8, 1959.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, House Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your committee's requests for views
of the Bureau of the Budget dated February 5, 1959, on two legislative proposals:
H.R. 1297, a bill to prohibit the manufacture, sale, or use in commerce of any motor
vehicle which discharges unburned hydrocarbons and other noxious gases in amounts
dangerous to human health, and H.R. 1346, a bill to prohibit the use in commerce
of any motor vehicle which discharges substances in amounts which are found by
the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to be dangerous to human health.
[p. 13]
These similar bills would authorize the Surgeon General to promulgate and revise
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 167
standards for maximum amounts of motor vehicle wastes to be discharged into the
atmosphere, would make unlawful the use of vehicles discharging substances in ex-
cess of such standards, and would provide a penalty for violation. The principal
differences are: H.R. 1297 specifies that standards would first be published in the
Federal Register 6 months after enactment of the bill and makes reference to the
carcinogenic nature of motor vehicle exhaust; H.R. 1346 prescribes that standards
would first be published 1 year after enactment of the bill, that standards need be
devised only for those substances on which sufficient information is available, that
standards would be developed for vehicles under various operating conditions, and
that use of vehicles discharging in excess of the limitation would be unlawful only
if a reasonable method of controlling the discharges is available.
These proposals would necessitate the creation of a Federal organization to in-
spect and enforce motor vehicle safety under the standards which would be defined
by the Surgeon General. Such inspection and enforcement are traditionally under
State and local jurisdiction and are matters in which the Federal Government most
suitably renders advise and technical assistance.
In reporting on these measures the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
points out that at the present time a sufficient amount of scientific information to
establish standards for substances emitted from motor vehicles is not available, that
such information could not be obtained before the date prescribed in H.R. 1297, and
that differing atmospheric conditions in various parts of the country make inappro-
priate the establishment of uniform national standards under Federal statute. Nor
is commercial production of suitable control devices yet practicable. The Depart-
ment of Commerce raises the additional problem of enforcement of the proposed
standards. Federal regulation and inspection of the Nation's numerous motor
vehicles would be both difficult and expensive.
This Bureau concurs in the conclusions reached by the Departments of Commerce
and Health, Education, and Welfare and joins them in recommending against en-
actment of these bills.
Sincerely yours,
PHILLIP S. HUGHES,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference.
THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE,
Washington, D.C., July 10, 1959.
Hon. OEEN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in reply to your recent request for the views
of this Department with respect to H.R. 1297 and H.R. 1346, similar bills relating
to the use of motor vehicles which discharge unburned hydrocarbons and other nox-
ious gases in amounts dangerous to human health.
The bills would authorize the Surgeon General to conduct research involving
fumes discharged by motor vehicle exhausts, to determine the effect of these fumes
on human health, and to promulgate stand-
[p. 14]
ards based on this research as to the amount of such fumes which may be discharged
from motor vehicles.
The Department recommends against the enactment of these bills.
Traditionally, the regulation and inspection of vehicles has been within the juris-
diction of the States. Estimates for 1958 indicate that there are in the United States
approximately 68 million registered vehicles of all types. Enforcement of the pro-
526-701 O - 73 - 13
-------
168 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
posed standards by the Federal Government, therefore, would be a difficult and
expensive undertaking.
The time limits available for research which would be imposed by the two bills
are believed to be impractical. H.R. 1297 provides a 6-month and H.R. 1346 pro-
vides a 12-month period, after the date of enactment, within which the standards
would be issued. Although methods exist for determining the amount of unburned
hydrocarbons discharged, they are neither quick nor simple. Furthermore, the
amounts discharged vary with the speed and mechanical condition of the vehicle.
It would appear that standards issued within either of the prescribed times would
not be based on full and adequate research. Available information indicates that
considerable expenditures and efforts have been made by official agencies and in-
dustry but that an entirely feasible solution has not been reached on a reasonable
method of control. Exhaust filters or other devices prescribed for mandatory instal-
lation based on inadequate research would be of limited effectiveness and subject to
becoming obsolete as new devices, based on continuing research, are developed.
In connection with the foregoing, it is observed that section 2(a) of H.R. 1346
provides that the standards would be enforced only if the Surgeon General finds
that a reasonable method of controlling exhaust discharges is available.
The problem is serious, in some areas at least, but the present research and
development efforts, largely in the hands of industry, need understanding assistance
and interpretation by the governmental authorities most concerned before satis-
factory regulations can be designed. The Federal Government should cooperate, as
needed, with the automotive engineers, with State motor vehicle and health authori-
ties, and other appropriate persons on the broad aspects of the problem, but enforce-
ment beyond that provided by the State and local jurisdictions cannot be readily
justified, since the safety phase of the motor vehicle exhaust problem is highly
localized.
For these reasons this Department recommends against enactment of these bills.
We have been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that it would interpose no
objection to submission of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
FREDERICK M. MUELLER,
Acting Secretary of Commerce.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
Washington, July 13,1959.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in response to your request of February 5,
1959, for a port on H.R. 1297, a bill to prohibit
fp-15]
the manufacture, sale, or use in commerce of any motor vehicle which discharges
unburned hydrocarbons and other noxious gases in amounts dangerous to human
health, and H.R. 1346, a bill to prohibit the use in commerce of any motor vehicle
which discharges substances in amounts which are found by the Surgeon General of
the Public Health Service to be dangerous to human health.
The bill, H.R. 1297, would require the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service to prescribe and publish in the Federal Register, not later than 6 months
after the date of enactment of the act, standards as to the amounts of unburned
hydrocarbons and other noxious gases which are safe, from the standpoint of human
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 169
health (with particular reference to the carcinogenic nature of unburned hydrocar-
bons and other gases) for a motor vehicle to discharge into the atmosphere.
It would provide criminal penalties, effective 1 year from the publication of
standards, for the manufacture for sale, the sale, the offering for sale, the use in
commerce, or the importation into the United States of any motor vehicle which dis-
charges unburned hydrocarbons or other noxious gases in amounts in excess of such
standards.
Research experts who are now working on this problem in this Department advise
that the scientific information required to justify and furnish the quantitative basis
for the establishment of health protection standards for unburned hydrocarbons and
noxious gases in motor vehicle exhausts is not now available and such knowledge
could not be developed realistically within the period specified in the bill.
During the recent National Conference on Air Pollution held in Washington, D.C.,
on November 18-20, 1958, it was reported that more needs to be known about the
individual components of exhaust emissions and the meteorological factors which
govern the formation of reaction products. Satisfactory and practicable methods of
reducing this pollution have yet to be developed. In this connection, it was reported
in January of 1959 at the annual meeting of the Society of Automotive Engineers
that certain experimental exhaust treatment devices have shown promise under test
conditions. These reports also pointed up serious shortcomings and complications
that will require much additional study, testing and development before any of the
devices could be made practicable and dependable enough for commercial produc-
tion and wide application.
The Public Health Service has further informed me that carcinogenicity for some
animals has been demonstrated in certain high boiling fractions of petroleum, that
airborne hydrocarbons have been shown to have carcinogenic properties in some
laboratory animals, that known carcinogenic substances are being measured in
particulates collected from the open atmosphere in several American cities, and
that tumors have been caused by exposure of laboratory animals to automobile
exhausts. Further studies will have to be made, however, before these and other
data can be projected for appraisal of the hazard to human beings. In addition to
carcinogenic considerations, these are other potential health hazards associated
with substances in automobile exhaust to which further intensive attention will
have to be given.
[p. 16]
Research on these subjects is being supported by this Department and other
organizations. In addition, this Department as well as commercial and other agen-
cies, has intensified support of research aimed at the elimination, or major reduction
of, unburned hydrocarbons and other materials in motor vehicle exhausts.
In summary, there is not now available the scientific knowledge needed to carry
out the specified purposes of H.R. 1297.
The bill, H.R. 1346, would require the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service to prescribe and publish in the Federal Register, not later than 12 months
after the date of enactment of the act, standards as to the amount of substances
which he considers safe, from the standpoint of human health, for a motor vehicle
to discharge to the atmosphere. Such standards, would, however, have to be estab-
lished only for those substances on which sufficient scientific information is available
to permit judgment as to adverse effects upon human health.
Provision is also made for the revision of these standards by the Surgeon General
and their enlargement by the inclusion of standards for additional exhaust compo-
-------
170 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
nents as adequate technical information concerning their health effects becomes
available.
Sections 2 and 3 provide for criminal penalties for using in commerce among the
several States, in the Territories or District of Columbia, or in commerce with for-
eign nations, a motor vehicle which discharges substances in amounts in excess of
such standards, provided the Surgeon General found there was available a reason-
able method of controlling such discharges. Section 4 contains definitions of terms
used in the bill and fixes the effective dates of the various provisions of the bill.
The limitations of existing technical knowledge, indicated previously in regard to
H.R. 1297, are also applicable to this bill. However, H.R. 1346 would require the
Surgeon General to prescribe standards only for those substances on which sufficient
scientific information is available to permit judgment, and would permit the Sur-
geon General to revise and enlarge such standards as additional adequate technical
data became available. These provisions of H.R. 1346, therefore, are technically
feasible of ultimate accomplishment.
We have no doubts as to the ultimate desirability of developing and publishing
standards or criteria relating to concentrations of various contaminants in the open
atmosphere, including those derived from the exhausts of motor vehicles. Such stand-
ards or criteria are concerned basically with conditions in the ambient atmosphere
and are, of course, related to the meteorological conditions and the intensity of
pollutional contributions, both of which vary greatly from place to place. The estab-
lishment, therefore, of uniform standards under a Federal statute does not appear
appropriate to the needs at the present time.
With regard to the regulatory features of this bill, the preponderance of air
pollution problems in the United States is intrastate in character, and the control of
the relatively smaller portions of the overall problems which could be reached by
Federal legislation relating to interstate commerce would not, in itself, be effective.
On the other hand, the practical totality of air pollution problems is susceptible to
legal control by official agencies of State and local governments. We,
[p. 17]
therefore, do not favor the imposition of Federal legal controls as proposed in this bill.
We are in full agreement with the congressional declaration of policy, as enunciated
in the act of July 14, 1955 (42 U.S.C. 1857), an act to provide research and technical
assistance relating to air pollution control, that the primary responsibility for the
control of air pollution is that of the States and local governments.
Under the present circumstances, we believe that the Federal effort in this field
can be most effective by research and technical assistance leading to the develop-
ment of standards or criteria of air quality appropriate for use in State or local
control programs. In this connection the need for such standards or criteria has been
recognized by such organizations as the American Public Health Association, the
Association of State and Territorial Health Officers, the Conference of State Sani-
tary Engineers, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the National Ad-
visory Committee on Air Pollution and others. The Public Health Service has been
aware of this need and, under existing authorizations, is carrying on and supporting
work relating to the development of standards or criteria for allowable concentra-
tions of contaminants in the air. In addition, we believe that encouragement and
assistance to State and local agencies in the development of needed control programs
would be more effective than the enactment of Federal control legislation.
Thus, the needed Federal action in this field is the development and dissemination
by the Surgeon General of such recommended standards or criteria pertaining to
allowable concentrations of contaminants in the open atmosphere as he considers
useful for the guidance of State and local governments and other organizations. The
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 171
*
Public Health Service is already cooperating with health authorities in one State
in a special project aimed at the development of standards of air quality for the
ambient atmosphere and of allowable concentrations of contaminants in automobile
exhausts. Since the Surgeon General already has the authority needed for such action
further legislation for this purpose does not appear necessary.
In summary, we regard the regulatory features of these bills as undesirable, and
believe the provisions concerning the development of technical data and the dis-
semination of information thereon are unnecessary.
We, therefore, recommend against enactment of the present bills.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that it perceives no objection to the submission
of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
ARTHUR S. FLEMMING, Secretary.
[p. 18]
l.lc(2) SENATE COMMITTEE ON LABOR
AND PUBLIC WELFARE
S. REP. No. 1410, 86th Cong., 2d Sess. (1960)
AIR-POLLUTION STUDY
MAY 23, I960.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. HILL, from the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 8238]
The Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 8238) to authorize and direct the Surgeon General of
the Public Health Service to make a study and report to Congress,
from the standpoint of the public health, of the discharge of substances
into the atmosphere from the exhausts of motor vehicles, having con-
sidered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and
recommend that the bill do pass.
EXPLANATION
The purpose of this legislation is to direct the Surgeon General of
the Public Health Service to conduct a study of the effect on human
health of substances discharged into the atmosphere by the exhausts
of motor vehicles.
The Surgeon General would be required to submit a report to Con-
-------
172 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
gress within 2 years, with such recommendations, if any, he deems
necessary to protect human health.
BACKGROUND
Increasing urbanization and industrialization in the United States
has led to the creation of a serious health problem caused by polluted
air. Recognition of the need for public-health protection was ex-
pressed in Public Law 84-159. This act placed the authority for the
control of air pollution with the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service under the supervision and direction of the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare.
[P. 1]
This act provided $5 million for 5 years for research and technical
assistance to the States relating to air-pollution control.
The authority of Public Law 84-159, due to expire on June 30,1960,
was broadened and extended by Public Law 86-365, which continued
the authorization for an appropriation of $5 million per year until the
year ending June 30, 1964. This general authority, however, pertains
to all types of air pollution. The committee is of the opinion that the
urgency of combating pollution due to the exhausts of motor vehicles
is such that specific emphasis on the need for action is required.
THE NEED
In June 1958, a panel of consultants on medical research and educa-
tion to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, under the
chairmanship of Dr. Stanhope Bayne-Jones, reported the need for
additional research on such environmental health problems as radia-
tion injury, harmful chemical processes, accidents, communicable
diseases, and increasing air and water pollution.
In the same month, the National Advisory Health Council of the
Public Health Service called attention to the constantly changing
pattern of problems in the field of environmental health and stated—
to provide the necessary leadership in the effective expansion of
the total national effort, the Public Health Service should devote
greater resources to research and education in this field.
The National Conference on Air Pollution recommended additional
research to devise effective control methods for various types of
emissions, with particular attention to problems of automobile
exhausts.
In a summary of the highlights of that conference, published by the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (Public Health Service
Publication No. 648), it is stated (p. 14):
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 173
The transportation industry's greatest pollution problem is
the exhaust emitted from the tailpipe of the automobile. Although
the public is more aware of the smoke and odors emitted from
diesel engine buses, trucks and trains, these are relatively minor
sources as compared to automobile exhausts.
The most significant emissions from automobile exhausts are
carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, and organic substances.
The latter two are the major cause of the Los Angeles smog and
are a problem of growing importance in many other cities. There
are probably several thousand organic components involved,
which have varying effects on eye irritation, toxicity, plant dam-
age and visibility. More needs to be known about the individual
components of exhaust emissions and the meteorological factors
which govern the formation of reaction products. Satisfactory
methods of reducing this pollution have yet to be developed,
although the automobile industry has made some progress in
achieving better combustion and thus reducing the amount of fuel
that escapes into the air.
Since the number of registered automobiles and trucks registered
has increased from 40 to 50 million between 1950 and 1960 and is due
[p. 2]
to reach 90 million by 1970, the Committee on Labor and Public
Welfare believes that emphasis is needed in providing for the leader-
ship that is necessary in combating air pollution due to motor vehicles.
Specific authority for concentrating attention on air pollution caused
by motor vehicles would hasten the development and adoption of the
most feasible control measures.
DEPARTMENTAL COMMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
Washington, April 7, 1960.
Hon. LISTER HILL,
Chairman, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : This letter is in response to your request of
August 24, 1959, for a report on H.R. 8238, a bill, to authorize and
direct the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to make a
study and report to Congress, from the standpoint of the public health,
of the discharge of substances into the atmosphere from the exhausts
of motor vehicles.
The bill (H.R. 8238) would require that the Surgeon General of the
Public Health Service conduct a thorough study to determine the
-------
174 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
amounts and kinds of substances which, from the standpoint of human
health, it would be safe to discharge from the exhausts of motor
vehicles under various operating conditions. The bill would also re-
quire that the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service submit a
report to Congress, within a period of 2 years after enactment, on the
results of the study, together with such recommendations as he may
consider necessary for protection of the public health.
The Surgeon General now has authorization to conduct and support
research relating to (a) the diseases and impairments of man under
the provisions of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C., ch. 6a)
and (b) the prevention and abatement of air pollution under provisions
of Public Law 159, 84th Congress (42 U.S.C. 1857-1857f). Under
these authorizations, the Public Health Service is now conducting and
supporting research and studies on health and other aspects of air
pollution from motor-vehicle exhausts.
While no additional authorities are needed to carry on the subject
research, we are in agreement with the opinion of the House Commit-
tee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, in its report on H.R. 8238,
as to the importance of motor-vehicle-exhaust gases in contributing to
air pollution, and the need for additional and expanded research on
this general subject. Likewise, we consider it desirable that Congress
be kept informed on the progress made in research on this important
subject. The requirement for submission of a report to the Congress
on the results of these studies within a 2-year period would permit
the Congress to review such progress and need for any additional
appropriate action.
[P. 3]
We therefore perceive no objection to the enactment of this bill by
the Congress.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that it perceives no objection to
the submission of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
BERTHA S. ADKINS,
Acting Secretary.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., April 5,1960.
Hon. LISTER HILL,
Chairman, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of
August 24, 1959, for the views of the Bureau of the Budget on H.R.
8238, a bill to authorize and direct the Surgeon General of the Public
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 175
Health Service to make a study and report to Congress, from the
standpoint of the public health, of the discharge of substances into the
atmosphere from the exhausts of motor vehicles. The bill would re-
quire the Surgeon General to undertake a study of the health effect
of substances discharged from automobile exhausts. The Surgeon
General shall, within 2 years, report to the Congress on the results of
the study together with recommendations for the protection of the
public health.
The present Federal Air Pollution Control Act (Public Law 159,
84th Cong.) authorizes the Surgeon General "* * * to prepare or recom-
mend research programs for devising and developing methods for
eliminating or reducing air pollution." The Public Health Service has
programmed $827,900 in 1960 for research on the effects of auto-
mobile exhausts on health. The 1961 budget proposes an increased
$405,700 over the 1960 level for this purpose. In order to coordinate
the total research effort of the Federal Government with that of in-
dustry and universities, the Surgeon General established late in 1950
a Technical Task Group on Automobile Exhaust Research.
Research on the health effects of automobile exhaust by the Public
Health Service is now underway and more is proposed in the 1900
budget. Additional legislative authority for such research program
in our opinion, is not needed. Accordingly, we see no need for enact-
ment of H.R. 8238.
Sincerely yours,
PHILLIP S. HUGHES,
Assistant Director for Legislative References.
[p. 4]
-------
176
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
l.lc(3) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
l.lc(3)(a) VOL. 105 (1959), Aug. 17: Passed House, pp. 16074-16080
DIRECTING SURGEON GENERAL
TO MAKE A STUDY OF THE
DISCHARGE OF SUBSTANCES
INTO THE ATMOSPHERE FROM
THE EXHAUSTS OF MOTOR VE-
HICLES
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, I move
to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 8238) to prohibit the introduction
into commerce of new motor vehicles
which discharge substances in amounts
found by the Surgeon General of the
Public Health Service to be dangerous to
human health.
The Clerk read the bill, as follows:
Be it enacted by Ike Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, That the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service (hereinafter referred to as the
"Surgeon General") shall conduct a thorough study
for the purpose of determining, with respect to the
various substances discharged from the exhausts of
motor vehicles, the amounts and kinds of such
substances which, from the standpoint of human
health it is safe for motor vehicles to discharge
into the atmosphere under the various conditions
under which such vehicles may operate.
SEC. 2. As soon as practicable, but not later
than two years after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Surgeon General shall submit to
Congress a report on the results of the study con-
ducted pursuant to the first section of this Act,
together with such recommendations, if any, based
upon the findings made in such study, as he may
deem to be necessary for the protection of the
public health.
SEC. 3. As used in this Act the term "motor
vehicles" means vehicles propelled by mechanical
power and used for transporting passengers or
property on a highway.
Amend the title so as to read: "A bill to authorize
and direct the Surgeon Genera! of the Public
Health Service to make a study and report to
Congress, from the standpoint of the public health,
of the discharge of substances into the atmosphere
from the exhausts of motor vehicles."
The SPEAKER. Is a second de-
manded?
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, I de-
mand a second.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that a second be con-
sidered as ordered.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Ala-
bama?
There was no objection.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself 5 minutes.
Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself 5 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, this bill was introduced
by the distinguished gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. SCHENK].
Mr. Speaker, I commend him for his
great service and effort in working for
this fine bill. It will do much for safety
of the American people.
Mr. Speaker, enactment of H.R. 8238
is recommended by the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce to
speed research into the problem of the
effect on human health of substances dis-
charged into the atmosphere by motor
vehicle exhausts.
The bill, as amended by the committee
directs the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service to conduct such a study
and submit a report to Congress within 2
years with such recommendations, if any,
he considers necessary to protect human
health.
The Surgeon General now is conducting
and sponsoring research into this problem
in connection with a study of air pollution
authorized by Congress. Enactment of
H.R. 8238 will emphasize the desire of
Congress to accelerate this research as
rapidly as possible.
It is hoped that within 2 years the
Surgeon General can make recommenda-
tions that will make possible remedial
action.
Air pollution is a national problem.
It is already a serious menace in some
large cities and threatens every metro-
politan area in the Nation. Automobile
exhausts have been blamed as a major
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
177
cause of air pollution. The National Con-
ference on Air Pollution held last Novem-
ber was told by Dr. Leslie A. Chambers,
director of research, Los Angeles County
Air Pollution District, that more than
two-thirds of hydrocarbon pollutants,
which play so prominent a role in smog
formation, come from the use of gasoline
engines in automobiles, trucks, and buses.
The evidence that there are carcino-
gens—cancer-producing agents—in the
air is quite convincing. Lung cancer
deaths among white males is twice as
high in cities as in rural sections. In
laboratory exposures of experimental ani-
mals to constituents of automotive ex-
haust caused an increase in lung tumors
as much as 100 percent. In a statement
regarding these experiments made to the
Subcommittee on Health and Science,
the Acting Surgeon General stated:
In our opinion these studies justify the conclusion
that constituents of automotive exhaust fumes can
produce carcinogenic and other undesirable physio-
logical effects in mice, and therefore might produce
these effects in human beings. Whether they do so,
however, cannot be stated.
The problem of automobile exhausts
has been under study by the committee
for several years.
In 1956, the Special Subcommittee on
Traffic Safety of the Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce made a
study of the problem during a visit to
research centers of the automobile manu-
facturing industry. In hearings held in
Dayton, Ohio, in 1956, Dr. Robert E.
Zipf, president of the Ohio State Coro-
ner's Association, recommended a re-
search program to study the problem of
automobile exhausts. It was pointed out
that harmful toxic effects of exhaust
fumes may be an important contributory
cause of automobile accidents.
After consideration of the data
gathered in the subcommittee study, the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK] in-
troduced H.R. 9368, 85th Congress, to
prohibit the use in commerce of any ve-
hicle which discharged unburned hydro-
carbons in an amount found by the Sur-
geon General of the Public Health Service
to be dangerous to human health. That
bill directed the Surgeon General to pre-
scribe and publish not later than 6
months after enactment of the legislation,
standards as to the amount of unburned
hydrocarbons which are safe, from the
standpoint of human health—with partic-
ular reference to the carcinogenic nature
of unburned hydrocarbons—for a motor
vehicle to discharge into the atmosphere.
Criminal penalties were provided for
operating in commerce a vehicle which
discharged unburned hydrocarbons in ex-
cess of the standards set by the Surgeon
General.
Hearings were held on this bill March
17, 1958, by the Special Subcommittee on
Traffic Safety. Leading experts in the
field were heard and a comprehensive rec-
ord of 180 pages published.
At the beginning of the present Con-
gress, the gentleman from Ohio intro-
duced H.R. 1346, a modification of his
bill in the previous Congress. The gentle-
man from California [Mr. McDONOUGH]
introduced H.R. 1297, also dealing with
the problem of unburned hydrocarbons.
H.R. 1297 would require the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service to
prescribe and publish in the Federal
Register, not later than 6 months after
the date of enactment of the legislation,
standards as to the amounts of unburned
hydrocarbons and other noxious gases
which are safe, from the standpoint of
human health (with particular reference
to the carcinogenic nature of unburned
hydrocarbons and other gases) for a
motor vehicle to discharge into the at-
mosphere. It would provide criminal pen-
alties, effective 1 year from the publica-
tion of standards, for the manufacturer
for sale, the offering for sale, the use in
commerce, or the importation into the
United States of any motor vehicle which
discharges unburned hydrocarbons or
other noxious gases in amounts in excess
of the standards set by the Surgeon Gen-
eral.
H.R. 1346 would require the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service to
prescribe and publish in the Federal
-------
178
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Register, not later than 12 months after
the date of enactment of the legislation,
standards as to the amount of substances
which he considers safe, from the stand-
point of human health, for a motor
vehicle to discharge into the atmosphere.
Such standards, however, would have to
be established only for those substances
on which sufficient scientific information
is available to permit judgment as to
adverse effects upon human health. The
bill provides for the revision of these
standards and their enlargement as ade-
quate technical information becomes
available. Criminal penalties are pro-
vided for using in commerce within the
United States or with foreign nations a
motor vehicle which discharges sub-
stances in amounts in excess of the
standards" fixed, provided the Surgeon
General found there was available a
reasonable method of controlling such
discharges.
Agency reports on H.R. 1297 and H.R.
1346 were not favorable. One objection
was to the creation of a Federal organ-
ization to inspect and enforce motor
vehicle safety standards.
After consideration of the legislation
by the Subcommittee on Health and
Safety, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
SCHENCK] introduced H.R. 8238 to elim-
inate the objection regarding Federal en-
forcement of the safety standards set
[p. 16074]
by the Surgeon General. The feeling was
that the essential and urgent thing is to
determine what can and should be done
as soon as possible.
After careful consideration, the com-
mittee adopted the substitute language
brought to the House today to direct the
Surgeon General to make a study and
report to the Congress as soon as possible
but not later than 2 years after date
of enactment of the legislation.
NEED FOR EARLY ACTION
That exhausts from motor vehicles
can and do pollute the air no one dis-
putes. There is disagreement about the
nature and the extent of this pollution.
There is some disagreement regarding
what can be done to control these harm-
ful exhausts. Research now underway
may provide the answer to some of these
questions and point the way to feasible
methods of abatement. If additional
legislation is indicated by the report the
Surgeon General makes, the Congress
will have basic information with which
to work.
If this air pollution resulted only in
discomfort and loss of visibility, with its
attendant hazards and motor vehicle
traffic, the problem would be serious
enough to warrant real concern but there
is abundant evidence that smog is a
serious health menace and results in
heavy losses to agriculture. The loss to
agriculture in the Los Angeles area alone
has been estimated at $5 million a year.
Therefore, the Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce urged the
adoption of H.R. 8238 as amended.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. ROBERTS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Arkansas.
Mr. HARRIS. I should like to com-
mend the gentleman from Alabama,
chairman of the Subcommittee on
Health and Safety, and the members
of his subcommittee, for the constant
work that has been accomplished on this
subject for the last several years. The
gentleman from Alabama and the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK],
the author of this bill, have labored to-
gether with their subcommittee for quite
some time—I think this is the third Con-
gress—during which a lot of study has
gone into the problems of safety. Is it
not true that from the gentleman's study
you found in certain metropolitan areas
of the country a very serious problem
in relation to exhaust fumes from auto-
mobiles?
I thank the distinguished gentleman,
the chairman of the Interstate and For-
eign Commerce Committee.
Mr. ROBERTS. I would certainly say
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
179
to the gentleman that that is true, and
I think that it is a problem that is not
only found in the Los Angeles area but I
think it is found in other areas of the
country, and that soon it will be here in
Washington and New York and in other
great metropolitan areas of the country.
Mr. HARRIS. The gentleman's com-
mittee held hearings on this particular
bill and had members of the industry,
scientists and research people before the
committee in the development of this
legislation; is that not true?
Mr. ROBERTS. I would say to the
gentleman we held full hearings in the
last session of the Congress and we held
hearings for 3 days in this session of the
Congress, and this has been a continuing
study with his subcommittee for the past
3 years.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. ROBERTS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.
Mr. GROSS. I note that the reports
from the executive branch of the Govern-
ment are adverse to, perhaps, the original
bill. This bill has been rewritten, has
it not?
Mr. ROBERTS. That is correct. May
I say to the gentleman that there has
been no report on this particular bill.
The report we had was on the McDon-
ough bill and the Schenck bill as orig-
inally introduced, H.R. 1346. This is a
clean bill and we have met the objec-
tions of the departments that were
brought out in the hearings.
Mr. GROSS. Now, as to the cost.
There will be some cost involved. Is that
to be absorbed by the agencies of Gov-
ernment?
Mr. ROBERTS. I would not want to
be bound, but I can say to the gentle-
man that I think sufficient funds are al-
ready in the hands of the Public Health
Service with which to make this study.
Mr. GROSS. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, first I
should like to say to the House that it
has been a very high honor and a great
privilege to be a member of the Commit-
tee on Highway Traffic and Safety since
its beginning in 1956 and during this
present Congress known as the Subcom-
mittee on Health and Safety. All this
time the committee has been under the
energetic and very capable chairman-
ship of our distinguished colleague from
Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS], our subcommit-
tee, through the deep interest of all our
members and their devotion to automo-
tive and highway traffic safety has rarely
achieved great results. All of this has
been done with very modest expenditure
of funds. Our subcommittee work has
been made possible through the under-
standing, splendid cooperation, encour-
agement and help of the able chairman
of the full Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, the distinguished
gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. HARRIS].
Mr. Speaker, the chairman of our
committee has explained the bill very
well. I believe it would not serve any
useful purpose to take further time to
explain the details of the bill.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I shall simply
ask unanimous consent to extend my
remarks at this point in the RECORD.
The SPEAKER. Without objection,
it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, some-
times, unfortunately, we are inclined to
pay little attention to many things which
are really very close to us in terms of
good health and we are also inclined to
take many things for granted. Funda-
mentally, as we all know, there are two
elementary needs for sustaining human
life. One is water, and it is well known
that human life cannot long exist with-
out water. In a relatively short time our
bodies become dangerously dehydrated
and this seriously affects all body func-
tions. The length of time the human
body can get along without water varies
somewhat from person to person, de-
pending upon variables and conditions.
The other fundamental need, for sus-
taining human life, Mr. Speaker, is oxy-
gen, which our marvelous body mecha-
nisms obtain from the air we breathe.
-------
180
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
While life can be maintained for hours
and sometimes even days without water,
human life ceases to exist and cannot be
restored if cut off for even a matter of
minutes from oxygen from the air we
breathe. Thus the air we breathe and the
purity of the air, when we stop to think
about it, immediately becomes of very
primary importance to each of us.
Much has been done, Mr. Speaker, in
the field of air pollution and in the
elimination of harmful pollutants from
such sources as smoke stacks, chemical
and oil refineries, incinerators, and manu-
facturing processes. Various agencies of
our Federal Government have cooper-
ated fully with State and local govern-
ments and with industry to determine
the cause and aid in the removal and
abatement of many causes of air pollu-
tion and contamination. Actually, many
millions of dollars have been spent by
various agencies of government, local,
State, and Federal, and by industry in
achieving the very commendable prog-
ress made thus far. Much, of course,
remains to be done and progress will con-
tinue because a considerable number of
standards have been agreed upon as the
result of significant achievements in re-
search. One source of air pollution,
however, Mr. Speaker, becomes more
alarming each day because of the present
limited knowledge of the harmful effects
on human health, because the amount of
air pollution from this source is increas-
ing day by day and because almost noth-
ing has been done on an overall basis to
control this source of air pollution. I
am speaking, Mr. Speaker, about the
presently uncontrolled emissions of auto-
motive exhaust gases which, many scien-
tific people are fully convinced, contain
substances which are not only harmful
but are extremely dangerous to human
health. I shall point out later, Mr.
Speaker, some of the dangers to which I
have referred and some of the limited
progress that has been made thus far by
various researchers and engineers work-
ing on these problems.
It is, Mr. Speaker, with pardonable
pride and the indulgence of the House,
that I point out the fact that I intro-
duced the first legislative proposal of
this kind in the Congress of the United
States on August 20, 1957. This bill,
known as H.R. 9368, provided the basis
for a hearing by the Special Subcommit-
tee on Highway Traffic Safety of which
I was privileged to be a member. This
hearing, held on March 17, 1958, de-
veloped 180 printed pages of testimony
from some of the most expert and
knowledgeable people in our Nation on
this subject. I commend its careful and
thoughtful study to you.
On January 7, 1959,1 introduced H.R.
1346, which approached these same
[p. 16075]
problems in a somewhat different man-
ner. On July 15, 1959, and in accordance
with a full and careful consideration of
the provisions of H.R. 1346 by our sub-
committee on Health and Safety, I
proposed a new bill, H.R. 8238. This
bill was unanimously recommended to
the full House Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce. During the
consideration by the entire committee a
belief was expressed that with the lim-
ited scientific data thus far available
and because no device of proven merit at
reasonable cost has yet been produced,
it would be more wise to confine present
legislation to require that a study be
made by the Surgeon General of the
Public Health Service and that a report
of his findings be filed with the Congress
within a period of 2 years. Accordingly
an amendment in the nature of a sub-
stitute for the original language of H.R.
8238 was approved and H.R. 8238, as
amended, is now before us here today.
Personally, Mr. Speaker, I feel this is a
long and strong step in the right direc-
tion and I earnestly recommend the
approval of this measure.
A tremendous amount of work has
been done, Mr. Speaker, in the interest
of better health by many agencies
financed through public funds and many
agencies financed through private funds
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
181
supported by contributions from individ-
uals, foundations, professional and
scientific organizations, and many others.
All have combined to make great progress
in the production, purity care and
packaging of foods, development of
medicines, vitamins, and vaccines and
the discovery and use of insecticides,
pesticides, fungicides, and many other
scientific and biological preparations to
produce more healthful and longer living
for people everywhere. This list is in no
way complete or indicative of the progress
already made and is used only by way of
illustration. Our medical, scientific, bio-
logical, chemical, and other researchers
in many fields of science are on the thresh-
old of many discoveries which will make
life more healthful, more enjoyable, and
which will also greatly lengthen the life
span. Our U.S. Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, through its
various components of the Bureau of
Public Health, the Food and Drug
Administration, the National Institutes
of Health, and others, working on their
own and in complete cooperation and
coordination with all other Federal
agencies, professional organizations of all
kinds, educational, scientific, and re-
search groups have all joined hands in
these efforts and achievements. Through-
out our Nation, Mr. Speaker, great
advances have been made and more are
in the making from the standpoints of
foods, drugs, medicines, and surgery in
the prevention and treatment of many
diseases, even in some of those thus far
regarded as incurable. The outlook for
better health, happier living, and longer
life has never been more bright.
While, as I have indicated, Mr.
Speaker, very significant progress in bet-
ter control of air pollution has been made
through the control and abatement of
some of the more or less fixed location
causes, almost nothing has been done in
the general field of the emissions of sub-
stances in automotive exhaust gases
which very many highly qualified med-
ical and scientific authorities are fully
convinced are harmful and dangerous to
human health. The severity and extent
of these dangers from the exhaust gases
of all types of automotive vehicles is in-
creasing at a very alarming rate, espe-
cially in the urban areas and in the areas
of congested traffic. That something
must be done promptly to meet this dire
threat to human life is fully recognized
and acknowledged not only by many
medical, scientific, and public health au-
thorities, but also by all engineers in the
automotive and automotive fuel fields.
Many years ago, Mr. Speaker, when I
was quite young and began my first ex-
perience as an assistant chemistry
teacher in a high school, we knew that
certain gases we developed in our labo-
ratory experiments had very unpleasant
odors and made some students feel quite
ill. We knew very little then as to the
health hazards involved but more and
more information has been developed.
Later as one engaged in the automo-
tive service field and still later as a high
school teacher of automotive training it
was felt that if there was some way to
determine the amount of unburned ex-
haust gases by instrumentation, better
and more economic engine performance
could be secured. This idea was fostered
in my own mind by a chance observation
of a carbon dioxide indicator being used
in the smoke stack leading from a large
stream boiler installation. The engineer
explained to me that he kept close watch
on this indicator so that he could better
control the efficiency of the fire under the
boiler. Thus my first interest in the
analysis of automotive gases, many years
ago, stemmed from the desire to obtain
better control of automotive engine ad-
justments in the interest of better per-
formance and more economy in opera-
tion.
Along with many of you, I have been
annoyed and at times made to feel ill
when driving in heavy traffic, or some-
times even riding in a closed car with
a leaky exhaust system, I have had to
breathe unpleasant and foul smelling
automotive exhaust gases. Frankly, I
have often been quite apprehensive of
-------
182
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
the possible ill effects of such fumes on
health. I have discussed the possibility
of such ill effects with my own doctor
and personal friend for many years, Dr.
Thomas P. Sharkey. Dr. Sharkey is an
eminently qualified internist and he con-
firmed my own fears that great dangers
of many kinds undoubtedly lurk in the
breathing of automotive exhaust gases.
During hearings held in Detroit in
1956 by our Subcommittee on Highway
Traffic Safety, Mr. Speaker, we made a
trip through some of the engineering
laboratories of the leading manufac-
turers of automobiles. There I saw some
engineers making some tests of exhaust
gases coming from the exhaust pipe of
one of their standard cars. A sampling
tube had been inserted in the automobile
exhaust pipe and it was connected to
some meters and also to a mechanism
which made a tracing on calibrated
paper which was being rolled up on one
roll from a supply roll. As I observed
these tests being made, and discussed the
procedure with the engineers, they told
me that they were studying the amounts
of unburned hydrocarbons being ex-
hausted by the engine under varying
adjustments made in both the ignition
and the carburetor. They pointed out
to me and demonstrated by means of
the tracing being made on the calibrated
recording paper that a considerable addi-
tional quantity of unburned hydrocar-
bons is present in the exhaust gases at
the times when the speed of the engine
is suddenly either accelerated or de-
celerated. At other times when the en-
gine was being operated evenly, either at
slow or relatively rapid speed, the engine
exhaust gases contained a lower and
more even amount of unburned hydro-
carbons. Thus it became quite evident
from this one test I saw being made that
the peaks of unburned hydrocarbons in
this automotive exhaust gas occurred
both during sudden acceleration or de-
celeration of the engine speed. At my
request, one of the engineers increased
and quickly decreased the engine speed
several times similar to the actions of
some drivers impatiently waiting for a
traffic light clearance or at a stop street.
The peaks of unburned hydrocarbons
showed up immediately on the instru-
ments and on the recording paper. This
demonstration quickly convinced me, Mr.
Speaker, that, first, drivers who quickly
accelerate and decelerate engine speeds
while waiting for a traffic light clearance,
or at a stoplight, are unnecessarily en-
dangering not only their own health, but
also those around them, none of whom
have any choice but to breathe this air
polluted and contaminated with un-
burned hydrocarbons and other noxious •
exhaust gases; second, that in closely
built-up urban areas with congested
automotive traffic with a lot of stop and
go driving, and in other areas where
traffic congestion occurs, actually mil-
lions of people are daily inhaling great
quantities of automobile exhaust gases
which, I am personally convinced after
much study, are very harmful to human
health.
The hearings held by our subcommit-
tee, Mr Speaker, are filled with testi-
mony and references by highly qualified
medical authorities, research scientists,
and other experts, that substances in au-
tomotive exhaust gases are harmful to
human health in many ways. House
Report No. 814 on H.R. 8238 quotes
many authorities on this subject and
there is no need to repeat them in my
remarks except to urge all Members to
study this report carefully.
Dr. Leroy E. Burney, Surgeon General
of the U.S. Public Health Service, is
quoted in a recent periodical as saying:
There is a definite association between com-
munity air pollution and high mortality rates due
to cancer of the respiratory tract, including the
lung, cancer of the stomach and esophagus, and
arteriosclerotic heart disease.
Dr. Burney is also quoted as having
stated in an address before the Society
of Automotive Engineers that—
Certain components of automotive exhaust have
been known as cancer causing substances for years.
[p. 16076]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
183
Time, Mr. Speaker, will not permit me
to quote or use but a very small amount
of the material I have, gathered in my
study of these problems. Many folks
first think of carbon monoxide as being
one of the greatest dangers in automotive
exhaust gas. There is no question, Mr.
Speaker, that carbon monoxide is a
deadly poison when released in a con-
fined space, but carbon monoxide is a
waste product of the gasoline that has
been totally burned up in an automotive
engine and it disperses quickly and
harmlessly in the open air. There are
other substances in automotive exhaust
gases, Mr. Speaker, the dangers of which,
while not yet fully documented by ade-
quate scientific data, are never-the-less
very dangerous. These substances result
from the unburned gasoline vapor and
are naturally present in greater volume
when the engine is idling along in slow
moving, congested traffic. Included in
automotive gases are oxides of nitrogen
and many other substances. Some of
them combine with ozone and other
gases in the air. Some of these gases
are changed into other compounds as the
result of the reaction of sunlight and
other light rays, all of them producing
still more organic compounds that we
breathe into our lungs.
There are nearly 70 million motor ve-
hicles being operated on our highways
and streets today, Mr. Speaker, and this
number is increasing at a net rate of
some 3 million per year. More than
130 million gallons of gasoline are being
used per day in our Nation and this
means that some where between 10 and
12 million gallons are being discharged
into the air. This tremendous number
of liquid gallons, when converted into
gases and this volume increased still
further when combined with gases al-
ready in the air, creates an almost un-
believable volume of cancer inducing
gases. I am told, Mr. Speaker, that
whether we drive or not, each of us in-
hales some 5,000 quarts of air each 24
hours. When we realize that this air
we breathe is contaminated with vapors
and tiny suspended organic substances
from automotive exhaust gases and
when we realize that even extremely
minute amounts of cancer-inducing au-
tomotive exhaust gases are so extremely
dangerous there is little wonder that the
250,000 Americans who die from cancer
each year include many who die from
lung cancer.
The Washington Sunday Star of Au-
gust 9,1959, Mr. Speaker, included a very
well written editorial on this subject
pointing out some of the dangers from
automotive exhaust gases that I have
been discussing here, and referred to a
recent announcement by General Motors
Corp., according to the New York Times
of August 4, and the Herald Tribune of
that same date, which indicated that
General Motors has held preliminary
discussions with the Sloan-Kettering In-
stitute for Cancer Research about the
possibility of that institute doing a thor-
ough study of the actual and potential
evils inherent in exhaust fumes from
trucks, buses, and private automobiles.
Under unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker,
I include this editorial as part of my
remarks:
POISON ON WHEELS
It is good to note that General Motors, in
cooperation with the Sloan-Kettering Institute for
Cancer Research, is planning to finance a thorough-
going study of the actual and potential evils
inherent in exhaust fumes from trucks, buses and
private automobiles. The project is altogether
timely and very much to the point, and it is to be
welcomed and commended as something that
ought to stimulate the entire automotive industry
into doing far more than it has done so far in this
challenging and worrisome field.
There can be no doubt, in any case, that the
contaminating materials released by vehicular
exhausts markedly exceed industrial smoke as the
principal cause of poisonous smog and other noxious
atmospheric conditions in all our great urban
centers. Experts like Surgeon General Leroy E.
Burney of the U.S. Public Health Service make no
bones about the situation. They feel sure that our
municipal traffic, because it is the chief contributor
to these conditions, must be dealt with as a factor
definitely associated with malignant tumors and
such afflictions as asthma. In Dr. Burney's opinion,
as expressed some months ago to the first National
Conference on Air Pollution, "We know that cancer-
producing agents are in the air we breathe. * * * We
know that lung-cancer rates in the largest cities
526-701 O - 73 - 14
-------
184
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
are twice as high as those in nonurban areas. The
case has not yet been proved, but the weight of
circumstantial evidence grows heavier as research
progresses."
These are words that speak pretty much for
themselves. With our population increasing at an
explosive rate, we face the prospect of massively
expanding motor traffic throughout our country.
As far as metropolitan public health is concerned,
this makes it all the more important, if not urgent,
to carry out just such studies as the one being con-
templated by General Motors. Everybody, of
course, and not just GM, has reason to take a
lively interest in the problem.
Favorable, continuous and insistent
prompt action, by the Congress, is com-
pletely justified and extremely impor-
tant, Mr. Speaker, on what is shown to
be a serious menace to human health. I
am completely convinced, Mr. Speaker,
that the exhaust pipes from automotive
engines may well prove to be the most
deadly and dangerous part of the car
from the standpoint of the health of
people.
The automotive industry, as a group
and through its association with various
automotive professional engineer organi-
zations, has been doing a great deal of
research on these problems and on de-
vices to correct some of the dangers to
which I have referred. Much has been
done, but a great deal more must be
done.
The American Petroleum Association,
through its own members and through
cooperation with many other organiza-
tions, has been doing a great deal of
work in this field.
Many universities, colleges, research
organizations, medical experts, scientists,
municipal and State officials and many
others have been working on these very
important problems.
Some progress has been made, Mr.
Speaker, and although some devices have
been developed in an effort to solve
the problem by attempting to clean up
automotive exhaust gases so that they
will not be harmful to human health,
efficient devices to do the job within
reasonable cost limits have not yet been
fully developed. I am completely confi-
dent, however, Mr. Speaker, that Ameri-
can automotive engineers, scientists,
mechanical engineers, chemical engi-
neers, and many others, both within the
industry and outside the industry, have
the ability and the ingenuity to do the
job once they are fully convinced of the
need and the public demand.
Frankly, Mr. Speaker, and as can be
seen by the reports from the several
departments, certain objections to H.R.
9368 and H.R. 1346 have been raised for
the reasons stated. I am firmly con-
vinced that H.R. 8238, as amended,
meets all these objections. Mr. William
F. Sherman, Secretary, Engineering Ad-
visory Committee, Automobile Manufac-
turers Association, by a telegram ad-
dressed to me on July 17,1959, expressed
certain reservations and opinions of
H.R. 8238, and, under unanimous con-
sent, I include Mr. Sherman's telegram
referred to in full:
I have been directed by the chairman and mem-
bers of the Engineering Advisory Committee of the
Automobile Manufacturers Association, which
appeared before your committee on July 8, to
advise you that the statement attributed to you by
the press that your bill H.R. 8238 is not opposed by
the manufacturers misinterprets the position of the
manufacturers with respect to your bill while all
of the automobile manufacturers subscribe to the
objectives of H.R. 8238 as evidenced by the major
intensive research and development program they
are conducting in their efforts in this direction, they
do not believe that its passage will accelerate
progress or further the attainment of these same
objectives. However, the automobile manufacturers
will support a bill that directs the Surgeon General
to conduct research on this subject and report his
findings periodically to the Congress.
Permit me, Mr. Speaker, to point out
that H.R. 8238 as amended fully meets
two statements in Mr. Sherman's tele-
gram which I have quoted fully. These
are: That "all the automobile manu-
facturers subscribe to the objectives of
H.R. 8238," and that "the automobile
manufacturers will support a bill that
directs the Surgeon General to conduct
research on this subject and report his
findings periodically to the Congress."
It is my considered opinion, Mr.
Speaker, therefore, that H.R. 8238 as
amended, meets any and all of the ob-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
185
jections of the several departments of
the Federal Government and all of the
objections of the Automobile Manufac-
turers Association Engineering Commit-
tee as presented by William F. Sherman,
its secretary.
It is also my own personal opinion, Mr.
Speaker, that the Surgeon General of
the Public Health Service through ap-
propriation of funds already approved
for the use of the Public Health Service,
the National Institutes of Health, and
the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare, has ample funds to carry
out the provisions of H.R. 8238, as
amended, and that no additional funds
are necessary at this time. It is also my
personal opinion, Mr. Speaker, that the
Automobile Manufacturers Association,
[p. 16077]
along with the petroleum industry, and
others, have ample funds and a recog-
nized responsibility in the public interest
to cooperate fully with the Surgeon
General, both in proving the need for
any corrective action necessary and
producing the device or methods neces-
sary to meet this need.
It is my personal opinion, therefore,
Mr. Speaker, that H.R. 8238, as amend-
ed, should be approved promptly by the
Congress so that the responsibility of
the Surgeon General is recognized; so
that he is directed to proceed promptly
in accordance with all the provisions of
H.R. 8238, as amended; that the automo-
tive industry in general should recognize
and act in accordance with its responsi-
bility in the public interest, and further;
that the Congress shall insist that all
proper steps be taken to alleviate the
dangers to human health from automo-
tive exhaust gases at the earliest prac-
ticable date.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I yield to the gentle-
man from Arkansas.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I should
like to commend the gentleman from
Ohio as well as the other members of
the committee for the tremendous prog-
ress they have made in their study on
matters of safety. I think it would be
well to advise the House that the author
of the bill, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
SCHENCK], has spent many years in the
field of education, was an instructor
himself in the field of the automotive
training and therefore has had a long
background of experience in this field.
He has made a tremendous contribution
to the solution of the safety problems in
this country.
Mr. SCHENCK. I thank the distin-
guished gentleman.
Mr. BECKER. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. BECKER. Mr. Speaker, I should
like to pursue the question raised by the
gentleman from Iowa [Mr. GROSS]. I
know that the gentleman from Alabama
[Mr. ROBERTS] answered very frankly
and honestly that he could not be bound
by his statement as to where the funds
for this study would come from. Is there
not further information as to where the
funds will come from to make this study?
I think we ought to have factual state-
ments as to where the funds are coming
from. I think the gentleman from Ala-
bama or the gentleman from Ohio can
give us that information.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, in reply
to the question of my good friend from
New York, the Public Health Service
now, as I understand it, has approxi-
mately $1 million in its fund for research
in connection with these exhaust gas
fumes. Also included in the National
Institutes of Health are various agencies.
I have a very definite opinion from all
the testimony we have received that
these substances in the exhaust gases are
carcinogenic in type, in that they are
cancer-forming substances. The National
Institutes of Health is interested in that
particular phase and has ample funds
with which to continue its research in
this matter, this being a very possible
-------
186
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
source of injury and harm to human
health.
Mr. BECKER. Does the gentleman
say that the funds are coming from the
Public Health Service, or are the funds to
be obtained from the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare? As I
understand the gentleman the funds are
going to come out of one of those two
departments, is that correct?
Mr. SCHENCK. That is my under-
standing. It is my understanding that
these funds will come directly out of the
Public Health Service, the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare and
the operations of the National Institutes
of Health, which funds have already been
appropriated.
Mr. BECKEE. Mr. Speaker, I would
like to say that my interest in this is
because so much of the funds of the
Department of Health, Education and
Welfare are used for studies and then
they make studies and start propagan-
dizing for funds to be appropriated by
Congress for purposes that many Mem-
bers of Congress are opposed to. That is
why I would like to know where these
funds are coming from.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I yield to the gentle-
man from Arkansas.
Mr. HARRIS. I think the gentleman
from New York is laboring under some
misapprehension with reference to the
purpose of this legislation.
Mr. BECKER. Perhaps so.
Mr. HARRIS. As the bill was origi-
nally introduced it required the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service,
after conducting necessary research, to
establish standards which the industry
would have to follow to meet this prob-
lem. We thought we were not quite
ready for that yet. The committee de-
cided that we should direct the Surgeon
General to make a study and to report
back to the Congress on the problem.
Mr. BECKER. Mr. Speaker, I am glad
the gentleman has cleared my mind on
that, because I was confused by the
original bill and the report, and the
proposition we have before us now. I
am now entirely satisfied.
Mr. TABER. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. SCHENCK. Yes, I am happy to
yield to the distinguished gentleman
from New York.
Mr. TABER. How can any committee
of Congress have legislative powers to
direct the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare to do anything?
Mr. SCHENCK. It is my understand-
ing, Mr. Speaker, that under the legis-
lative jurisdiction of the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce and
through legislation approved by the
Congress we may direct the Department
to do so.
Mr. TABER. They have the right to
bring in bills that relate to the Depart-
ment, but they do not have the right to
direct them what to do.
Mr. SCHENCK. Oh, yes.
Mr. TABER. Oh, no; they could not.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield
3 minutes to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia [Mr. McDONOUGH].
Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Speaker, as
the author of one of the bills, H.R. 1297,
considered by the committee, I want to
express my appreciation to the commit-
tee for bringing this bill to the floor and
for the hearings that were held and the
study that was made. The report sig-
nifies that this is a very vital thing as
far as the health of the public in general
is concerned. It has been determined
after long and exhaustive research that
the exhaust gases of automobiles con-
tribute immeasurably to the pollution
of the air, especially in heavily popu-
lated city areas of the United States and
in particular in my locality in Los An-
geles, where we have not only a heavy
population and a heavy automobile
registration operating the year around,
but we have a topographical situation
where the prevailing wind comes off the
Pacific Ocean and we have a high
mountain range to the east of the city
which impedes the flow of the atmos-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
187
phere. The polluted air keeps build-
ing up and building up until it rolls back
over the city and then drops when the
atmosphere gets heavy and brings down
upon the people toxic gases that cause
smarting of the eyes and contributes to
asthmatic conditions and, as the report
indicates, is a contributing factor to the
incidence of cancer. Of course, there is
no secret about the fact that automobile
exhaust gases are very disastrous be-
cause we have heard of a number of
suicides where people have used that as
a means of committing suicide, that is,
in a concentrated form where they pipe
the exhaust gas into the cabin of the
car and they inhale a certain amount of
carbon monoxide and all the deleterious
gases. When we know these gases are
being released into the atmosphere in
large quantities it is certainly the re-
sponsibility of the Public Health Service
to discover to what extent this can be
controlled and what sort of equipment
ought to be applied to an automobile to
implement the study of the Public Health
Service in order to prevent the intro-
duction of these gases into the at-
mosphere.
Permit me to read the following from
the committee report:
HISTORY OF THE LEGISLATION
Air pollution is a national problem. It is a public
health problem. Federal, State, and local govern-
ments have spent vast sums to study and control
this problem. Industry likewise has spent millions
on research and abatement. Great progress has been
made but the problem is far from solved. In fact,
the blight of air pollution, especially resulting from
automotive exhaust gases, has become a real
menance to all urban areas.
This problem has been under consideration by
the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce for many years. In 1955, your committee
reported favorably on legislation for Federal aid in
air-pollution control. This legislation (Public Law
159, 84th Cong.) directs the Public Health Service
to conduct and support research and to provide
technical services to State and local governments
and to private agencies. The law provides for a
5-year program and authorized total expenditures
of $25 million.
In 1956, the Special Subcommittee on Traffic
Study of this committee made a study
[p. 16078]
of noxious, toxic, and harmful motor vehicle exhaust
fumes in connection with a comprehensive investiga-
tion of highway traffic safety. Testimony was taken
and research activities of the industry were studied
on visits to manufacturing plants.
The danger to automobile drivers and occupants
resulting from exposure to exhaust fumes in traffic
was called forcefully to the attention of the Traffic
Safety Subcommittee in the 1956 hearings at
Dayton, Ohio, by Dr. Robert E. Zipf, president of
the Ohio State Coroner's Association, who urged
that a research program be set up to study this
problem (hearings, "Traffic Safety, 1956," p, 722).
Legislation proposed to provide standards
After consideration of the data gathered in the
subcommittee study, Congressman SCHENCK, on
July 20,1957, introduced H.R. 9368, 85th Congress,
to prohibit the use in commerce of any motor
vehicle which discharged unburned hydrocarbons
in an amount found by the Surgeon General to be
dangerous to human health.
That bill directed the Surgeon General of the
Public Health Service to prescribe and publish,
not later than 6 months after enactment of the
legislation, standards as to the amount of unburned
hydrocarbons which are safe, from the standpoint
of human health (with particular reference to the
carcinogenic nature of unburned hydrocarbons),
for a motor vehicle to discharge into the atmosphere.
The bill provided criminal penalties for any
person using in commerce in the Territories or the
District of Columbia, in interstate commerce, or in
commerce with foreign nations, a motor vehicle
which discharged unburned hydrocarbons in
amounts in excess of the standards set by the
Surgeon General.
Hearings on this bill were held March 17, 1958,
by the Special Subcommittee on Traffic Safety.
Leading experts in the field were heard and a com-
prehensive record of 180 pages published, which is
available from the committee.
At the beginning of the present session, Congress-
man SCHENCK introduced H.R. 1346, a modification
of his bill in the previous Congress. Congressman
McDONOUGH introduced H.R. 1297, also dealing
with the problem of motor exhausts. The bill
H.R. 8238, here reported with amendments, was
similar to H.R. 1346 but with modifications referred
to below.
Because agency reports on H.R. 1346 and H.R.
1297 were discussed by the committee in detail in
connection with consideration of H.R. 8238, and
the adoption of the committee substitute, the text
of these two bills and the agency reports thereon
are printed hereafter in an appendix to this report.
Hearings held on air pollution legislation
Hearings on air pollution legislation were held
May 19 and June 24, 1959, by the Subcommittee
on Health and Safety. At that time valuable
information on the problem of unburned hydro-
carbons was presented by representatives of the
Public Health Service and others. These hearings
-------
188
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
have been printed and are available from the
committee.
Additional hearings were held July 7, 8, and 9 by
the subcommittee to consider automobile safety
legislation, including the problem of unburned
hydrocarbons.
Following the hearings, the legislation was
considered by the subcommittee. Certain amend-
ments were adopted to H.R. 1346, chiefly to section
2 to eliminate the objection raised by the Bureau
of the Budget and the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, that as written this section
would necessitate the creation of a Federal enforce-
ment organization in an area traditionally under
State and local jurisdiction. Congressman SCHENCK
thereafter introduced a new bill to incorporate the
amendments adopted in the subcommittee and this
became H.R. 8238, the bill considered by the entire
committee.
In addition to the above objection, the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare, while
agreeing that the provisions of H.R. 1346 relating
to standards "are technically feasible of ultimate
accomplishment," also opposed enactment of the
legislation as introduced on other grounds set out in
detail in a letter addressed to the chairman of this
committee, included hereafter in an appendix to
this report. After considering these objections and
other aspects of the problem, the committee adopted
an amendment in the nature of a substitute for the
purpose of accelerating research into the problem.
As outlined above, the committee substitute calls
for a comprehensive study and report by the
Surgeon General.
NEED FOR THE LEOISLATION
Automobile exhaust research now is being con-
ducted by the Public Health Service. In the hearings
on May 19 and June 24 the scope and progress of
this research was explored by the subcommittee.
The committee is concerned about the general
problem of air pollution but desires to emphasize
here the importance of giving the highest priority
to an investigation of the role of motor vehicle
exhaust gases, especially in view of the testimony in
the record regarding the important part motor
vehicle exhaust gases play in contributing to air
pollution in major metropolitan areas.
Also, harmful toxic effects upon drivers of motor
vehicles who inhale exhaust fumea may be an
important contributory cause of automobile acci-
dents, as pointed out by Dr. Zipf in the 1956 sub-
committee hearings mentioned above.
Clearly, more information is needed about the
part that unburned hydrocarbons play in con-
tributing to air pollution in general, with the
attendant ill effects on human health and comfort.
We need information on how to eliminate and
control harmful, toxic, and irritating motor vehicle
exhaust fumes. We need more information regarding
the harmful effects of these fumes on public health.
In the May 19, 1959, hearings on air pollution
control legislation, the subcommittee was told that
scientists know there are pollutants in the air which
cause cancer, particularly in laboratory animals,
and that death rates from certain types of cancer
and respiratory conditions are higher in urban
areas where air pollution is greater. Statistics were
cited which show that lung cancer rates are twice aa
high for the largest cities than in rural areas.
Agriculture also suffers extensive damage from
air pollution.
Extensive study of problem needed
The committee feels that extensive study of
carcinogens (cancer-producing agents) which may
be present in motor vehicle exhausts is urgent. In
that connection, the following excerpt from a
statement regarding air pollution research sub-
mitted by the Public Health Service in connection
with the May 19 hearings (p. 32) is of interest:
"In something less than 4 years of effort in this
field, several important and significant findings have
emerged from medical research on air pollution
and its effect on man. Evidence strongly suggests
that the slowly progressive and subtle changes that
may result from air pollution cause much of the
distress and disability of our aging population.
Certain air pollutants found in our cities are known
to be experimentally carcinogenic for animals, and
there is evidence that death rates for certain causes
of death increase markedly with urbanization.
Specifically, these causes include cancer of the lung,
trachea, and bronchus, cancer of the stomach and
esophagus, arterio-scl erotic heart disease, and
myocardial degeneration. Incomplete evidence
suggests that the distribution of cancer mortality
within cities is related to the distribution of air
pollution intensity. Further medical research on the
effects of air pollution is needed in order to help
delineate those factors which affect human comfort,
health, and life spans, so that effective and practical
control efforts may be undertaken."
In the hearings on H.R. 9368, 85th Congress,
March 17, 1958, the subcommittee was told in a
statement submitted by the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare (hearings, p. 120):
"It has been shown that auto exhausts contains
substances which, when supplied to suitable
experimental animals under appropriate conditions,
will increase the frequency of cancer."
Reports of studies on exhaust fumes
The committee also considered the following
memorandum from the Acting Surgeon General,
dated July 14, 1959, submitted by the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare, in response to a
request from the subcommittee chairman:
"The following information is provided in re-
sponse to the request of Representative KENNETH
A. ROBERTS, chairman, Subcommittee on Health
and Safety, concerning the possible effects on health
of automotive exhaust fumes.
"Automotive exhaust fumes, and the products
that result after these fumes enter the atmosphere,
include numerous groups of compounds of which
the unburned and partially burned hydrocarbons
are only one. To our knowledge, the only pertinent
studies thus far undertaken that involve the
deliberate exposure of human subjects to known
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
189
mixtures, or constituents, of automotive exhausts,
are the studies concerned with its effect in producing
eye irritation.
"Our presently available information, therefore,
is limited to knowledge obtained from controlled
laboratory exposures of experimental animals to
constituents of automotive exhaust. The results of
two such studies, conducted by Dr. Paul Kotjn and
his associates at the University of Southern Cali-
fornia, have been reported in Cancer (vol. 9, No. 5,
1956, and vol. 10, No. 6, 1957). These studies
involved the exposure of both tumor-susceptible
and tumor-resistant mice to ozonized gasoline, a
form of unburned hydrocarbon. The exposures
induced an increase in lung tumors of 100 percent
in the tumor-susceptible mice, and produced lung
tumors in 10 percent of the tumor-resistant mice.
Other effects reported included higher death rate,
, lighter body weights and some reduction in fertility.
Dr. Kotin, in his conclusion, states: 'Differences in
tumor rates and the production of hyperplastic and
metaplastic changes in the bronchial epithelium
in a highly refractory inbred strain warrant the
consideration of polluted atmosphere characterized
primarily by oxidation products of aliphatic hydro-
carbons as a factor in human pulmonary car-
cinogenesis.'
"In our opinion, these studies justify the con-
clusion that constituents of automotive exhaust
fumes can produce carcinogenic and other un-
desirable physiological effects in mice, and therefore
might produce these effects in human beings.
Whether they do so, however, cannot now be
stated."
Discussions at Conference on Air Pollution
The need for extensive study of the contribution
of motor-vehicle exhaust fumes to air pollution in
metropolitan areas is indicated in papers prepared
for presentation at the National Conference on Air
Pollution in Washington, November 18, 1958.
[p. 16079]
Dr. Leslie A. Chambers, director of research,
Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District,
said:
"Few sources of air pollution have been under
such close scrutiny in recent years as the automobile
and other petroleum fueled vehicles. This attention
is well deserved on the basis of the firmly established
major role of vehicular exhausts in the production
of smog in Los Angeles, and the inevitable inference
that automobile exhausts are contributing heavily
to air pollution in other metropolitan areas."
Dr. Paul Kotin, associate professor of pathology,
University of Southern California School of Medi-
cine, Los Angeles, said:
"Certain epidemiological facets of the increasing
incidence of lung cancer suggest that the atmos-
pheric environment may be casually associated
with this observed increase."
Dr. Lester Breslow, chief, Bureau of Chronic
Disease, California State Department of Health,
said:
"The findings of the several investigations briefly
reported here add up to a substantial justification
for concern about the long-term effect of repeated
exposure to air pollution. Evidence is gradually
accumulating which suggests that air pollution of
various types chemically and physically, may be
involved in such important lung conditions as
chronic bronchitis, asthma, emphysema, and lung
cancer."
Dr. Thomas F. Mancuso, chief, division of
industrial hygiene, Ohio State Department of
Health, Columbus, said:
"I believe that air pollution represents a highly
probable and important factor in the excess of lung
cancer in urban areas, acting directly and aug-
menting the occupational exposures of men so that
carcinogenic and cocarcmogenic agents of both
environments may be involved."
Recommendations of national conference
The National Conference on Air Pollution
recommended additional research to devise effective
control methods for various types of emissions, with
particular attention to problems of automobile
exhausts.
In a summary of the highlights of that con-
ference, published by the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare (Public Health Service
Publication No. 648), it is stated (p. 14):
"The transportation industry's greatest pollution
problem is the exhaust emitted from the tailpipe of
the automobile. Although the public is more aware
of the smoke and odors emitted from diesel engine
buses, trucks and trains, these are relatively minor
sources as compared to automobile exhausts.
"The most significant emissions from automobile
exhausts are carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen,
and organic substances. The latter two are the
major cause of the Los Angeles smog and are a
problem of growing importance in many other
cities. There are probably several thousand organic
components involved, which have varying effects
on eye irritation, toxicity, plant damage and
visibility. More needs to be known about the
individual components of exhaust emissions and the
meteorological factors which govern the formation
of reaction products. Satisfactory methods of
reducing this pollution have yet to be developed,
although the automobile industry has made some
progress in achieving better combustion and thus
reducing the amount of fuel that escapes into
the air."
Studies of fumes in metropolitan areas
In the hearings March 17, 1958, on H.R. 9368,
85th Congress, Dr. Clarence A. Mills, Professor of
experimental medicine, University of Cincinnati,
presented three exhibits showing some very inter-
esting results of his study of air pollution problems.
His testimony indicates the urgent need for further
study of the part motor-vehicle exhaust fumes play
in contributing to air pollution in metropolitan
areas.
In his statement he had the following to say
regarding his exhibit C, an article from the
-------
190
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
November 1957 issue of Cancer Research (hearings,
p. 75):
"Now, exhibit C, the tobacco smoking, motor
exhaust fumes and general air pollution in relation
to lung-cancer incidence, represents a very serious
effort to assay the various factors at work in the
amazing and very alarming rise in lung-cancer
incidence in. American cities, much more in the
cities than in the country districts, and the finger
of suspicion has been pointed very strongly at
tobacco smoking, there had been some suspicion of
general urban air pollution being a factor also, but
there had been no real serious effort at separate
evaluation of those factors in this lung-cancer
situation.
"This report, exhibit C, presents my findings
there which, in essence, indicate tobacco smoking,
and primarily cigarette smoking, as the major
etiological causative factor in lung-cancer incidence,
but that tobacco-smoking effect is more than
doubled for those urban residents who drive more
than 12,000 miles a year on an average in urban
tra'fflc.
"It is still higher for those tobacco smokers who
drive that much and then live in the dirtiest part
of the city.
"So we have there a very first strong hint that
motor-exhaust fumes are a significant factor,
mathematically significant also, in the incidence of
lung cancer."
The committee recognizes the urgent need for
additional and expanded research on the problem
to determine how motor vehicle exhausts contribute
to air pollution and the harmful levels of concen-
tration endangering human health. This research
is necessary to establish criteria upon which
engineers can develop better control methods.
In a letter to the chairman of the Subcommittee
on Health and Safety, dated July 16, 1959, Hon.
Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare said:
"It should be pointed out that the role of the
Public Health Service in the auto exhaust problem
is essentially one of research related to the char-
acterization of exhaust components and to their
effect."
I am very much concerned with the
passage of adequate legislation to con-
trol this, having introduced a bill with
my colleague, the gentleman from Ohio.
I trust we will obtain a satisfactory re-
port from the Public Health Service
soon and that we will be able to imple-
ment the recommendations of the Public
Health Service as soon as possible.
The SPEAKER. The question is, Will
the House suspend the rules and pass
the bill as amended?
The question was taken; and (two-
thirds having voted in favor thereof)
the rules were suspended and the bill
was passed.
The title was amended so as to read:
"A bill to authorize and direct the Sur-
geon General of the Public Health Service
to make a study and report to Con-
gress, from the standpoint of the public
health, of the discharge of substances
into the atmosphere from the exhausts
of motor vehicles."
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, I want
to express my deep appreciation and sin-
cere thanks to the Members of the House
for their approval of H.R. 8238 today.
This measure is of great importance for
the protection of human health from the
harmful substances I am convinced are
contained in automotive exhaust gases.
It is my sincere hope, Mr. Speaker, that
this proposed legislation will receive
prompt attention in the other body and
that it will be approved.
Engineers and scientists in the auto-
motive and allied fields are to be sincerely
commended, Mr. Speaker, on the progress
made thus far in working on these
problems, but much more needs to be
done and done promptly in the public
interest. It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that
the approval of this measure here in the
House today will serve to encourage
greater interest and an early solution.
The Congress, by approving this
measure, Mr. Speaker, will focus public
attention upon these dangers to human
health, especially in areas of congested
and slow moving automotive traffic and I
am certain that such attention will bring
public demand for adequate protection.
I feel certain also that many local com-
munities and states will be encouraged
to take appropriate action.
There is no doubt in my mind, Mr.
Speaker, but that the Surgeon General
and all those associated with him will be
able to establish proper standards of
safety in automotive exhaust gases well
within the time limitation of two years
as required by the provisions of H.R.
8238.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
191
I am completely confident, however,
Mr. Speaker, that automotive engineers
and other scientists will find the proper
solutions to these problems with or even
perhaps without the need for any new
device or attachment. The best forecast
of the future needs but a brief review of
accomplishments in the past to note that
our U.S. engineers and scientists can
always achieve the proper answers when
confronted with the necessity of doing so.
The automotive industry in our United
States has, by sheer skill, ability, and
know-how, produced the best engineered
and best appearing automobiles in the
entire world. A method of controlling
exhaust gases so that they will not be
harmful to human health coupled with
the production of efficient automobiles
of pleasing design and style which at the
same time include safety devices for the
protection of everyone are but two of the
challenges that will be met successfully
through American ingenuity.
It is not my purpose or intention, Mr.
Speaker, to create any undue hardship
on the very important automotive indus-
try. I am convinced, however, Mr.
Speaker, that these matters to which I
have referred are essential in the public
interest and I am sure that these chal-
lenges can be and will be met because
such is the history of American ingenuity
and accomplishment.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker. I ask
unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to extend
their remarks.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
[p. 16080]
l.lc(3)(b) VOL. 106 (1960), May 26: Passed Senate, p. 11209
STUDY OP DISCHARGE OF SUB-
STANCES FROM EXHAUSTS OF
MOTOR VEHICLES
The bill (H.R. 8238) to authorize and
direct the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service to make a study and re-
port to Congress, from the standpoint of
the public health, of the discharge of
substances into the atmosphere from the
exhausts of motor vehicles was consid-
ered, ordered to a third reading, read the
third time, and passed.
[p. 11209]
-------
192 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
l.ld AMENDMENT OF ACT OF JULY 14, 1955
October 9, 1962, P.L. 87-761, 76 Stat. 760
AN ACT
To amend the Act of July 14, 1955, relating to air pollution control, to authorize
appropriations for an additional two-year period, and for other purposes
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That the first sentence of
section 5 of the Act entitled "An Act to provide research and technical
assistance relating to air pollution control", approved July 15, 1955,
as amended (42 U.S.C., sec. 1857d), is amended by striking out "nine
fiscal years during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and ending
June 30, 1964," and inserting in lieu thereof "eleven fiscal years
during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1966,".
SEC. 2. Section 3 of the Act entitled "An Act to provide research
and technical assistance relating to air pollution control", approved
July 15, 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C., sec. 1857b), is amended by
inserting "(a)" immediately after "SEC. 3.", and by adding at the
end thereof the following new subsection:
"(b) In view of the nationwide significance of the problems of air
pollution from motor vehicles, the Surgeon General shall conduct
studies of the amounts and kinds of substances discharged from the
exhausts of motor vehicles and of the effects of the discharge of such
substances, including the amounts and kinds of such substances which,
from the standpoint of human health, it is safe for motor vehicles to
discharge into the atmosphere."
Approved October 9, 1962.
[p. 760]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 193
l.ld(l) SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
S. REP. No. 1083, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961)
PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON AIR POLLUTION PROBLEMS
OF MORE THAN LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE UNDER, AND EXTEND
THE DURATION OF, THE FEDERAL AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
LAW, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
SEPTEMBER 18 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 16), 1961.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. KERR, from the Committee on Public Works, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 455]
The Committee on Public Works, to whom was referred the bill
(S. 455) to provide for public hearings on air pollution problems of
more than local significance under, and extend the duration of, the
Federal air pollution control law, and for other purposes, having con-
sidered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment, and
recommend that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 455, is to authorize the Surgeon General to make
investigations and to hold public hearings on air pollution problems
which are interstate in nature and are of broad significance.
GENERAL STATEMENT
Public Law 159, 84th Congress, approved July 14, 1955, authorized
a program for research and technical assistance to obtain data and
to devise and develop methods for control and abatement of air
pollution, by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and
the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. The act recognizes
the primary responsibilities and rights of the States, local govern-
ments, and other public agencies in controlling air polluiton, but
provides Federal grants-in-aid to those agencies concerned with air
pollution and control, to assist them in the formulation and execution
of their air pollution abatement research programs.
Under the provisions of the act, the Surgeon General is authorized
-------
194 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
to prepare or recommend research programs, and to encourage co-
opera-
[p.l]
tive activities, collect and disseminate information, conduct and
support research, and to make available to all agencies the results of
surveys, studies, and investigations, research and experiments relating
to air pollution and abatement. Reports of such studies as considered
desirable may be published from time to time by the Surgeon General,
together with appropriate recommendations.
The act authorized an appropriation of $5 million annually for each
of the fiscal years beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960.
In 1959 this act was amended to extend the duration of the Federal
air pollution control law to June 30, 1964.
Under this authorized program, approximately $2 million was ex-
pended in 1955; $1.7 million during fiscal year 1956; $2.7 million for
1957; $4 million for each of 1958 and 1959; $4.3 million for fiscal year
1960; $4.9 million for fiscal year 1961, and the request for fiscal year
1962 amounts to about $5 million. It is understood that additional
amounts are requested for fiscal year 1962 through other authoriza-
tions.
The Federal effort has contributed materially to difficult problems
of sampling, identifying, and measuring airborne contaminants, such
as the improvement of the methods of analyzing gaseous contaminants
present in the atmosphere of virtually every city.
Appraisal has been made of some important modern sources of urban
air pollution such as oil refineries, automobile exhausts, and combus-
tion processes, which are inevitable results of our increasing mechani-
zation and industrialization.
Studies of chemical, meteorological, and physical influences and of
atmosphere reactions are making available new knowledge that must
ultimately be required for proper and economical procedure for con-
trolling air pollution.
Scientists have generally concurred that a major source of fumes
which are ingredients of smog and pollution in most cities is the motor
vehicle, and that phase of the problem is under study on all fronts
including the automobile, and petroleum industry. The Federal Gov-
ernment has increased its work in this field, and will continue to
expedite the program for investigating the part that motor vehicle
exhaust and combustion play in the problem of atmospheric
contamination.
Health studies have developed evidence as to the effect of air
pollution on human health and well-being, creating much discomfort
from obstruction of breathing, and causing disease and even death.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 195
The Federal Government is not carrying this entire program alone,
as many agencies are participating in the attack on the air pollution
problem. In the great concern for the health of the American people,
this very acute problem must be recognized, together with the fact
that increased urbanization and industrialization will undoubtedly
produce new air pollution problems in the future.
DISCUSSION
When Public Law 159 was enacted, the committee acknowledged
that the desired aims and objectives envisioned under the program
could not be entirely accomplished within the authorized 5-year
period. Accordingly, in 1959, the act was amended to extend the
program to June 30, 1964, The committee is of the opinion that it
would be helpful to the program if it were extended for another
[p. 2]
period of years and accordingly recommends that it be extended to
June 30, 1966.
The committee is of the opinion that the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare could make a significant contribution by
exercising Federal leadership in dealing with air pollution problems
of broad significance. This contribution would result through the
development and publication of recommendations based on the evalua-
tion of data developed by the Department or presented by others, as
well as a full consideration of the points of view of all parties having a
significant interest in such problems. Some of these problems, al-
though essentially local in character, manifest themselves in many
communities throughout the Nation. Others involve pollution from
sources within one State which, through the movement of air masses,
affect communities in other States. Both types of problems can be
expected to increase in number and extent with further urbanization,
and the development of solutions for them may in many cases trans-
cend the capabilities of local agencies, and even of State control
authorities. The recommendations resulting from hearings would not
be binding upon the participants in the hearings or anyone else; the
purpose of the hearings would be simply to develop such recommenda-
tions as a means of focusing public attention on and developing sup-
port for the most carefully considered solutions to the problems which
occasioned the hearings.
The committee believes that enactment of S. 455 would serve a
very useful purpose and accordingly recommends its passage.
-------
196 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with subsection (4) of rule XXIX of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as
reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted
is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
Public Law 159—84th Congress
Chapter 360—1st Session
and
as amended by Public Law 365—86th Congress 1st session
AN ACT To provide research and technical assistance relating to air pollution
control
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That in recognition of the
dangers to the public health and welfare, injury to agricultural crops
and livestock, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards
to air and ground transportation, from air pollution, it is hereby de-
clared to be the policy of Congress to preserve and protect the primary
responsibilities and rights of the States and local governments in
controlling air pollution, to support and aid technical research to
devise and develop methods of abating such pollution, and to provide
Federal technical services and financial aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies and other public or private agencies
and institutions in the formulation and execution of their
[p. 3]
air pollution abatement research programs. To this end, the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the
Public Health Service (under the supervision and direction of the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare), shall have the authority
relating to air pollution control vested in them respectively by this Act.
SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful investi-
gation and in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State
and local government air pollution control agencies, with other public
and private agencies and institutions, and with the industries involved,
to prepare or recommend research programs for devising and develop-
ing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For the purpose
of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to make joint
investigations with any such agencies or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities
by State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of
air pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 197
pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in
the Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State
and local government air pollution control agencies, and other public
and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; and (4)
make available to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, other public and private agencies and institutions, and
industries, the results of surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and abate-
ment thereof.
SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may[, upon request of any State or
local government air pollution control agency,] conduct investigations
and research and make surveys concerning any specific problem of air
pollution confronting [such State or local government air pollution
control agency] any State or local government air pollution control
agency with a view to recommending a solution of such problem but
only if requested to do so by such State or local government air pollution
control agency or if, in his judgment, such problem may affect or be of
concern to communities in various parts of the Nation or may affect any
community or communities in a State other than that in which the matter
causing or contributing to the pollution originated.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time
to time reports of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments made under the authority of this Act as he may consider
desirable, together with appropriate recommendations with regard to
the control of air pollution.
SEC. 5. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the [nine
fiscal years during the period beginning July, 1955, and ending June
30, 1964 not to exceed $5,000,000] eleven fiscal years beginning July 1,
1955, and ending June 30, 1966, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it
to carry out its functions under this Act and, in furtherance of the
policy declared in the first section of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-
aid to State and local government air pollution control agencies, and
other public and private agencies and institutions, and to individuals,
for surveys and studies and for research, training, and
[p. 4]
demonstration projects, and (2) enter into contracts with public and
private agencies and institutions and individuals for surveys and
studies and for research, training, and demonstration projects. Such
grants-in-aid and contracts may be made without regard to sections
3648 and 3709 of the Revised Statutes. Sums appropriated for such
grants-in-aid and contracts shall remain available until expended, and
-------
198 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
shall be allotted in accordance with regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
SEC. 6. (a) Whenever, on the basis of reports, surveys, or studies, he
believes it appropriate, or whenever requested by any State or local govern-
ment air pollution control agency, the Surgeon General may call a public
hearing on any problem of air pollution which may affect or be of concern
to communities in various parts of the Nation or which may affect any
community or communities in any State other than the State in which the
matter causing or contributing to the pollution originates. Any such
hearing shall be conducted before a board composed of not less than five
me appointed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare,
wh I be representative of the public, industry which is affected by or
concerned with the problem, persons who are expert or have special knowl-
edge in the matter, interested Federal agencies, and interested State or
local government air pollution control agencies.
(b) Subject to regulations of the Surgeon General, an opportunity to be
heard at such hearing shall be accorded to all interested persons.
(c) After consideration of the information presented at the hearing and
such other information as is available to it, the board shall make a report
and recommendations to the Surgeon General on such matters as the
existence, cause, and effect of the air pollution on which the hearing was
held, progress toward its abatement, and other related matters. Such
report and recommendations, together with the comments and recommenda-
tions, if any, of the Surgeon General with respect thereto, shall be available
to the community or communities, Government agencies, and industries
concerned and, to the extent the Surgeon General deems appropriate, to
the public, but shall not be binding on any person, agency, or organization.
SEC. [6.1 7. When used in this Act—
(a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the State
health authority, except that in the case of any State in which there
is a single State agency other than the State health authority charged
with responsibility for enforcing State laws relating to the abatement
of air pollution, it means such other State agency;
(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency"
means a city, county, or other local government health authority,
except that in the case of any city, county, or other local government
in which there is a single agency other than the health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating
to the abatement of air pollution, it means such other agency; and
(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
SEC. [7.1 8. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority
of any department or agency of the United States to conduct or make
grants-in-aid or contracts for research and experiments relating to air
pollution under the authority of any other law.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 199
SEC. [8.1 9. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress
that any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any
building, installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable
[p. 5]
and consistent with the interests of the United States and within any
available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and within any interstate agency or any
State or local government air pollution control agency in preventing
or controlling the pollution of the air in any area insofar as the dis-
charge of any matter from or by such property may cause or contribute
to pollution of the air in such area.
[p. 6]
l.ld(2) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE
AND FOREIGN COMMERCE
H.R. REP. No. 2265, 87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962)
EXTENDING THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
AUGUST 23, 1962.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama, from the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 12833]
•
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 12833) to amend the act of July 14, 1955,
relating to air pollution control, to authorize appropriations for an
additional 2-year period, and for other purposes, having considered
the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recom-
mend that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION
The purposes of H.R. 12833 are to extend the time limitation on
authorized appropriation of the present Air Pollution Control Act
(Public Law 159, 84th Cong., as amended by Public Law 86-365) for
2 years; provide continued emphasis by the Surgeon General for
526-701 O - 73 - 15
-------
200 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
studies on the effects of motor vehicle exhausts, including human
health. Specific activities in this field have been conducted under
Public Law 86-493.
Public Law 159, 84th Congress, approved July 14,1955, authorized
a program for research and technical assistance to obtain data and to
devise and develop methods for control and abatement of air pollution,
by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service. The act recognizes the primary
responsibilities and rights of the States, local governments, in con-
trolling air pollution, but provides Federal grants-in-aid to those
agencies concerned with air pollution and control, to assist them in
the formulation and execution of their air pollution abatement research
programs.
Under the provisions of the act, the Surgeon General is authorized
to prepare or recommend research programs, and to encourage cooper-
ative activities, collect and disseminate information, conduct and
[p-i]
support research, and to make available to all agencies the results of
surveys, studies, and investigations, research and experiments relating
to air pollution and abatement. Reports of such studies as considered
desirable may be published from time to time by the Surgeon General,
together with appropriate recommendations.
The act authorized an appropriation of $5 million annually for
each of the fiscal years beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30,
1960. In 1959 this act was amended to extend the duration of the
Federal air pollution control law to June 30,1964.
Public Law 86-493 approved June 8, 1960, directed the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service to give special emphasis and
priority to the role of motor vehicle exhaust gases in the general
problem of air pollution and specifically as to the effect of such ex-
hausts on human health. A report by the Surgeon General was re-
quired within 2 years after the date of the enactment of the act.
Under the program authorization of these acts and sections 301 and
311 of the Public Health Service Act, approximately $200,000 was
expended in 1955 for air pollution research and technical assistance;
$1.7 million during fiscal year 1956; $2.7 million for 1957; $4 million
for each of 1958 and 1959; $4.3 million for 1960; $6 million for 1961;
$8.4 million for 1962; and for fiscal year 1963 it is anticipated the
expenditures will approximate $11 million.
HISTORY OF THE LEGISLATION
Air pollution is a serious national problem. In the future, unless
appropriate action is taken, the problem will increase greatly because
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 201
of further industrial growth and concentration of population in urban
areas. Our Nation's technological society produces great material
benefits for the people, but also creates, as byproducts, potential prob-
lems of contamination of our environment. Air pollution is not a
temporary problem, but one which will require continuing attention.
Continuing research and control efforts will be necessary if major
adverse effects on the public health and welfare are to be prevented.
It is a significant public health problem and Federal, State, and local
governments are spending large sums to study and control it. Industry
likewise has spent millions on research and abatement. Great progress
has been made but the problem is far from solved. In fact the blight
of air pollution, especially resulting from automotive exhaust gases,
has become a real menace to all urban areas.
The problem of air pollution has been under consideration by the
Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce for many years. In
1955, your committee reported favorably on the basic legislation
establishing the Federal air pollution research and technical assist-
ance program (Public Law 159, 84th Cong.).
In 1956, the special Subcommittee on Traffic Safety of this commit-
tee made a study of noxious, toxic, and harmful motor vehicle exhaust
fumes in connection with a comprehensive investigation of highway
traffic safety. Testimony was taken and research activities of the
industry were studied on visits to manufacturing plants.
Hearings have been held by the Health and Safety Subcommittee
of this committee in 1958, 1959, and 1960 on various bills concerned
with extension of the Federal air pollution program and on the progress
being made in air pollution control, particularly with regard to motor
vehicle exhausts.
[p. 2]
In 1959, the committee reported favorably on legislation to extend
the Federal air pollution program (Public Law 86-365) and in 1960,
a favorable committee report was made on a bill requiring increased
emphasis on research into the motor vehicle exhaust problem and a
report to Congress on the results of such investigations (Public Law
86-493).
The executive branch of Government has also recognized the air
pollution problem and in 1954, at the request of President Eisenhower,
the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare appointed an ad hoc
Interdepartmental Committee on Community Air Pollution. In Janu-
ary 1955, the President stated in his special health message that—
As a result of industrial growth and urban development, the
atmosphere over some population centers may be approaching
the limit of its ability to absorb air pollutants with safety to
-------
202 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
health. I am recommending an increased appropriation to the
Public Health Service for studies seeking necessary scientific
data and more effective methods of control.
More recently President Kennedy stated in his message on natural
resources in February 1961 that—
We need an effective Federal air pollution control program now.
For although the total supply of air is vast, the atmosphere over
our growing metropolitan areas—where more than half the people
live—has only limited capacity to dilute and disperse the con-
taminants now being increasingly discharged from homes, fac-
tories, vehicles, and many other sources.
• In his message on the health program in that same month he provided
more specific recommendations for air pollution legislation which
would accelerate efforts in this field. He recommended that Congress
enact legislation to "strengthen the Federal effort to prevent air
pollution, a growing and serious problem in many areas," by pro-
viding—
(a) authority for an adequate research program on the causes,
effects, and control of air pollution, (6) project grants and techni-
cal assistance to State and local air pollution control agencies to
assist in the development and initiation or improvement of pro-
grams to safeguard the quality of air, and (c) authority to con-
duct studies and hold public conferences concerning any air
pollution problem of interstate nature or of significance to com-
munities in different parts of the Nation.
GENERAL STATEMENT
With the passage of Public Law 159, air pollution activities in the
Public Health Service were conducted, starting in 1955, within two
separate organizational units—the air pollution engineering program
and the air pollution medical program. The interrelationships of the
engineering and health aspects of air pollution as developed by these
programs pointed out the value of closest possible coordination of their
activities. Consequently, in 1960, the Public Health Service strength-
ened the activity by combining the two programs into a single Division
of Air Pollution which has provided a more comprehensive, inter-
disciplinary approach to research, technical assistance
[p. 3]
and training, and a simplified and more effective mechanism for work-
ing with other agencies, industry, universities, and other interested
organizations and individuals.
In recognition of the urgency of many air pollution problems, the
Public Health Service, immediately after enactment of Public Law
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 203
159, began utilizing, through research grants and contracts, the re-
sources and capabilities of universities and other institutions to ex-
plore the nature of and the means for coping with such problems.
Cooperative activities with other Federal agencies such as the Bureau
of Mines, the Weather Bureau, and the Department of Agriculture
having interests and specialized skills in this field were likewise in-
augurated and have continued.
Accomplishments of the program, in the short period since its
establishment, have been noteworthy. Working with the Weather
Bureau, a great deal has been learned about the influence of meteoro-
logical factors on the buildup or dispersion of airborne contaminants.
A program for continuous surveillance of weather to forecast periods
of widespread air stagnation has been in effect since 1960. This pro-
vides local health agencies and other appropriate authorities with
advance notice of atmospheric conditions for which protective mea-
sures might be indicated.
A national air sampling network has been established which is
providing needed information on the composition and concentrations
of pollutants in the air in various parts of the country. Data obtained
are of inestimable value to State and local air pollution control agen-
cies, as well as to the Public Health Service.
Morbidity and mortality surveys have brought forth impressive
evidence of the relationships of polluted air to various forms of cardio-
respiratory disease. A strong statistical association has been shown,
for example, between air pollution and emphysema. The sharply
rising death rate ascribed to this disease is a matter of real concern.
The evidence developed with respect to production of lung cancer is
such as to require further study as expeditiously as feasible.
Laboratory studies of mechanisms of physiological response to vari-
ous forms of air pollutants have yielded valuable information for
appraisal of health effects to be anticipated from various levels of
pollution. Field studies and special surveys in many areas of the Na-
tion have produced findings which are being correlated with such
laboratory research.
As directed by Public Law 86-493, special efforts have been devoted
to the problems associated with the emissions from motor vehicles.
A comprehensive report on this subject submitted, as directed, to the
Congress in June 1962, is being printed as House of Representatives
Document 489 in order to make this valuable contribution widely
available.
In the report, it is pointed out that, while the precise role of motor
vehicle emissions in producing adverse effects is far from fully defined,
it is known that photochemical reactions in the air result in the forma-
tion of many highly reactive substances which could be more injurious
-------
204 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
than those originally emitted. Vegetation damage from photochemical
reaction products has been demonstrated in the laboratory. Damage
of the same type is found in many areas of the United States. In
these localities, the presence of the suspected agents has been con-
firmed by measurements.
[p. 4]
The significance of photochemical reactions is further emphasized
by laboratory studies showing irradiated exhaust to produce more
marked effects on experimental animals than does unirradiated
exhaust.
In carrying out the duties specified by Public Law 84-159 and
Public Law 86-493, the Federal Government has sought successfully
to further man's knowledge of the causes, effects, and control of air
pollution. An important consequence of these efforts has been the
development, both in and out of Government, of an increasing reser-
voir of trained individuals and of equipment and facilities for tackling
the air pollution problems of today and tomorrow. The need for
further development and utilization of these resources is great. The
problem will be even greater in the near future as the increasing popu-
lation, the greater urbanization, and the expansion of industrialization
place ever greater strains on our limited air resources.
Pressures for the development of adequate air quality standards
will continue to increase. As yet these are virtually nonexistent,
despite the need of industry and Government for such criteria as a
basis for more rational design of control procedures.
Production of acceptable criteria must await, for most air con-
taminants, additional knowledge of their measurement and further
evaluation of their effects, whether these be on the health or comfort
of man, the corrosion of the structures in which he works and lives,
or the destruction of the vegetation he grows for utilitarian or decora-
tive purposes. Research will be required, not only on the health effects
of specific pollutants, singly or in particular combinations, but also
on the relationship and relative significance of such effects to other
environmental factors which may influence health and well-being.
Despite the need for further knowledge and for development of
acceptable criteria, much can be done at the present time through a
more effective utilization of information already on hand. This re-
quires the establishment of appropriate agencies to promote such
utilization.
The Public Health Service has attempted to bring about the practi-
cal application of scientific information developed for the elimination
or reduction of air pollution. This has been carried out through various
forms of technical assistance. Training programs of considerable
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 205
variety and scope have provided means for State and local control
agencies and industry to develop personnel knowledgeable in the
methods for dealing with air pollution. Technical publications have
been prepared to further help achieve these objectives. Consultation
and assistance have been provided to existing State and local air
pollution control agencies, and in the development of new programs.
On the State level, during the past decade, there has been improve-
ment in the development of comprehensive programs dealing with
problems in this area. Some 15 States now have enactments which
authorize specific programs, whereas no State had such authorization
in 1950.
According to a recent survey, there are only 106 local control pro-
grams which have full-time staffs. These programs serve 342 local
political jurisdictions, which contain about 45 percent of the national
urban population. Only 28 of these control programs have five or
more full-time employees.
Air pollution problems are not limited to communities. Farmers too
are affected. Vegetation damage from air pollution is now estimated
to run as high as $500 million annually.
[p-5]
COMMITTEE HEARINGS
The Subcommittee on Health and Safety conducted hearings on
June 25, 1962, on a number of bills aimed at extending the authoriza-
tion of Public Law 159 of the 84th Congress and expending the
authority of the Public Health Service under the provisions of that
legislation. The bills are as follows: H.R. 747 and H.R. 1189 by
Mr. McDonough, H.R. 2948 by Mr. Shelley, H.R. 3577 by Mr.
Roosevelt, H.R. 9347 and H.R. 10615 by Mr. Halpern, H.R. 9352
and H.R. 11524 by Mr. Gorman, H.R. 10519 by Mr. Roberts of
Alabama, and S. 455, passed by the Senate during the first session of
the 87th Congress. As a result of these hearings, a clean bill was in-
troduced by Mr. Roberts of Alabama (H.R. 12833).
CONCLUSION
This legislation (H.R. 12833) accomplishes two purposes, the first
of which is to extend the existing law with respect to air pollution for
an additional period of 2 years subject to all of the conditions and
limitations which have heretofore applied to this program.
The second purpose is to enact into permanent law a requirement
that the Surgeon General specifically conduct studies on motor vehicle
exhaust as it affects human health through the pollution of air. The
committee believes this requirement should be made permanent law
-------
206 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
as the result of the special 2-year study and investigation conducted
pursuant to Public Law 86-493. The report on this study is now being
printed as House Document No. 489.
The committee urges that the bill as reported do pass.
AGENCY REPORTS
The reports on several of the bills on which hearings were held as a
result of which a clean bill, H.R. 12833 was introduced, are as follows:
Department of Labor, Department of the Interior, Federal Aviation
Agency, Department of Agriculture, Comptroller General of the
United States, Bureau of the Budget, Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, Department of the Army, and the Secretary of
Commerce.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, June 22, 1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR CONGRESSMAN HARRIS: This is in further response to your
request for the views of the Department of Labor on H.R. 10519, a
bill to extend and strengthen the Federal air pollution control program.
We strongly urge the enactment of H.R. 10519 which is the ad-
ministration's proposal for strengthening the Federal effort to prevent
air pollution.
Earlier this year President Kennedy called attention to the problem
of air pollution in his special message on health care and also in his
conservation message. As the President pointed out, pollution of the
air we breathe is a growing and serious problem in many areas;
[p. 6]
since fresh air can neither be piped into cities nor stored for future
use, our only protection is to prevent pollution. The President drew
a parallel between legislation needed in the field of air pollution and
the legislation passed last year by Congress to enable us to accelerate
our efforts to combat water pollution.
We believe that the proposals contained in H.R. 10519 would be
of great benefit to labor and industry, as well as to the general public.
We prefer, however, to leave detailed discussion of its provisions to
those agencies primarily concerned with its administration.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 207
presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's
program.
Yours sincerely,
ARTHUR J. GOLDBERG,
Secretary of Labor.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, D.C., June 29, 1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of
Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. HARRIS: There is pending before your committee H.R.
10519, a bill to extend and strengthen the Federal air pollution control
program.
We recommend the enactment of the bill.
As the title of the bill states, it is intended to extend and strengthen
the present Federal air pollution control program. The bill provides
for air pollution prevention and technological source control activities
within the Federal Government wherever these can be provided by
available resources. The Department of the Interior has been active
in air pollution abatement research and investigations since before
1912, in which year its Bureau of Mines published three bulletins on
causes and means of preventing smoke emissions from coal burning
equipment. Publications followed shortly that recorded work of the
Bureau of Mines on control of fumes from metallurgical processes and
on developing adequate ventilation standards for automotive vehicular
tunnels. Through the years that followed until mid-1954, during which
period the major assigned Federal responsibilities regarding air pollu-
tion were concentrated within this Department, a long and impressive
list of achievements and their documenting publications was developed
by the Bureau of Mines.
Since 1955, this Department has been pleased to cooperate, through
its Bureau of Mines, in the Federal air pollution abatement program
that became a primary responsibility of the Public Health Service
under Public Law 84-159. The Bureau of Mines air pollution interests
center around technologic developments for the control of the sources
of pollution which result from the production, processing and utiliza-
tion of minerals, mineral fuels and their products. Bureau research on
automobile and diesel engine exhaust has materially contributed to
the knowledge on this subject. Research on the problem of reducing
air pollution from thermal powerplants and other indus-
[P-V]
-------
208 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
trial, fuel-burning installations has provided much needed new in-
formation on the development of economic means for reducing the
concentration of sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen in the effluent
gases from the stack.
We favor the enactment of H.R. 10519 because we believe there is
a need for increased emphasis on air pollution abatement and because
the bill provides the means and encouragement for the Surgeon Gen-
eral to utilize fully the resources available to him from agencies such
as our own that have much to offer to the Federal program of air
pollution abatement.
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to
the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administra-
tion's program.
Sincerely yours,
JOHN A. CARVER, JR.,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior.
FEDERAL AVIATION AGENCY,
Washington, D.C., June 28,1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House, of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of March 6,
1962, for the views of this Agency with respect to H.R. 10519, a bill
to extend and strengthen the Federal air pollution control program.
This proposal recognizes the need for national leadership in the
development of cooperative Federal, State, and local programs for
the prevention and control of air pollution by: (a) Encouraging inter-
state compacts for the prevention and control of air pollution; (6)
authorizing the Surgeon General to make grants to air pollution con-
trol agencies and to others for research, and for the development and
initiation, or improvement of programs for the prevention of air pollu-
tion; (c) permitting the Surgeon General to initiate research and to
make surveys concerning any specific problem of air pollution.
Authority is afforded the Surgeon General to call a public conference
on any problem of air pollution, to be conducted by a five member
board, and at which interested persons shall be afforded a hearing.
The board shall make an advisory report and recommendations to the
Surgeon General with respect to the air pollution problem under
consideration.
This Agency defers to the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare in that it is the Department primarily concerned with the
subject of the proposal.
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 209
from the standpoint of the administration's program to the submission
of this report to your committee.
Sincerely,
N. E. HALABY, Administrator.
[p. 8]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, D.C., June 22, 1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : Thank you for your letter of March 6,1962,
giving us the opportunity to report on House bill 10519. The bill is
entitled "To extend and strengthen the Federal Air Pollution Control
Program."
The bill would extend and strengthen the present Air Pollution
Control Act (Public Law 159, 84th Cong.) as amended (42 U.S.C.
1857-1857g). H.R. 10519 includes the substantive provisions of the
current Air Pollution Control Act and additional provisions which
would add to or modify certain aspects of the current act.
This Department favors the enactment of H.R. 10519 as it is in
accord with the President's message regarding legislation needed to
strengthen the Federal effort to prevent air pollution relative to a
health program.
This Department has a direct interest in the abatement of air
pollution. Individuals who produce, handle, process, and market farm
and forest products, including animals, crop plants, and forest trees
upon which this country depends for food, fiber, shelter, and other
materials, are affected adversely by air pollutants. Adverse effects
include not only the impairment of health and comfort to the in-
dividual but also normal growth and development of farm animals
and plants and of forest trees.
Air pollution, especially from effluents containing fluorine, sulfur
and other compounds and combustion products, has been demon-
strated to cause extensive crop, livestock, and forest damage. This
Department has authority and will undertake such research and other
appropriate action in the abatement of air pollution affecting agricul-
ture as the relative importance of such problems make it necessary to
include funds for them in budget requests.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the
presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's
program.
Sincerely yours,
ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, Secretary.
-------
210 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, April 13, 1962.
B-135945
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Your letter of March 13, 1962, requests our
comments on H.R. 10519, a bill to extend and strengthen the Federal
air pollution control program.
Since we have no particular information concerning the desirability
of the proposed legislation we make no recommendations concerning
the merits of the bill, however, the following comments are offered
for your consideration.
[p-9]
The bill is similar in many respects to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 466), which originally vested authority under
that act in the Surgeon General. Public Law 87-88, approved July 20,
1961, amended that act and transferred the authority contained there-
in to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. Concerning
the desirability of such transfer of authority, the House Committee
on Public Works stated, at page 4 of House Report No. 306, 87th
Congress, in part as follows:
"* * * During public hearings the committee heard testimony favor-
ing the establishment of a Federal Water Pollution Control Ad-
ministration in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
The President has urged the establishment of a 'special unit' in the
Public Health Service to administer both air and water pollution con-
trol programs.
"The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, recognizing the
need to upgrade pollution control activities in his Department, asked
the committee for '* * * time to take a complete fresh look at the
situation and the various proposals for dealing with it.'
"In order to give the Secretary complete flexibility in effectuating
his decision relating to the proper administrative status of this pro-
gram the bill approved by the committee would transfer responsibility
for the administration of the Federal water pollution control program
from the Surgeon General to the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare.
"This action is in conformity with recommendation No. 14 of the
first report of the Hoover Commission on Organization of the Execu-
tive Branch of the Government (H. Doc. 55, 81st Cong.) which states:
"'Under the President, the heads of departments must hold full
responsibility for the conduct of their departments. There must be a
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 211
clear line of authority reaching down through every step of the or-
ganization and no -subordinate shall have authority independent from
that of his superior.'"
In view of this recent action by the Congress on water pollution
control legislation, your committee may wish to revise the present
bill to also vest authority for air pollution control in the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare.
Section 4(b)(6) of the bill provides for the establishment and main-
tenance of research fellowships. This section is similar to research
fellowships provided by section 4 (a) (4) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 466c(a)(4)) except that under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act reports must be furnished to the Con-
gress on the operations thereunder. Your committee may wish to
consider whether similar reports should be required on operations
under section 4(b)(6) of the bill.
No provision is made in the bill to require a grantee to keep adequate
cost records of the projects or undertakings to which the Federal
Government makes financial contributions, or to authorize the Sur-
geon General or the Comptroller General to have access to the gran-
tee's records for purposes of audit and examination. In view of the
increase in grant programs over the last several years, we believe that
in order to determine whether grant funds have been expended for the
purpose for which the grant was made, the grantee should be required
by law to keep records which would fully disclose the disposition of
those funds. We believe also that the agency as well as the General
Accounting Office should be permitted to have access to the
[p. 10]
grantee's records for the purpose of audit and examination. We
suggest, therefore, that a new section be added to the bill as follows:
"RECORDS AND AUDIT"
"(a) Each recipient of assistance under this Act shall keep such
records as the Surgeon General shall prescribe, including records
which fully disclose the amount and disposition by such recipient of
the proceeds of such assistance, the total cost of the project or under-
taking in connection with which such assistance is given or used, and
the amount of that portion of the cost of the project or undertaking
supplied by other sources, and such other records as will facilitate an
effective audit.
"(b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the
Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly author-
ized representatives, shall have access for the purpose of audit and
-------
212 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
examination to any books, documents, papers, and records of the
recipients that are pertinent to the grants received under this Act."
We would also favor the addition of a like section as an amendment
to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Language similar to
that suggested above is contained in H.R. 132, 87th Congress, re-
ported by your committee August 21, 1961, and in section 25 of the
Area Redevelopment Act, Public Law 87-27, approved May 1, 1961.
Sincerely yours,
JOSEPH CAMPBELL,
Comptroller General of the United States.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., March 28, 1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate, and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your request of March
6, 1962, for the views of the Bureau of the Budget on H.R. 10519, a
bill to extend and strengthen the Federal air pollution control pro-
gram.
This bill includes the substantive provisions of the current Air
Pollution Control Act and would add to or modify the current act by:
(a) recognition of the need for the Federal Government to
provide national leadership;
(b) authorization to the Surgeon General to make project
grants of limited duration to State and local air pollution control
agencies for the development, initiation, or improvement of con-
trol programs;
(c) consent of the Congress to the negotiation of agreements or
compacts by two or more States for cooperative effort and mutual
assistance, and for the establishment of agencies to effectuate
such agreements or compacts;
(d) authorization to the Surgeon General to detail, upon re-
quest, personnel to air pollution control agencies;
(e) authorization to the Surgeon General to conduct studies on
his own initiative and to make recommendations concerning any
[p. 11]
air pollution problem of interstate nature or of significance to, or
typical of air pollution problems confronting, communities in
different parts of the Nation;
(/) authorization to the Surgeon General to call a public con-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 213
ference, on his own initiative or upon request of any air pollution
control agency, for voluntary formal expression of views by
interested persons on any problem of air pollution which is of
concern to communities in various parts of the Nation, or which
is of interstate nature;
(gf) elimination of the time limitation (June 30, 1964) and $5
million ceiling on annual appropriations.
This proposed legislation was prepared by the administration and
would carry out the recommendation for strengthening the Federal
effort to prevent and control air pollution contained in the President's
message to the Congress on February 27, 1962, on health programs.
I am authorized to advise you that the enactment of H.R. 10519
would be in accord with the program of the President.
Sincerely yours,
PHILLIP S. HUGHES,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
Washington, March lit, 1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your request for a
report on H.R. 10519, a bill to extend and strengthen the Federal air
pollution control program.
H.R. 10519 embodies the administration's proposals in the area of
air pollution. In the form of a draft bill it was transmitted by this
Department to the Speaker of the House of Representatives on
February 27, 1962, and was referred to your committee on March 1.
For the reasons given in our letter to the Speaker in support of the
bill we recommend its early enactment.
Sincerely,
ABRAHAM A. RIBICOFF, Secretary.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
Washington, June 22, 1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your request to the
Secretary of Defense for the views of the Department of Defense with
respect to H.R. 10519, 87th Congress, a bill to extend and strengthen
-------
214 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
the Federal air pollution control program. The Secretary of Defense
has delegated to the Department of the Army the responsibility for
expressing the views of the Department of Defense thereon.
The purpose of H.R. 10519 is to extend and strengthen the Federal
air pollution control program by adding to the substance of the exist-
ing Federal air pollution control program, aiithorized in title 42,
United States Code, provisions which would do the following:
[p. 12]
(a) recognize the responsibility of the Federal Government to
provide national leadership;
(b) authorize the Surgeon General to make grants of limited
duration to air pollution control agencies for the development,
initiation, or improvement of air pollution control programs (as
distinct from his present authority to award grants-in-aid and
contracts for research, training, and demonstration projects);
(c) give consent of the Congress to the negotiation of agree-
ments or compacts by two or more States for the establishment
of agencies to effectuate such agreements or compacts;
(d) authorize the Surgeon General to detail, upon request,
personnel to air pollution control agencies;
(e) authorize the Surgeon General to conduct studies on his
own initiative, as well as on request from an air pollution control
agency, and to make recommendations, concerning any air pollu-
tion problem of an interstate nature or of significance to, or
typical of air pollution problems confronting, communities in
different parts of the Nation;
(/) eliminate the time limitation (June 30, 1964) and $5 million
ceiling on annual appropriations.
The bill also contains a disclaimer of any intention to limit the
functions of any Federal agency under any other provision of law
relating to air pollution, which disclaimer appears to be at least as
broad as the disclaimer already contained in section 1857 (f) of title 42,
United States Code.
The Department of the Army on behalf of the Department of
Defense has considered the above-mentioned bill. The Department of
Defense recognizes the danger to public health and welfare from air
pollution and supports air pollution abatement programs to the full
extent commensurate with military security. To this end, the Depart-
ment of Defense cooperates by making available unclassified results
of research into the general control of air pollution for the benefit of
the public. In the light of the above, and of the disclaimer adverted to
in the preceding paragraph, the Department of the Army on behalf
of the Department of Defense interposes no objection to subject bill.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 215
Enactment of this legislation will cause no apparent increase in
budgetary requirements of the Department of Defense.
This report has been coordinated within the Department of Defense
in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the
administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of
this report for the consideration of the committee.
Sincerely yours,
ELVIS J. STAHR, Jr.,
Secretary of the Army.
[p. 13]
THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE,
Washington, D.C., July 6, 1962.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in reply to your request for
the views of this Department with respect to H.R. 10519, a bill to
extend and strengthen the Federal air pollution control program.
This bill was submitted to the Congress by the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare and would carry out the recommenda-
tions made by the President in his special health message. Among
other things the bill would direct the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service, under the supervision and direction of the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare to—
(1) Assure the utilization in the Federal air pollution control
program of all appropriate and available facilities and resources
within the Federal Government through a program of cooperative
activities.
(2) Encourage the States and local governments in the preven-
tion and control of air pollution.
(3) Conduct research, and encourage the conduct of research
through financial assistance, in air pollution through grants, con-
tracts, training, research fellowships, cooperative activities and
the collection and dissemination of information pertaining to the
prevention and control of air pollution.
(4) Make grants of limited duration to air pollution control
agencies.
(5) Conduct investigations, research, and studies into air pollu-
tion problems if requested to do so by an air pollution control
agency or if, in his judgment, such problems are of broad national
interest or interstate in character.
526-701 O - 73 - 16
-------
216 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(6) Call a public conference on any problem of air pollution
which is interstate in nature or is otherwise of national
significance.
(7) Elimination of the time limitation (June 30, 1964) and $5
million ceiling on annual appropriations.
This Department has consistently supported a vigorous Federal
program in air pollution since its inception 1955. Air pollution affects
every segment of our life and economy. It causes large monetary
losses due to corrosion and soiling; it demonstrably affects our weather
now and, may present a serious geophysical problem in the future.
These important effects are in addition to the health burden placed
on our population. This Department, through its Weather Bureau
and its National Bureau of Standards, has an interest in, and can
make contributions to, better solutions of the total air pollution
problem.
Section 3 (a) relating to cooperative activities recognizes the interest
of other Federal departments and agencies in air pollution. It would
require the Surgeon General to encourage cooperative activities with
departments and agencies having functions relating to the prevention
and control of air pollution so as to assure utilization of all appropriate
and available Federal facilities and resources in the air pollution con-
trol program. We believe that a continuing, integrated, Federal pro-
gram
[p. 14]
which utilizes the valuable competence in the various Federal depart-
ments and agencies is essential in order to combat the increasing air
pollution problem.
This Department favors the enactment of this legislation.
The Bureau of the Budget advised that there would be no objection
to the submission of this report from the standpoint of the administra-
tion's program. The Bureau further advised that enactment of this
legislation would be in accord with the program of the President.
Sincerely yours,
EDWARD GUDEMAN,
Under Secretary of Commerce.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as re-
ported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is
enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italics, existing
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 217
ACT OF JULY 14, 1955
AN ACT To provide research and technical assistance relating to air pollution
control
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That in recognition of the
dangers to the public health and welfare, injury to agricultural crops
and livestock, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards
to air and ground transportation, from air pollution, it is hereby de-
clared to be the policy of Congress to preserve and protect the primary
responsibilities and rights of the States and local governments in
controlling air pollution, to support and aid technical research to
devise and develop methods of abating such pollution, and to provide
Federal technical services and financial aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies and other public or private agen-
cies and institutions in the formulation and execution of their air
pollution abatement research programs. To this end, the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service (under the supervision and direction of the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare) shall have the authority relating
to air pollution control vested in them respectively by this Act.
SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful in-
vestigation and in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with
State and local government air pollution control agencies, with other
public and private agencies and institutions, and with the industries
involved, to prepare or recommend research programs for devising
and developing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For
the purpose of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to
make joint investigations with any such agencies or institutions.
(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities
by State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of
air pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air
[p. 15]
pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in
the Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State
and local government air pollution control agencies, and other public
and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; and
(4) make available to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, other public and private agencies and institutions, and in-
dustries, the results of surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and abatement
thereof.
-------
218 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
SEC. 3. (a) The Surgeon General may, upon request of any State or
local government air pollution control agency, conduct investigations
and research and make surveys concerning any specific problem of air
pollution confronting such State or local government air pollution
control agency with a view to recommending a solution of such
problem.
(b) In view of the nationwide significance of the problems of air pollu-
tion from motor vehicles, the Surgeon General shall conduct studies of the
amounts and kinds of substances discharged from the exhausts of motor
vehicles and of the effects of the discharge of such substances, including
the amounts and kinds of such substances which, from the standpoint of
human health, it is safe for motor vehicles to discharge into the atmosphere.
SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time
to time reports of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments made under the authority of this Act as he may consider
desirable, together with appropriate recommendations with regard to
the control of air pollution.
SEC. 5. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the [ninej
eleven fiscal years during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and ending
June 30, (19641 1966, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it to carry
out its functions under this Act and, in furtherance of the policy
declared in the first section of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to
State and local government air pollution control agencies, and other
public and private agencies and institutions, and to individuals, for
surveys and studies and for research, training, and demonstration
projects, and (2) enter into contracts with public and private agencies
and institutions and individuals for surveys and studies and for re-
search, training, and demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and
contracts may be made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of
the Revised Statutes. Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid and
contracts shall remain available until expended, and shall be allotted
in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare.
SEC. 6. When used in this Act—
(a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the State
health authority, except that in the case of any State in which there
is a single State agency other than the State health authority charged
with responsibility for enforcing State laws relating to the abatement
of air pollution, it means such other State agency;
(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency"
means a city, county, or other local government health authority,
except that in the case of any city, county, or other local government
[p. 16]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 219
in which there is a single agency other than the health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating
to the abatement of air pollution, it means such other agency; and
(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority of
any department or agency of the United States to conduct or make
grants-in-aid or contracts for research and experiments relating to
air pollution under the authority of any other law.
SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress that
any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any
building, installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable
and consistent with the interests of the United States and within any
available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency or any State
or local government air pollution control agency in preventing or
controlling the pollution of the air in any area insofar as the discharge
of any matter from or by such property may cause or contribute to
pollution of the air in such area.
[p. 17]
-------
220
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Lid (3) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
l.ld(3)(a) VOL. 107 (1961), Sept. 20: Passed Senate, pp. 20417-20418
HEARINGS ON AND EXTENSION
OF FEDERAL AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL LAW
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I move
that the Senate proceed to the consider-
ation of Calendar No. 1063, S. 455.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. The bill will be stated by title.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (S.
455) to provide for public hearings on air
pollution problems of more than local
significance under, and extend the dura-
tion of, the Federal air pollution control
law, and for other purposes.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tern-
pore. The question is on agreeing to the
motion of the Senator from California.
The motion was agreed to and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, air pol-
lution is a grave national problem. The
Federal Government has had a responsi-
bility in this field in the last several
years to use its power and might to help
stamp out air pollution in all the com-
munities of America. I introduced the
proposed legislation, which would con-
tinue that program and would invigorate
the Federal Government to cope with the
responsibilities of the problem. The bill
was reported unanimously from the com-
mittee.
Mounting concern has been shown with
each passing year about contamination of
the atmosphere, especially in our heavily
industrialized and thickly settled areas.
The menace of air pollution, notably in
metropolitan centers, now is generally
acknowledged to be an undeniably serious
threat to the health of the American
people.
For the past 6 years under a law which
I had the privilege of introducing in Con-
gress, the Federal Government has been
active, primarily through the U.S. Public
Health Service, in collecting data about
the occurrence of smog and other forms
of pollution, in measuring the effects of
contamination upon mankind, in trying
to identify the sources of pollutants, in
determining conditions which produce the
most objectionable accumulations, and
in providing information which may open
the way to stamp out this scourge.
As these studies have gone on, scien-
tists and engineers have come to realize
the complexities of air pollution are grea-
ter than had been suspected. They like-
wise feel the need for better and addi-
tional tools to carry on their programs
for safeguarding the Nation's health.
Early in the present session, in com-
pany with several colleagues, I intro-
duced for the second successive year a
bill which would strengthen the role of
the Federal Government in antipollution
work and would broaden the scope of my
original legislation, Public Law 159. This
measure once more has been approved
by the Senate Public Works Committee
as a desirable means of stepping up the
attack upon the annoying, insidious, dan-
gerous phenomenon which is a result of
our Nation's ever-expanding use of motor
vehicles and ever-growing industrial
operations.
We know now that air pollution is not
a temporary problem. Consequently,
there is before the Senate the bill S. 455
which will be a step along the lines recom-
mended by President Kennedy in one of
his series of special messages to Congress
in the first weeks after he assumed office.
I wish to recall that on February 23, the
President in discussing a variety of ques-
tions relating to our natural resources
called for "new leadership, research, and
financial and technical assistance for the
control of air pollution, a serious hazard
to the health of our people that causes an
estimated $7.5 billion annually in damage
to vegetation, livestock, metals, and other
materials." The President in that message
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
221
pointed out "although the total supply
of air is vast, the atmosphere over our
growing metropolitan areas—where more
than half the people live—has only lim-
ited capacity to dilute and disperse the
contaminants now being increasingly dis-
charged from homes, factories, vehicles,
and many other sources."
The bill I was privileged to reintroduce
this year passed this Senate unanimously
more than a year ago. Originally recom-
mended by a former Surgeon General
and a Republican administration, it has
the support of the present Surgeon Gen-
eral and the incumbent Democratic
administration.
I believe it is decidedly in the public
interest to cloak the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon
General, as this measure would do, with
authority to create investigating and
hearing boards to dig into major pollu-
tion problems and to ascertain the facts
about atmospheric contamination which
is interstate in character. It also is essen-
tial, as the legislation further provides,
to extend the duration of the research
program for another 2 years, to June
30, 1966.
There is nothing in this bill which
would transgress on the jurisdiction,
rights, and powers of States and other
non-Federal agencies of government. But
the hearing boards would recom-
mend constructive measures and under
this legislation the Surgeon General
would advise all levels of government on
positive steps he feels would reduce dan-
gers to the American people.
Enactment of this proposal would be
of immeasurable assistance to scientists
working in laboratories, research institu-
tions, field measurement stations, and
elsewhere in gathering fundamental in-
formation and in devising remedial cour-
ses of action to reduce the air-pollution
hazard.
I ask unanimous consent that excerpts
from the committee report—No. 1083—
be printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the excerpts
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
GENERAL STATEMENT
Public Law 159, 84th Congress, approved July
14, 1955, authorized a program for research and
technical assistance to obtain data and to devise
and develop methods for control and abatement of
air pollution, by the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, and the Surgeon General of the Public
Health Service. The act recognizes the primary
responsibilities and rights of the States, local
governments, and other public agencies in con-
trolling air pollution, but provides Federal grants-
in-aid to those agencies concerned with air pollution
and control, to assist them in the formulation and
execution of their air pollution abatement research
programs.
Under the provisions of the act, the Surgeon
General is authorized to prepare or recommend
research programs, and to encourage cooperative
activities, collect and disseminate information,
conduct and support research, and to make avail-
able to all agencies the results of surveys, studies,
and investigations, research and experiments
relating to air pollution and abatement. Reports of
such studies as considered desirable may be pub-
lished from time to time by the Surgeon General
together with appropriate recommendations.
[p. 20417]
The act authorized an appropriation of $5 million
annually for each of the fiscal years beginning July
1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1960. In 1959 this act
was amended to extend the duration of the Federal
air pollution control law to June 30, 1964.
Under this authorized program, approximately
$2 million was expended in 1955; $1.7 million during
fiscal year 1956; $2.7 million for 1957; $4 million
for each of 1958 and 1959; $4.3 million for fiscal
year 1960; $4.9 million for fiscal year 1961, and the
request for fiscal year 1962 amounts to about $5
million. It is understood that additional amounts
are requested for fiscal year 1962 through other
authorizations.
The Federal effort has contributed materially to
difficult problems of sampling, identifying, and
measuring airborne contaminants, such as the
improvement of the methods of analyzing gaseous
contaminants present in the atmosphere of virtually
every city.
Appraisal has been made of some important
modern sources of urban air pollution such as oil
refineries, automobile exhausts, and combustion
processes, which are inevitable results of our
increasing mechanization and industrialization.
Studies of chemical, meteorological, and physical
influences and of atmosphere reactions are making
available new knowledge that must ultimately be
required for proper and economical procedure for
controlling air pollution.
Scientists have generally concurred that a major
source of fumes which are ingredients of smog and
pollution in most cities is the motor vehicle, and
that phase of the problem is under study on all
-------
222
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
fronts, including the automobile and petroleum
industry. The Federal Government has increased
its work in this field, and will continue to expand the
program for investigating the part that motor
vehicle exhaust and combustion play in the problem
of atmospheric contamination.
Health studies have developed evidence as to the
effect of air pollution on human health and well-
being, creating much discomfort from obstruction
of breathing, and causing disease and even death.
The Federal Government is not carrying this
entire program alone, as many agencies are par-
ticipating in the attack on the air pollution problem.
In the great concern for the health of the American
people, this very acute problem must be recognized,
together with the fact that increased urbanization
and industrialization will undoubtedly produce new
air pollution problems in the future.
DISCUSSION
When Public Law 159 was enacted, the committee
acknowledged that the desired aims and objectives
envisioned under the program could not be entirely
accomplished within the authorized 5-year period.
Accordingly, in 1959, the act was amended to
extend the program to June 30, 1964. The com-
mittee is of the opinion that it would be helpful to
the program if it were extended for another period
of years and accordingly recommends that it be
extended to June 30, 1966.
The committee is of the opinion that the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare could
make a significant contribution by exercising
Federal leadership in dealing with air pollution
problems of broad significance. This contribution
would result through the development and publica-
tion of recommendations based on the evaluation
data developed by the Department or prescribed
by others, as well as a full consideration of the
points of view of all parties having a significant
interest in such problems. Some of these problems,
although essentially local in character, manifest
themselves in many communities throughout the
Nation. Others involve pollution from sources
within one State which, through the movement of
air masses, affect communities in other States.
Both types of problems can be expected to increase
in number and extent with further urbanization,
and the development of solutions for them may in
many cases transcend the capabilities of local
agencies, and even of State control authorities. The
recommendations resulting from hearings would
not be binding upon the participants in the hearings
or anyone else; the purpose of the hearings would be
simply to develop such recommendations as a
means of focusing public attention on and develop-
ing support for the most carefully considered
solutions to the problems which occasioned the
hearings.
The committee believes that enactment of S. 455
would serve a very useful purpose and accordingly
recommends its passage.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tern-
pore. The bill is open to amendment. If
there be no amendment to be proposed,
the question is on the engrossment and
third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, was read the third
time, and passed, as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, That section 3 of the Act of July 14,
1955 (42 U.S.C. 1857b), is amended by striking
out", upon request of any State or local government
air pollution control agency,", by striking out "such
State or local government air pollution control
agency" and inserting in lieu thereof "any State or
local government air pollution control agency",
and by inserting before the period at the end thereof
but only if requested to do so by such State or
local government air pollution control agency or
if, in his judgment, such problem may affect or be
of concern to communities in various parts of the
Nation or may affect any community or com-
munities in a State other than that in which the
matter causing or contributing to the pollution
originated."
SEC. 2. Such Act is further amended by re-
designating sections 6, 7, and 8 as sections 7, 8,
and 9, respectively, and inserting after section 5
the following new section'.
"SEC. 6. (a) Whenever, on the basis of reports,
surveys, or studies, he believes it appropriate, or
whenever requested by any State or local govern-
ment air pollution control agency, the Surgeon
General may call a public hearing on any problem
of air pollution which may affect or be of concern
to communities in various parts of the Nation or
which may affect any community or communities
in any State other than the State in which the
matter causing or contributing to the pollution
originates. Any such hearing shall be conducted
before a board composed of not less than five
members, appointed by the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare, who shall be representative
of the public, industry which is affected by or con-
cerned with the problem, persons who are expert or
have special knowledge in the matter, interested.
Federal agencies, and interested State or local
government air pollution control agencies.
" (b) Subject to regulations of the Surgeon
General, an opportunity to be heard at such hearing
shall be accorded to all interested persons.
" (c) After consideration of the information
presented at the hearing and such other information
as is available to it, the board shall make a report
and recommendations to the Surgeon General on
such matters as the existence, cause, and effect of
the air pollution on which the hearing was held,
progress toward its abatement, and other related
matters. Such report and recommendations,
together with the comments and recommendations,
if any, of the Surgeon General with respect thereto,
shall be available to the community or communities,
Government agencies, and industries concerned
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
223
and, to the extent the Surgeon General deems
appropriate, to the public, but shall not be binding
on any person, agency, or organization."
SEC. 3. Section 5 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1857d) is
amended by striking out "nine fiscal years beginning
July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1964, not to
exceed $5,000,000" in the first sentence, and
inserting in lieu thereof "eleven fiscal years be-
ginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1966,
not to exceed $5,000,000".
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the bill
was passed.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
[p. 20418]
l.ld(3)(b) VOL. 108 (1962), Sept. 17: Amended and passed House,
pp. 19658-19661
EXTENDING THE AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL ACT
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I move to
suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R.
12833) to amend the act of July 14, 1955,
relating to air pollution control, to au-
thorize appropriations for an additional
2-year period, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, That the first sentence of section 5 of the
Act entitled "An Act to provide research and
technical assistance relating to air pollution con-
trol," approved July 15, 1955, as amended (42
U.S.C., sec. 1857d), is amended by striking out
"nine fiscal years during the period beginning July
1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1964," and inserting
in lieu thereof "eleven fiscal years during the period
beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1966,".
SEC. 2. Section 3 of the Act entitled "An Act to
provide research and technical assistance relating
to air pollution control", approved July 15, 1955,
as amended (42 U.S.C., sec. 1857b), is amended by
inserting "(a)" immediately after "SEC. 3.", and by
adding at the end thereof the following new sub-
section:
"(b) In view of the nationwide significance of
the problems of air pollution from motor vehicles,
the Surgeon General shall conduct studies of the
amounts and kinds of substances discharged from
the exhausts of motor vehicles and of the effects of
the discharge of such substances, including the
amounts and kinds of such substances which, from
the standpoint of human health, it is safe for motor
vehicles to discharge into the atmosphere."
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is a
second demanded?
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, I de-
mand a second.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without
objection, a second will be considered as
ordered.
There was no objection.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 12833 reported by
the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce provides for a 2-year extension
of the present Federal air pollution con-
trol program with additional new lan-
guage directing the Surgeon General to
continue the investigation of motor ve-
hicle exhaust fumes, which are an im-
portant source of air pollution, especially
in metropolitan areas. In June, the Sur-
geon General made a comprehensive re-
port to Congress on motor vehicle ex-
haust in compliance with the Schenck
Act of 1960, sponsored by the distin-
guished ranking minority member of the
Subcommittee on Health and Safety, the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK], who
has taken a very active interest in this
critical problem.
This important report, which will be
very valuable to public officials, research
workers, scientists, and others for many
years to come, is being printed as House
Document No. 489, and will be available
in a few days from the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
It is imperative that we extend the
Federal aid to air pollution control pro-
gram this session. Our air is a valuable
national resource. Since the enactment of
of Public Law 159 of the 84th Congress,
approved July 4, 1955, setting up the
Federal program, the Surgeon General of
-------
224
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
the U.S. Public Health has made re-
markable progress on a program of re-
search and technical assistance to devise
and develop methods for the control and
abatement of air pollution. Extension of
the act is necessary this session if the
program is not to be interrupted.
PROGRAM ESTABLISHED IN 1955
The legislation enacted in 1955 recog-
nizes that air pollution endangers the
public health and welfare, injures crops
and livestock, damages property, and
creates hazards to air and ground trans-
portation. It has no provision for Federal
enforcement activity and specifically pre-
serves the rights and responsibilities of
State and local governments in control-
ling air pollution. Under the act, the
Surgeon General is authorized to—
First. Undertake investigations jointly
with other Federal agencies, with State
and local air pollution control agencies,
and with public and private agencies or
institutions, and with industries involved,
to develop research programs for the
elimination or reduction of air pollution.
Second. Encourage cooperative activi-
ties by State and local governments to
prevent and abate air pollution.
Third. Collect and disseminate infor-
mation relating to air pollution and the
prevention and abatement thereof.
Fourth. Conduct research on air pollu-
tion problems and assist research activi-
ties of State and local agencies, both
public and private.
Fifth. Conduct, upon request by a
State or local government control agency,
investigations and research and make sur-
veys concerning any specific problem of
air pollution confronting any State or
local air pollution control agency with a
view of recommending a solution of the
problem.
Sixth. Make grants and enter into con-
tracts for research, training, and demon-
stration projects for State and local
government air pollution control agencies
and other public and private agencies and
institutions and to individuals.
The original act set up a 5-year pro-
gram, with appropriations limited to not
more than $5 million a year. In Septem-
ber 1959, the original act was extended
4 years. Thus, we need to extend the act
this session to permit the inclusion of
Public Law 159-84 items in the budget
next year.
EXPANDED PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
On February 27, 1962, the Secretary of
the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare, in a letter to the Speaker,
submitted the draft of a bill to expand
the present program. That bill, H.R.
10519, introduced by the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS], chairman of the
Subcommittee on Health and Safety, in-
cluded the substantive provisions of the
existing law and proposed to add or modi-
fy certain aspects of the present act by—
(a) Recognition of the need for the
Federal Government to provide national
leadership;
(b) Authorization to the Surgeon
General to make project grants of limi-
ted duration to State and local air pollu-
tion control agencies for the development,
initiation, or improvement of control
programs;
(c) Consent of the Congress to the
negotiation of agreements or compacts
by two or more States for cooperative
effort and mutual assistance, and for the
establishment of agencies to effectuate
such agreements or compacts;
(d) Authorization to the Surgeon Gen-
eral to detail, upon request, personnel to
air pollution control agencies;
(e) Authorization to the Surgeon Gen-
eral to conduct studies on his own initia-
tive and to make recommendations con-
cerning any air pollution problem of
interstate nature or of significance to, or
typical of air pollution problems con-
fronting, communities in different parts
of the Nation;
(f) Authorization to the Surgeon Gen-
eral to call a public conference, on his
own initiative or upon request of any air
pollution control agency, for voluntary
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
225
formal expression of views by interested
persons on any problem of air pollution
which is of concern to communities in
various parts of the Nation, or which is
of interstate nature;
(g) Elimination of the time limita-
tion—June 30, 1964—and $5 million ceil-
ing on annual appropriations.
However, due to heavy schedule of
the committee with other legislation, it
has been impossible to give adequate con-
sideration to these recommendations. The
Subcommittee on Health and Safety held
hearings on the program last fall during
the adjournment of Congress before these
recommendations were made. The sub-
committee was able to schedule 1 day of
hearings on June 25 to hear Members
of Congress, but as stated before, the
heavy schedule of the committee made
it impossible for us to go into these recom-
mendations in detail. A 2-year extension
of the present law will enable us to study
these proposals next Congress.
The people of this country have been
concerned about air pollution for many
years but in recent years, with the ad-
vent of smog on the west coast and in
[p. 19658]
other areas, the public alarm and con-
cern have been increased.
ECONOMIC LOSS HEAVY
Current estimates of the economic loss
from air pollution in the United States
range from $4 to $11 billion a year. Re-
gardless of the actual figure, we know
that the annual loss is staggering.
Approximately 90 percent of our urban
population lives in locations with air pol-
lution problems. Few cities, large or
small, are immune. The Public Health
Service has estimated that all of the 212
communities with a population in excess
of 50,000 have air pollution problems.
Although air pollution is considered
primarily a problem of urban areas, that
is not entirely the case as the loss to
farmers runs into the millions. It has
been estimated that the yearly crop loss
in California due to contaminated air is
between $6 and $10 million. This is
chiefly in the Los Angeles area. It is
known that there are severe losses in
Florida, New Jersey, Tennessee, and
other States.
The loss is not confined to growing
crops. In Florida fluorides from phos-
phate processing plants accumulate in
and on vegetation. The Public Health
Service reports that these fluorides, in-
gested by cattle, can cause fluorosis which
may seriously affect milk production.
The Federal effort made under Public
Law 159 has assisted materially in meet-
ing difficult problems of sampling, identi-
fying, and measuring airborne contamin-
nants, such as the improvement of the
methods of analyzing gaseous contami-
nants present in the atmosphere of vir-
tually every city.
Appraisal has been made of some im-
portant modern source of urban air pol-
lution.
Studies of chemical, meteorological,
and physical influences and of needed
atmosphere reactions are making avail-
able new knowledge for proper and eco-
nomical procedure for controlling air pol-
lution.
Scientists have generally concurred
that a major source of fumes which are
ingredients of smog and pollution in
most cities is the motor vehicle. The
amendment proposed in this bill will
make certain that the Public Health
Service continues its work in this field,
and will expedite the program for inves-
tigating the part that motor vehicle ex-
haust and combustion play in the
problem of atmospheric contamination.
Health studies have developed evidence
as to the effect of air pollution on human
health and well-being, creating much
discomfort, from obstruction of breath-
ing, and causing disease and even death.
The Federal Government is not carry-
ing this entire program alone, as many
agencies are participating in the attack
on the air pollution problem. In the
great concern for the health of the
American people, this very acute problem
-------
226
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
must be recognized together with the fact
that increased urbanization and indus-
trialization will undoubtedly produce
new air pollution problems in the future.
This is an important program and the
committee urges enactment of the pend-
ing bill to insure continuation of this
work.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HARRIS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, the appro-
priation from this purpose has gone from
$200,000 in 1955 to $11 million estimated
in 1963. This activity ought to be in
pretty good shape and I hope we will
soon begin to see some tangible results.
From what I have experienced by way of
monoxide alleys around Washington I
do not think very much is happening for
the money that is being spent. I am
not going to oppose this bill, but I should
like to see some results for $11 million
a year expenditure for study purposes.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I share
the gentleman's concern. As I indicated,
there have been these results. A great
deal of progress has been made, and we
hope we will accomplish a lot more by
extending the program. I share the gen-
tleman's feeling that we need results and
must have them. I think we are on the
way to getting results.
Mr. GROSS. We have spent $4 million
in 2 or 3 years, $8 million in 1 year, and
now it is up to $11 million. This has all
gone up from $200,000 a year. I think
it is high time we began to see some real,
tangible results from these expenditures
for study purposes.
Mr. HARRIS. It is my hope, and I
expect we shall see such results.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may require.
Mr. Speaker, it is both a privilege and
a pleasure to serve as a member of the
great Committee on Interstate and For-
eign Commerce with the gentleman from
Arkansas [Mr. HARRIS], as our chairman.
Our committee, because of its extremely
broad legislative jurisdiction, has a very
heavy schedule which is of great personal
interest to nearly everyone throughout
the Nation. The effective chairmanship
of our committee requires a man of wide
experience, knowledge, tolerance, under-
standing, and a willingness to give full
consideration to the views of each mem-
ber of our committee. Our chairman, the
distinguished gentleman from Arkansas
[Mr. HARRIS], has all these attributes,
and I am grateful for the opportunity
to serve with him.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate deeply the
kind and complimentary reference our
distinguished chairman has made to the
Schenck Act of the 86th Congress of
which I was the author. I also appreciate
deeply, Mr. Speaker, the cooperation
and support of the distinguished gentle-
man from Arkansas [Mr. HARRIS], in the
successful enactment of the Schenck Act
which was the first measure on this sub-
ject approved by the Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to express my
sincere appreciation and commendation
to the distinguished chairman of our
Subcommittee on Health and Safety, the
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS]
for his continuous, unrelenting, and ef-
fective work in the entire field of health
and safety. It has been both a privilege
and a pleasure to work with him and I
sincerely hope that the citizens of the
great State of Alabama will reelect him
to the Congress as one of the eight Mem-
bers from that State.
Congressman ROBERTS has worked un-
ceasingly here in the Congress of the
United States in the very best tradition
on all questions of health and safety be-
fore our subcommittee and has done so
entirely in the best interest of all the
people of our Nation. He has given dis-
tinguished leadership to the work of our
subcommittee and I wanted to take this
opportunity to personally commend him.
Mr. Speaker, on June 7, 1962, the Sur-
geon General of the Public Health Service
transmitted to the Congress a report en-
titled "Motor Vehicles, Air Pollution, and
Health." The report was prepared as re-
quired by Public Law 86-493, an act
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
227
which I had the privilege of sponsoring.
The work on motor vehicle emissions in
which the Public Health Service is en-
gaged is extremely complex and difficult.
I speak with some firsthand knowledge
on this matter, as I made it a point during
this past year to visit, in Cincinnati, Ohio,
the research laboratories of the Division
of Air Pollution. There I had the oppor-
tunity to see the very practical, yet highly
imaginative, methods being employed by
the scientific and technical personnel to
seek out the answers to such worrisome
problems as why and how does smog
form, and what does this do to the health
of the public.
While I do not profess to be a technical
specialist in this field, I have availed
myself of many opportunities, as a mem-
ber of the Subcommittee on Health and
Safety, which is under the able chairman-
ship of the gentleman from Alabama [Mr.
ROBERTS] to discuss the problems of air
pollution from automotive sources with
many individuals knowledgeable in the
field. The subject is not so simple as the
discharge from cars of carbon monoxide,
which everyone knows to be poisonous, or
the objectionable odors one encounters
behind some trucks or buses.
The problems are inseparably related
to the fundamental design principles of
gasoline engines, and of diesel engines,
which are different, to the fuels which
are burned, to driving patterns, to car
maintenance and operating habits, and
how much horsepower the average citi-
zen demands. Furthermore, the problems
are related to sunlight which changes the
chemical structure of the waste products
discharged by motor vehicles. The chan-
ges which occur can alter significantly
the degree and nature of hazard to hu-
man health, and also the potential for
destroying vegetation or damaging prop-
erty. The research stimulated by Public
Law 86-493 has elicited many clues to
help find solutions to this form of pollu-
tion which prevails in every part of our
country. The recent report of the Public
Health Service presents this information
clearly and definitively. The report, I
would add, makes very interesting read-
ing and I would recommend it to your
attention. It will shortly be reaching
your desks as House Document No. 489.
H.R. 12833 insures the continuation,
without interruption, of the necessary
research on auto exhaust. Of even more
importance, it provides for the continua-
tion of the entire Federal program on air
pollution. The contamination of our at-
mosphere arises from many sources
[p. 19659]
besides motor vehicles. The significance
of these multiple sources, individually,
and as they relate to each other, must be
determined. The program for protecting
our air must be broadened, with the
knowledge developed in recent years by
the Public Health Service and other re-
search groups, and with the experience
obtained by industry and by State and
local agencies, we can proceed with hear-
ings which will enable the next Congress
to provide suitable legislation to accom-
plish our purpose. Meanwhile, H.R.12833
assures that irreplaceable scientific man-
power, as well as valuable time, will not
be lost.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the gentleman
from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS] may extend
his remarks at this point in the RECORD.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gentleman
from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Speaker, it is necessary to enact this leg-
islation to prevent possible delays in our
important air pollution control program.
This 2-year extension will permit the
Subcommittee on Health and Safety to
study various suggestions for expanding
the present program.
We have reached a situation where air
pollution is a serious national problem.
More importantly, this problem will re-
main with us and grow steadily worse
unless suitable, sustained measures are
undertaken. Air pollution affects our en-
tire population and its effective control
-------
228
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
will require the cooperation of that pop-
ulation, working as individuals, as well as
through their local, State, and Federal
agencies.
The problems associated with the pol-
lution of our air have been subjects of
serious consideration by the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce for
a number of years. The Federal air pol-
lution research and technical assistance
program was established in 1955, based
on legislation reported favorably by your
committee. This legislation, which had
time and budgetary limitations, has been
extended by subsequent action of the
Congress, without however, the removal
of these restrictions. One significant
addition to the basic program came about
in 1960, when, under the sponsorship of
the ranking minority member of the Sub-
committee on Health and Safety, the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK],
H.R. 86-493 brought about the necessary
comprehensive investigations of the spe-
cial problems of air pollution originating
from the operation of automotive
vehicles.
Findings in the report emanating from
this work amply demonstrate the wisdom
of this congressional mandate.
Despite remarkable achievements in
the development and dissemination of
scientific and technical information since
inception of the air pollution program in
which there has been general recognition
that a more comprehensive approach is
essential if we are not to lose ground. In
his January 1955 special health message,
President Eisenhower stated that—
As a result of industrial growth and urban
development, the atmosphere over some population
centers may be approaching the limit of its ability
to absorb air pollutants with safety to health. I am
recommending an increased appropriation to the
Public Health Service for studies seeking necessary
scientific data and more effective methods of
control.
President Kennedy, in his natural re-
sources message of February 1961 said:
We need an effective Federal air pollution control
program now. For although the total supply of air
is vast, the atmosphere over our growing metro-
politan areas—where more than half the people
live—has only limited capacity to dilute and
disperse the contaminants now being increasingly
discharged from homes, factories, vehicles, and
many other sources.
If I may expand upon this statement
by the President, I would add that the
effects of air pollution discharged in these
metropolitan areas are not limited to the
immediate vicinity of their release. Tens
of millions of dollars of damage to farm
crops occur annually at distances up to
50 miles occur annually at distances up
to 50 miles or more downwind from large
urban complexes, and this damage has
been demonstrated to be of a type due to
specific air contaminants. Furthermore,
such damage, which is on the increase,
has occurred in east coast States as well
as west coast States and in many others
in between. The problems, thus, are rural
as well as urban—of economic conse-
quence in addition to being of health
significance.
Since the enactment of Public Law
84-159 in 1955, great strides have been
made in the identification and measure-
ment of air pollutants, and in the evalua-
tion of their effects. The magnitude and
nature of the problem, and its occurrence
in many localities throughout the land,
has been clearly demonstrated.
The agricultural damage I have just
mentioned is illustrative of one of the
economic aspects of air pollution. The
total annual cost, in terms of property
damage, must be expressed in billions.
Of greater concern, however, are the
effects on health.
Since 1955, many specific relationships
of air contaminants to disease conditions
have been delineated. There is a strong
statistical association between the rising
death rate from the lung condition called
emphysema and air pollution. The indi-
cations of a relationship of air pollution
to lung cancer are such as to make in-
tensified studies a matter of great
urgency. Another health effect demon-
strated by recent research efforts is the
probability that resistance to some in-
fectious diseases is lowered as a result of
breathing chemically polluted air.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
229
These and other findings justify the
requests by Presidents Eisenhower and
Kennedy for a program more in keeping
with the needs. This means not only a
program of expanded research, but also a
program for more effective application of
existing know-how.
An administration proposal for a com-
prehensive program was submitted by the
Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare in February 1962. Unfortu-
nately, sufficient time for adequate
hearings on a problem of such far-
reaching nature was not available during
the current session. The Subcommittee
on Health and Safety, of which I am
chairman, did devote sufficient time to
the subject, however, to conclude that
the interests of the country would be best
served by postponing legislative proposals
for a broader type of air pollution
program until proper hearings can be
conducted. I wish to give assurance that
such hearings will be held in time to
permit congressional action early in the
next session.
Meanwhile, your committee recom-
mends H.R. 12833 which extends the
existing authority to the Surgeon General
of the Public Health Service for a period
of 2 years beyond that specified in present
legislation. This will provide a basis
whereby budgetary as well as research
processes and planning can be satis-
factorily maintained while congressional
action is in process.
H.R. 12833, in addition to extending
the provisions of Public Law 84-159, as
amended, emphasizes the importance of
continued research on air pollution of
motor vehicle origin.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speaker,
the legislation before us today extends
a program of air pollution control and
abatement methods for another 2 years.
This program was borne out of the need
to begin studies on a problem which
has all the elements of serious threat to
the health of this Nation.
This program began with the signing
of Public Law 84-159, and was later
amended by Public Law 365 in the 86th
Congress. The measure before us now
would extend the program another 2
years, and as a member of the Health
and Safety Subcommittee of the Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce Committee,
I am pleased to support this bill and the
efforts of the distinguished chairman of
the subcommittee, the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS].
Through experience on the subcom-
mittee, I have learned that air pollution
is a problem of national scope which
affects not only our urban population but
the rural areas as well. When we think
of polluted air we immediately visualize
city streets choked with the blue pall
of automotive and industrial gases.
And we think of Americans breathing
that air each moment. However, what
of the effects of this air on American
agriculture and its related industries?
The results which have come from the
air pollution control program thus far
have been impressive. Studies have
shown the relationships between polluted
air and respiratory diseases, as has been
expected. The human heart, it has
been shown, is also affected by polluted
air. Emphysema, a disease which has
health authorities very much concerned
because of its rising death toll, is strongly
tied to stagnant air by impressive
supporting statistical data. Medically,
there is good, accurate evidence to show
the need for continuing research.
The effects of polluted air on animals
is another factor which we should bear
in mind as this legislation is considered.
[p. 19660]
With medical data showing the direct
ties polluted air can have to human
health, it logically follows that this same
air would have effects on the food man
eats. Vegetation damage from air pol-
lution is estimated at some $500 million
annually. Vegetation is susceptible to
the chemical effects of polluted air, and
in fact is perhaps more immediately
sensitive to it than man or animals may
be. Under this program we have before
us, it has been learned that the elements
-------
230
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
in these gases are changed by the sun-
light, and their bearing on vegetation is
made greater in many instances.
The State of Florida is fortunate in
having a great number of rapidly ex-
panding cities, and surrounding them is
an abundant agricultural economy based
on vegetables, sugarcane, cattle, citrus,
and flower growing. These elements of
Florida's economy are interrelated, and
depend on each other for their continued
growth and development. Motor vehicles
and rail facilities are needed to transport
agricultural commodities into urban
markets for sale and consumption. These
areas in turn provide many supplies such
as fertilizer and machinery for agricul-
ture. Tourism flourishes in Florida as a
result of air, rail, bus, and automobile
facilities, all of which must be studied
for prevention pollution measures.
For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, and
because the air pollution control problems
of the Nation are rapidly increasing,
I urge passage of H.R. 12833.
Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I wish
to urge the House to act favorably on
H.R. 12833, extending the Air Pollution
Control Act because it insures the con-
tinuation of vital legislation which serves
one of the most important interests of
our Nation and all its citizens—public
health. It has been my privilege for
several years to preside over the Sub-
committee on Appropriations, which is
charged with the responsibility of exam-
ining the programs of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare. This
has been a unique and rewarding ex-
perience, and has provided opportunity
to become familiar with the people and
programs with which this Department is
concerned. All of these are intimately
concerned with the health and welfare
of the public; of all these programs,
there is none which relates more directly
to the basic requirements of the average
citizen than that concerned with air pol-
lution, whose objective is to safeguard
the quality of the air that each citizen
breathes.
My committee, each year, has held ex-
tensive hearings on the appropriation
requests for air pollution and other en-
vironmental health programs. In addi-
tion, 2 years ago, the committee held ex-
tensive hearings on this and related
health problems of the environment,
during which we heard expert testimony
from many outstanding authorities. On
the basis of this testimony, there is no
question that air pollution is a serious
and growing problem in many areas of
our country.
Until recently, most of us have taken
for granted the availability of unlimited
quantities of fresh air to breathe. Now,
however, it has become apparent that
the quantity of air supply in any loca-
tion is limited and can be overloaded
with wastes discharged to it to the point
that it becomes unwholesome, so that it
can actually damage our health and our
property. Of all our natural resources,
the air is perhaps used more extensively
by each person than any other in that
the average adult breathes approxi-
mately 30 pounds of it each day, a much
larger quantity than he takes in in either
food or drink. It is essential that the
quality of the air which we all breathe
be maintained in suitable condition,
since we cannot purify it for breathing
purposes, but must take it as it comes
to us.
The experts testify that the increasing
seriousness of air pollution is due pri-
marily to our growth of population and
our increasing economic prosperity. The
pollutional discharges are concentrated
in our urban areas where an increasing
percentage of our population lives and
where the greatest use of raw materials,
finished products, and energy resources
is made. The effects of the pollution,
however, are not confined to the cities,
but extend out from them for many
miles into the surrounding areas. Air
pollution produces a heavy toll of
economic loss in this country each year—
in the form of damage to agricultural
and other plants, corrosion of materials
and structures, and decreases in real
estate values. Estimates of the total of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
231
such damage recently have ranged from
$5 to $11 billion annually.
More important than this property
damage, however, is the increasingly
specific evidence that air pollution is a
growing threat to the health of all of us.
Testimony offered before the Appropria-
tions Subcommittee has shown not only
that deaths can be caused by high con-
centrations of air pollutants under
acutely adverse conditions as have oc-
curred in London, England, and New
York City, but that air pollution is
closely associated with acute and chronic
respiratory illness. With respect to lung
cancer, the incidence among those
breathing polluted city air is greater
than among rural residents, and materials
capable of producing lung cancers in
experimental animals can be extracted
routinely from the air in our cities.
Recent research by the Public Health
Service shows increasing evidence link-
ing air pollution with such respiratory
diseases as asthma, bronchitis, and
emphysema. These seriously crippling
respiratory ailments are increasing rap-
idly in their incidence in this country,
and currently constitute the major
causes of respiratory disability and of
payments therefor under the social
security system. In addition, other
studies have shown exposure to irritating
air pollutants to increase the suscept-
ibility of individuals to respiratory
infections, a primary cause of industrial
absenteeism.
Over the past several years, the needs
for action to abate or prevent air pollu-
tion have received attention by a number
of expert scientific groups. Two years
ago, an ad hoc task group, appointed by
the Surgeon General, reported on national
needs in air pollution research. More
recently, a committee on environmental
health problems, appointed by the Sur-
geon General and under the chairmanship
of Dr. Paul M. Gross of Duke University,
now president of the American Asso-
ciation for the Advancement of Science,
reported on the research, training, and
operational needs nationally in the
control of air pollution and other environ-
mental health hazards. Also, the Com-
mittee on Atmospheric Sciences of the
National Academy of Sciences has
reported this year on national goals and
plans in this broad field, and has devoted
considerable attention to the specific
needs with respect to air pollution. The
reports of all of these expert committees
are in essential agreement in that they
foresee the need for and recommend
increased attention to this growing and
serious problem. Solutions to the prob-
lems of air pollution will require con-
certed and intensified actions involving
all levels of government, industry and
other organizations. The Federal Govern-
ment has a real responsibility to provide
leadership and assistance in seeing that
the overall job gets done.
Under H.R. 12833, the House is being
asked to extend for the period of 2 years
the Federal program in the field of air
pollution, and to direct that the prob-
lems of pollutant emissions from auto-
motive vehicles be given special atten-
tion. I submit that these are minimal
steps. In the long run, much more will
be required, involving cooperation of
Federal, State and local governments,
industry, and other organizations that
have a direct or indirect concern with
problems of unclean air. Unfortunately,
it appears that there has not been
sufficient time in this session of the
Congress to develop decisions as to the
most desirable provisions of more com-
prehensive legislation designed to sub-
stantially strengthen the Nation's efforts
in the field of air pollution control. In
the meantime, until more comprehensive
action can be taken, we cannot fail to
support H.R. 12833, which authorizes
and directs the Surgeon General to press
forward in the present program activities
of the Public Health Service in relation
to air pollution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is, Will the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill H.R. 12833?
The question was taken; and (two-
thirds having voted in favor thereof) the
526-701 0-73-17
-------
232
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
rules were suspended and the bill was
passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's desk the bill (S. 455) to pro-
vide for public hearings on air pollution
problems of more than local significance
under, and extend the duration of, the
Federal air pollution control law, and
for other purposes, and ask for its
immediate consideration.
[p. 19661]
l.ld(3)(c) VOL. 108 (1962), Sept. 26: Senate concurs in House amend-
ments, pp. 20802-20803
EXTENSION OP FEDERAL AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL LAW
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, there
are at the desk amendments of the
House of Representatives to Senate bill
455, of which I am the author. I ask
that they be laid before the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
METCALF in the chair) laid before the
Senate the amendments of the House
of Representatives to the bill (S. 455)
to provide for public hearings on air pol-
[p. 20802]
lution problems of more than local sig-
nificance under, and extend the duration
of, the Federal air pollution control law,
and for other purposes, which were, to
strike out all after the enacting clause
and insert,:
That the first sentence of section 5 of the Act
entitled "An Act to provide research and technical
assistance relating to air pollution control", ap-
proved July 15, 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C., sec.
1857d), is amended by striking out "nine fiscal
years during the period beginning July 1, 1955,
and ending June 30, 1964," and inserting in lieu
thereof "eleven fiscal years during the period
beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June 30, 1966,".
SBC. 2. Section 3 of the Act entitled "An Act to
provide research and technical assistance relating
to air pollution control", approved July 15, 1955,
as amended (42 U.S.C., sec. 1857b), is amended by
inserting "(a)" immediately after "SEC. 3.", and
by adding at the end thereof the following new
subsection:
"(b) In view of the nationwide significance of
the problems of air pollution from motor vehicles,
the Surgeon General shall conduct studies of the
amounts and kinds of substances discharged from
the exhausts of motor vehicles and of the effects of
the discharge of such substances, including the
amounts and kinds of such substances which from
the standpoint of human health, it is safe for motor
vehicles to discharge into the atmosphere."
And to amend the title so as to read:
"An act to amend the act of July 14,
1955, relating to air pollution control, to
authorize appropriations for an addi-
tional 2-year period, and for other
purposes."
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield to me?
Mr. KUCHEL. I yield.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Has this matter
been cleared with the chairman of the
committee?
Mr. KUCHEL. No; it has not. The
bill came from the Committee on Public
Works, but it has not been cleared with
the chairman.
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator may
go ahead and speak on the matter, and
in the meantime we will check into it.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, air
pollution continues to be a grave and
serious problem to the health of the
American people, and it is the Federal
Government which must supply, and
continue to supply, the leadership in the
elimination of air pollution.
We supplied the legislation for that
leadership 7 years ago in enacting the
first Federal air pollution law in our
country's history. I am glad to recall
that I was the author of that law.
A year ago I introduced S. 455, to con-
tinue the responsibility of the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare,
and particularly of the Surgeon General
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
233
of the United States, in the field of
research with respect to air pollutants.
Under the provisions of the original
act, the Surgeon General is authorized
to prepare or recommend research pro-
grams and to encourage cooperative
activities, collect and disseminate in-
formation, conduct and support research,
and to make available to all agencies the
results of surveys, studies, investigations,
research, and experiments relating to
air pollution and abatement. Reports of
such studies as are desirable may be
published from time to time by the
Surgeon General, together with appro-
priate recommendations.
The act authorized an appropriation
of $5 million annually for each of the
fiscal years beginning July 1, 1955, and
ending June 30, 1960.
In 1959 this act was amended to ex-
tend the air pollution control law to
June 30, 1964.
As I said, the bill passed the Senate
unanimously about a year ago. During
the intervening months the President of
the United States recommended that
this legislation be adopted.
In the House of Representatives
amendments were written into the bill
to provide that the program should con-
tinue for 2 additional years, or until
June 30, 1966; and, in addition, the
House of Representatives wrote in what
I think is a worthwhile feature, making
it abundantly clear that the intention of
the Congress with respect to the responsi-
bility of the Surgeon General includes the
following. I read, parenthetically, from
section 2 of the bill as amended in the
House:
In view of the nationwide significance of the
problems of air pollution from motor vehicles, the
Surgeon General shall conduct studies of the
amounts and kinds of substances discharged from
the exhausts of motor vehicles and of the effects of
the discharge of such substances, including the
amounts and kinds of such substances which, from
the standpoint of human health, it is safe for motor
vehicles to discharge into the atmosphere.
Under existing law, the Surgeon
General of the United States has entered
into contracts with eleemosynary insti-
tutions and others to conduct research of
this kind. Some of the research is being
carried on in the State of California,
and particularly in the city of Los
Angeles, under a contract with the
University of Southern California, by
which animal life is exposed to the
exhausts of automobiles and the adverse
effect on animal life is measured.
This is but one of the types of experi-
mentation conducted under the present
law by which the Government of the
United States is seeking to isolate air
pollutants and, having isolated them, to
take such steps as may be necessary to
eliminate them from the air we breathe.
But, in addition to that highly impor-
tant function, there is present in this
country today the problem of adverse
effects of air pollution on agriculture,
plant life, and animal life; and there
again the Surgeon General is making
progress under present law. That prog-
ress needs to continue being made.
In a word, Mr. President, the House of
Representatives has taken the bill which
the Senate passed a year ago and has
written into it provisions for a con-
tinuation of the present highly important
responsibilities of the Surgeon General;
and, in addition, has written out clearly
that the responsibility shall include
appropriate research with respect to the
exhausts of motor vehicles.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. KUCHEL. I yield.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I say, most regret-
fully, to my friend from California,
because I know of his deep interest in this
matter, and of his leadership in having
the legislation passed, or processed, that
I have asked one of the aids of the
Senate to check with the Public Works
Committee and with the chairman of
the committee relating to the House
amendments.
I say most respectfully that I have not
been able to obtain a firm answer. I
understand there is a temporary "hold"
on it, without any particular opposition.
-------
234
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
I know the Senator will be cooperative.
If the Senator will withdraw his request
now, we will speak with the chairman
of the committee. Now that the Senator
has made his presentation, if we can
obtain clearance, it can go through
rather quickly, because I doubt whether
there would be substantial opposition.
Mr. KUCHEL. I shall do so. Mr.
President, I wish to say for the RECORD
that I cleared this matter with the
majority leader, but I say most frankly
I did not clear it with the chairman of the
Senate committee which originally re-
ported my bill. Under those circum-
stances, I apologize to my friend.
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator
knows that I have no objection.
Mr. KUCHEL. Yes.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I am in full
support of what the Senator seeks to do.
I am only serving as sort of a "watchdog"
on procedural matters, to protect the
rights of committees. I am sure this
matter can be handled very shortly, if
the Senator will withdraw his request.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the House
amendments to the bill (S. 455) may be
temporarily laid aside.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator withdraws his request for present
consideration of the House amendments.
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Subsequently the Presiding Officer
laid before the Senate the amendments
of the House of Representatives to the
bill (S. 455) to provide for public hear-
ings on air pollution problems of more
than local significance under, and ex-
tend the duration of, the Federal air
pollution control law, and for other
purposes.
Mr. KUCHEL. I have talked with the
distinguished Senator from Oklahoma,
under whose sponsorship my bill was
reported a year ago and passed. He has
no objection to the Senate considering
the House amendments. In fact, he will
approve my request. As I said earlier,
I had cleared the matter with the dis-
tinguished majority leader.
Mr. President, I move that the Senate
concur in the amendments of the House
of Representatives.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the
amendments were agreed to.
Mr. BURDICK. Mr. President, I
move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
[p. 20803]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 235
Lie THE CLEAN AIR ACT, DECEMBER 17, 1963
P.L. 88-206, 77 Stat. 392
AN ACT To improve, strengthen, and accelerate programs for the prevention and
abatement of air pollution
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Act of July 14,1955,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 1857-1857g), is hereby amended to read as
follows:
"FINDINGS AND PURPOSES
"SECTION 1. (a) The Congress finds—
"(1) that the predominant part of the Nation's population is
located in its rapidly expanding metropolitan and other urban
areas, which generally cross the boundary lines of local jurisdic-
tions and often extend into two or more States;
"(2) that the growth in the amount and complexity of air
pollution brought about by urbanization, industrial development,
and the increasing use of motor vehicles, has resulted in mounting
dangers to the public health and welfare, including injury to
agricultural crops and livestock, damage to and the deterioration
of property, and hazards to air and ground transportation;
"(3) that the prevention and control of air pollution at its
source is the primary responsibility of States and local govern-
ments; and
"(4) that Federal financial assistance and leadership is essential
for the development of cooperative Federal, State, regional, and
local programs to prevent and control air pollution.
"(b) The purposes of this Act are—
"(1) to protect the Nation's air resources so as to promote the
public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its
population;
"(2) to initiate and accelerate a national research and develop-
ment program to achieve the prevention and control of air
pollution;
"(3) to provide technical and financial assistance to State and
local governments in connection with the development and ex-
ecution of their air pollution prevention and control programs;
and
"(4) to encourage and assist the development and operation of
regional air pollution control programs.
-------
236 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES AND UNIFORM LAWS
"SEC. 2. (a) The Secretary shall encourage cooperative activities
by the States and local governments for the prevention and control of
air pollution; encourage the enactment of improved and, so far as
practicable in the light of varying conditions and needs, uniform State
and local laws relating to the prevention and control of air pollution;
and encourage the making of agreements and compacts between States
for the prevention and control of air pollution.
"(b) The Secretary shall cooperate with and encourage cooperative
activities by all Federal departments and agencies having functions
relating to the prevention and control of air pollution, so as to assure
the utilization in the Federal air pollution control program of all
appropriate and available facilities and resources within the Federal
Government.
"(c) The consent of the Congress is hereby given to two or more
States to negotiate and enter into agreements or compacts, not in
conflict with any law or treaty of the United States, for (1) coopera-
tive effort and mutual assistance for the prevention and control of air
[p. 392]
pollution and the enforcement of their respective laws relating thereto,
and (2) the establishment of such agencies, joint or otherwise, as they
may deem desirable for making effective such agreements or compacts.
No such agreement or compact shall be binding or obligatory upon
any State a party thereto unless and until it has been approved by
Congress.
[p. 393]
"RESEARCH, INVESTIGATIONS, TRAINING, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
"SEC. 3. (a) The Secretary shall establish a national research and
development program for the prevention and control of air pollution
and as part of such program shall—
"(1) conduct, and promote the coordination and acceleration of,
research, investigations, experiments, training, demonstrations,
surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, pre-
vention, and control of air pollution; and
"(2) encourage, cooperate with, and render technical services
and provide financial assistance to air pollution control agencies
and other appropriate public or private agencies, institutions,
and organizations, and individuals in the conduct of such activi-
ties; and
"(3) conduct investigations and research and make surveys
concerning any specific problem of air pollution in cooperation
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 237
with any air pollution control agency with a view to recommend-
ing a solution of such problem, if he is requested to do so by such
agency or if, in his judgment, such problem may affect any com-
munity or communities in a State other than that in which the
source of the matter causing or contributing to the pollution is
located; and
"(4) initiate and conduct a program of research directed to-
ward the development of improved, low-cost techniques for ex-
tracting sulfur from fuels.
"(b) In carrying out the provisions of the preceding subsection the
Secretary is authorized to—
"(1) collect and make available, through publications and other
appropriate means, the results of and other information, including
appropriate recommendations by him in connection therewith,
pertaining to such research and other activities;
"(2) cooperate with other Federal departments and agencies,
with air pollution control agencies, with other public and private
agencies, institutions, and organizations, and with any industries
involved, in the preparation and conduct of such research and
other activities;
"(3) make grants to air pollution control agencies, to other
public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and organiza-
tions, and to individuals, for purposes stated in subsection (a)(l)
of this section;
"(4) contract with public or private agencies, institutions, and
organizations, and with individuals, without regard to sections
3648 and 3709 of the Revised Statutes (31 U.S.C. 529; 41 U.S.C.
5);
"(5) provide training for, and make training grants to, person-
nel of air pollution control agencies and other persons with
suitable qualifications;
"(6) establish and maintain research fellowships, in the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare and at public or
nonprofit private educational institutions or research or-
ganizations;
"(7) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other Federal
departments and agencies, and with other public or private
agencies, institutions, and organizations having related respon-
sibilities,
[p. 394]
basic data on chemical, physical, and biological effects of varying
air quality and other information pertaining to air pollution and
the prevention and control thereof; and
-------
238 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"(8) develop effective and practical processes, methods, and
prototype devices for the prevention or control of air pollution.
"(c)(l) In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this
section the Secretary shall conduct research on, and survey the results
of other scientific studies on, the harmful effects on the health or
welfare of persons by the various known air pollution agents (or
combinations of agents).
"(2) Whenever he determines that there is a particular air pollu-
tion agent (or combination of agents), present in the air in certain
quantities, producing effects harmful to the health or welfare of per-
sons, the Secretary shall compile and publish criteria reflecting accur-
ately the latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and
extent of such effects which may be expected from the presence of
such air pollution agent (or combination of agents) in the air in vary-
ing quantities. Any such criteria shall be published for informational
purposes and made available to municipal, State, and interstate air
pollution control agencies. He shall revise and add to such criteria
whenever necessary to reflect accurately developing scientific
knowledge.
"(3) The Secretary may recommend to such air pollution control
agencies and to other appropriate organizations such criteria of air
quality as in his judgment may be necessary to protect the public
health and welfare.
"GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
"SEC. 4. (a) From the sums appropriated annually for the purposes
of this Act but not to exceed 20 per centum of any such appropriation,
the Secretary is authorized to make grants to air pollution control
agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost of developing,
establishing, or improving programs for the prevention and control
of air pollution: Provided, That the Secretary is authorized to make
grants to intermunicipal or interstate air pollution control agencies
(described in section 9(b) (2) and (4)) in an amount up to three-
fourths of the cost of developing, establishing, or improving, regional
air pollution programs. As used in this subsection, the term 'regional
air pollution control program' means a program for the prevention
and control of air pollution in an area that includes the areas of two
or more municipalities, whether in the same or different States.
"(b) From the sums available under subsection (a) of this section
for any fiscal year, the Secretary shall from time to time make grants
to air pollution control agencies upon such terms and conditions as
the Secretary may find necessary to carry out the purpose of this sec-
tion. In establishing regulations for the granting of such funds the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 239
Secretary shall, so far as practicable, give due consideration (1) the
population, (2) the extent of the actual or potential air pollution
problem, and (3) the financial need of the respective agencies. No
agency shall receive any grant under this section during any fiscal
year when its expenditures of non-Federal funds for air pollution
programs will be less than its expenditures were for such programs
during the preceding fiscal year. No grant shall be made under this
section until the Secretary has consulted with the appropriate official
as designated by the Governor or Governors of the State or States
affected.
"(c) Not more than 12^ per centum of the grant funds available
under subsection (a) of this section shall be expended in any one
State.
[p. 395]
"ABATEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION
"SEC. 5. (a) The pollution of the air in any State or States which
endangers the health or welfare of any persons, shall be subject to
abatement as provided in this section.
"(b) Consistent with the policy declaration of this Act, municipal,
State, and interstate action to abate air pollution shall be encouraged
and shall not be displaced by Federal enforcement action except as
otherwise provided by or pursuant to a court order under subsection
(g).
"(c)(l)(A) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State, a
State air pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of the
Governor and the State air pollution control agency for the State in
which the municipality is situated) the governing body of any municip-
ality, the Secretary shall, if such request refers to air pollution which
is alleged to endanger the health or welfare of persons in a State other
than that in which the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing
to such pollution) originate, give formal notification thereof to the
air pollution control agency of the municipality where such discharge
or discharges originate, to the air pollution control agency of the State
in which such municipality is located, and to the interstate air pollu-
tion control agency, if any, in whose jurisdictional area such mu-
nicipality is located, and shall call promptly a conference of such
agency or agencies and of the air pollution control agencies of the
municipalities which may be adversely affected by such pollution,
and the air pollution control agency, if any, of each State, or for each
area, in which any such municipality is located.
"(B) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State, a State
air pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of the Governor
-------
240 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
and the State air pollution control agency for the State in which the
municipality is situated) the governing body of any municipality, the
Secretary shall, if such request refers to alleged air pollution which is
endangering the health or welfare of persons only in the State in
which the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such
pollution) originate and if a municipality affected by such air pollu-
tion, or the municipality in which such pollution originates, has
either made or concurred in such request, give formal notification
thereof to the State air pollution control agency, to the air pollution
control agencies of the municipality where such discharge or dis-
charges originate and of the municipality or municipalities alleged to
be adversely affected thereby, and to any interstate air pollution
control agency, whose jurisdictional area includes any such mu-
nicipality and shall promptly call a conference of such agency or
agencies, unless, in the judgment of the Secretary, the effect of such
pollution is not of such significance as to warrant exercise of Federal
jurisdiction under this section.
"(C) The Secretary may, after consultation with State officials of
all affected States, also call such a conference whenever, on the basis
of reports, surveys, or studies, he has reason to believe that any
pollution referred to in subsection (a) is occurring and is endangering
the health and welfare of persons in a State other than that in which
the discharge or discharges originate. The Secretary shall invite the
cooperation of any municipal, State, or interstate air pollution control
agencies having jurisdiction in the affected area on any surveys or
studies forming the basis of conference action.
"(2) The agencies called to attend such conference may bring such
persons as they desire to the conference. Not less than three weeks,
prior notice of the conference date shall be given to such agencies.
[p. 396]
"(3) Following this conference, the Secretary shall prepare and
forward to all air pollution control agencies attending the conference
a summary of conference discussions including (A) occurrence of air
pollution subject to abatement under this Act; (B) adequacy of meas-
ures taken toward abatement of the pollution; and (C) nature of
delays, if any, being encountered in abating the pollution.
"(d) If the Secretary believes, upon the conclusion of the conference
or thereafter, that effective progress toward abatement of such pollu-
tion is not being made and that the health or welfare of any persons
is being endangered, he shall recommend to the appropriate State,
interstate, or municipal air pollution control agency (or to all such
agencies) that the necessary remedial action be taken. The Secretary
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 241
shall allow at least six months from the date he makes such recom-
mendations for the taking of such recommended action.
"(e) (1) If, at the conclusion of the period so allowed, such remedial
action or other action which in the judgment of the Secretary is
reasonably calculated to secure abatement of such pollution has not
been taken, the Secretary shall call a public hearing, to be held in or
near one or more of the places where the discharge or discharges
causing or contributing to such pollution originated, before a hearing
board of five or more persons appointed by the Secretary. Each State
in which any discharge causing or contributing to such pollution
originates and each State claiming to be adversely affected by such
pollution shall be given an opportunity to select one member of such
hearing board and each Federal department, agency, or instrumen-
tality having a substantial interest in the subject matter as determined
by the Secretary shall be given an opportunity to select one member
of such hearing board, and one member shall be a representative of the
appropriate interstate air pollution agency if one exists, and not less
than a majority of such hearing board shall be persons other than
officers or employees of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare. At least three weeks prior notice of such hearing shall be
given to the State, interstate, and municipal air pollution control
agencies called to attend such hearing and to the alleged polluter or
polluters.
"(2) On the basis of evidence presented at such hearing, the hearing
board shall make findings as to whether pollution referred to in sub-
section (a) is occurring and whether effective progress toward abate-
ment thereof is being made. If the hearing board finds such pollution
is occurring and effective progress toward abatement thereof is not
being made it shall make recommendations to the Secretary concerning
the measures, if any, which it finds to be reasonable and suitable to
secure abatement of such pollution.
"(3) The Secretary shall send such findings and recommendations
to the person or persons discharging any matter causing or contribut-
ing to such pollution; to air pollution control agencies of the State or
States and of the municipality or municipalities where such discharge
or discharges originate; and to any interstate air pollution control
agency whose jurisdictional area includes any such municipality,
together with a notice specifying a reasonable time (not less than six
months) to secure abatement of such pollution.
"(f) If action reasonably calculated to secure abatement of the
pollution within the time specified in the notice following the public
hearing is not taken, the Secretary—
"(1) in the case of polution of air which is endangering the
-------
242 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
health or welfare of persons in a State other than that in which
the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such pollu-
tion) originate, may request the Attorney General to bring
[p. 397]
a suit on behalf of the United States to secure abatement of pollu-
tion, and
"(2) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons only in the State in which the dis-
charge or discharges (causing or contributing to such pollution)
originate, at the request of the Governor of such State, shall pro-
vide such technical and other assistance as in his judgment is
necessary to assist the State in judicial proceedings to secure
abatement of the pollution under State or local law or, at the
request of the Governor of such State, shall request the Attorney
General to bring suit on behalf of the United States to secure
abatement of the pollution.
"(g) The court shall receive in evidence in any suit brought in a
United States court under subsection (f) of this section a transcript
of the proceedings before the board and a copy of the board's recom-
mendations and shall receive such further evidence as the court in its
discretion deems proper. The court, giving due consideration to the
practicability of complying with such standards as may be applicable
and to the physical and economic feasibility of securing abatement of
any pollution proved, shall have jurisdiction to enter such judgment,
and orders enforcing such judgment, as the public interest and the
equities of the case may require.
"(h) Members of any hearing board appointed pursuant to subsec-
tion (e) who are not regular full-time officers or employees of the
United States shall, while participating in the hearing conducted by
such board or otherwise engaged on the work of such board, be entitled
to receive compensation at a rate fixed by the Secretary, but not ex-
ceeding $50 per diem, including travel time, and while away from
their homes or regular places of business they may be allowed travel
expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by
law (5 U.S.C. 73b-2) for persons in the Government service employed
intermittently.
"(i) (1) In connection with any conference called under this section,
the Secretary is authorized to require any person whose activities
result in the emission of air pollutants causing or contributing to air
pollution to file with him, in such form as he may prescribe, a report,
based on existing data, furnishing to the Secretary such information
as may reasonably be required as to the character, kind, and quantity
of pollutants discharged and the use of devices or other means to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 243
prevent or reduce the emission of pollutants by the person filing such
a report. After a conference has been held with respect to any such
pollution the Secretary shall require such reports from the person
whose activities result in such pollution only to the extent recom-
mended by such conference. Such report shall be made under oath or
otherwise, as the Secretary may prescribe, and shall be filed with the
Secretary within such reasonable period as the Secretary may pre-
scribe, unless additional time be granted by the Secretary. No person
shall be required in such report to divulge trade secrets or secret
processes and all information reported shall be considered confidential
for the purposes of section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code.
"(2) If any person required to file any report under this subsection
shall fail to do so within the time fixed by the Secretary for filing the
same, and such failure shall continue for thirty days after notice of
such default, such person shall forfeit to the United States the sum of
$100 for each and every day of the continuance of such failure, which
forfeiture shall be payable into the Treasury of the United States,
and shall be recoverable in a civil suit in the name of the United
States brought in the district where such person has his principal
office or in any district in which he does business: Provided, That the
[p. 398]
Secretary may upon application therefor remit or mitigate any for-
feiture provided for under this subsection and he shall have authority
to determine the facts upon all such applications.
"(3) It shall be the duty of the various United States attorneys,
under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States, to
prosecute for the recovery of such forfeitures.
"AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE AND FUEL POLLUTION
"SEC. 6. (a) The Secretary shall encourage the continued efforts on
the part of the automotive and fuel industries to develop devices and
fuels to prevent pollutants from being discharged from the exhaust of
automotive vehicles, and to this end shall maintain liaison with auto-
motive vehicle, exhaust control device, and fuel manufacturers. For
this purpose, he shall appoint a technical committee, whose member-
ship shall consist of an equal number of representatives of the Depart-
ment and of automotive vehicle, exhaust control device, and fuel
manufacturers. The committee shall meet from time to time at the
call of the Secretary to evaluate progress in the development of such
devices and fuels and to develop and recommend research programs
which could lead to the development of such devices and fuels.
"(b) One year after enactment of this section, and semi-annually
-------
244 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Congress on measures
taken toward the resolution of the vehicle exhaust pollution problem
and efforts to improve fuels including (A) occurrence of pollution as
a result of discharge of pollutants from automotive exhaust; (B)
progress of research into development of devices and fuels to reduce
pollution from exhaust of automotive vehicles; (C) criteria on degree
of pollutant matter discharged from automotive exhausts; (D) efforts
to improve fuels so as to reduce emission of exhaust pollutants; and
(E) his recommendations for additional legislation, if necessary, to
regulate the discharge of pollutants from automotive exhausts.
"COOPERATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES TO CONTROL AIR POLLUTION
FROM FEDERAL FACILITIES
"SEC. 7. (a) It is hereby declared to be the intent of Congress that
any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any build-
ing, installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable and
consistent with the interests of the United States and within any
available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare and with any air pollution control agency in
preventing and controlling the pollution of the air in any area insofar
as the discharge of any matter from or by such building, installation,
or other property may cause or contribute to pollution of the air in
such area.
"(b) In order to control air pollution which may endanger the health
or welfare of any persons, the Secretary may establish classes of poten-
tial pollution sources for which any Federal department or agency
having jurisdiction over any building, installation, or other property
shall, before discharging any matter into the air of the United States,
obtain a permit from the Secretary for such discharge, such permits
to be issued for a specified period of time to be determined by the
Secretary and subject to revocation if the Secretary finds pollution is
endangering the health and welfare of any persons. In connection
with the issuance of such permits, there shall be submitted to the
Secretary such plans, specifications, and other information as he deems
relevant thereto and under such conditions as he may prescribe. The
Secretary shall report each January to the Congress the status of such
permits and compliance therewith.
[p. 399]
"ADMINISTRATION
"SEC. 8. (a) The Secretary is authorized to prescribe such regula-
tions as are necessary to carry out his functions under this Act. The
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 245
Secretary may delegate to any officer or employee of the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare such of his powers and duties
under this Act, except the making of regulations, as he may deem
necessary or expedient.
"(b) Upon the request of an air pollution control agency, personnel
of the Public Health Service may be detailed to such agency for the
purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act. The provisions of
section 214 (d) of the Public Health Service Act shall be applicable
with respect to any personnel so detailed to the same extent as if
such personnel had been detailed under section 214 (b) of that Act.
"(c) Payments under grants made under this Act may be made in
installments, and in advance or by way of reimbursement, as may be
determined by the Secretary.
"DEFINITIONS
"SEC. 9. When used in this Act—
"(a) The term 'Secretary' means the Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare.
"(b) The term 'air pollution control agency' means any of the
following:
"(1) A single State agency designated by the Governor of that
State as the official State air pollution control agency for purposes
of this Act;
"(2) An agency established by two or more States and having
substantial powers or duties pertaining to the prevention and
control of air pollution;
"(3) A city, county, or other local government health authority,
or, in the case of any city, county, or other local government in
which there is an agency other than the health authority charged
with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating to
the prevention and control of air pollution, such other agency; or
"(4) An agency of two or more municipalities located in the
same State or in different States and having substantial powers
or duties pertaining to the prevention and control of air pollution.
"(c) The term 'interstate air pollution control agency' means—
"(1) an air pollution control agency established by two or more
States, or
"(2) an air pollution control agency of two or more municipali-
ties located in different States.
"(d) The term 'State' means a State, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and
American Samoa.
-------
246 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
"(e) The term 'person' includes an individual, corporation, partner-
ship, association, State, municipality, and political subdivision of a
State.
"(f) The term 'municipality' means a city, town, borough, county,
parish, district, or other public body created by or pursuant to State
law.
"(g) All language referring to adverse effects on welfare shall in-
clude but not be limited to injury to agricultural crops and livestock,
damage to and the deterioration of property, and hazards to trans-
portation.
[p. 400]
"OTHER AUTHORITY NOT AFFECTED
"SEC. 10. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section,
this Act shall not be construed as superseding or limiting the authori-
ties and responsibilities, under any other provision of law, of the
Secretary or any other Federal officer, department, or agency.
"(b) No appropriation shall be authorized or made under section
301, 311, or 314 (c) of the Public Health Service Act for any fiscal
year after the fiscal year ending June 30, 1964, for any purpose for
which appropriations may be made under authority of this Act.
"RECORDS AND AUDIT
"SEC. 11. (a) Each recipient of assistance under this Act shall keep
such records as the Secretary shall prescribe, including records which
fully disclose the amount and disposition by such recipient of the
proceeds of such assistance, the total cost of the project or undertaking
in connection with which such assistance is given or used, and the
amount of that portion of the cost of the project or undertaking sup-
plied by other sources, and such other records as will facilitate an
effective audit.
"(b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the
Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly autho-
rized representatives, shall have access for the purpose of audit and
examinations to any books, documents, papers, and records of the
recipients that are pertinent to the grants received under this Act.
"SEPARABILITY
"SEC. 12. If any provision of this Act, or the application of any
provision of this Act to any person or circumstance, is held invalid,
the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances,
and the remainder of this Act, shall not be affected thereby.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 247
"APPROPRIATIONS
"SEC. 13. (a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out section 4 of this Act for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1964,
not to exceed $5,000,000.
"(b) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
Act not to exceed $25,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1965,
not to exceed $30,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1966, and
not to exceed $35,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967.
"SHORT TITLE
"SEC. 14. This Act may be cited as the 'Clean Air Act'."
SEC. 2. The title of such Act of July 14, 1955, is amended to read
"An Act to provide for air pollution prevention and control activities
of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and for other
purposes".
Approved December 17, 1963.
[p- 401]
l.le(l) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE
AND FOREIGN COMMERCE
H.R. REP. No. 508, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963)
CLEAN AIR ACT
JULY 9, 1963.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama, from the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 6518]
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 6518) to improve, strengthen, and accelerate
programs for the prevention and abatement of air pollution, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and
recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
526-701 O - 73 -
-------
248 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Page 7, strike out lines 8 through 17, inclusive, and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SEC. 4. (a) In any fiscal year, not to exceed $5,000,000 of the
amounts authorized to be appropriated by section 12 of this Act
for such fiscal year shall be available to make grants to air
pollution control agencies to assist them in meeting the costs of
establishing and maintaining programs for the prevention and
control of air pollution. Sums available for making grants as
provided in this section shall remain available for such purpose
during the fiscal year for which appropriated and the succeeding
fiscal year.
Page 8, line 9, strike out "equal to" and insert in lieu thereof "not
to exceed".
Page 8, line 10, strike out the colon and insert in lieu thereof a
period.
Page 8, strike out lines 11 through 17, inclusive, and insert in lieu
thereof "In the".
Page 13, line 11, immediately after the comma, insert:
and one member shall be a representative of the Department of
the Interior,
Page 21, line 15, strike out "This Act" and insert in lieu thereof the
following:
[P. 1]
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this
Act
Page 21, immediately after line 18, insert the following:
(b) No appropriation shall be authorized or made under sec-
tions 301, 311, or 314(c) of the Public Health Service Act for
any fiscal year after the fiscal year ending June 30, 1964, for any
purpose for which appropriations may be made under authority
of this Act.
Page 21, after line 24, insert the following:
APPROPRIATIONS
SEC. 12. (a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
cary out section 4 of this Act for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1964, not to exceed $5,000,000.
(b) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to carry out
this Act not to exceed $20,000,000 for the fiscal year ending
June 30,1965, $30,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1966,
and $35,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967.
Page 22, line 2, strike out "12." and insert "13.".
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 249
HISTORY OF LEGISLATION
Air pollution is a serious national problem. It is probable that it
will increase greatly, unless appropriate action is taken, owing to
further industrial growth and the concentration of population in
urban areas. The Nation's rapid progress in technological development
has made possible a high level of material benefits for the people,
but has also generated, as byproducts of such development, a high
level of existing and potential problems of contamination of our en-
vironment. The pollutants come from many sources—from furnaces
which heat homes, offices, and public buildings; from burning of domes-
tic and industrial waste; from motor vehicle exhaust; from industrial
processes which release chemical vapors; and from combustion of fuels
for the generation of power.
Continuing research and control efforts will be necessary if major
adverse effects on the public health and welfare are to be prevented.
Federal, State, and local governments are spending large sums to
study and control it. Industry likewise has spent many millions on
research and abatement. Great progress has been made but the
problem is far from solved. In fact, the blight of air pollution, especially
resulting from motor vehicle exhaust gases, has become a real menace
to all urban areas.
The problem of air pollution has been under consideration by the
Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce for many years. In
1955, the committee reported favorably on the basic legislation
establishing the existing Federal air pollution research and technical
assistance program, which became Public Law 159 of the 84th
Congress.
[p. 2]
In 1956, the Special Subcommittee on Traffic Safety of this com-
mittee made a study of noxious, toxic, and harmful motor vehicle
exhaust fumes in connection with a comprehensive investigation of
highway traffic safety. Testimony was taken and research activities
of the industry were studied on visits to manufacturing plants.
Hearings have been held by the Health and Safety Subcommittee
of this committee in 1958, 1959, and 1960 on various bills concerned
with extension of the Federal air pollution program and on the progress
being made in air pollution control, particularly with regard to motor
vehicle exhausts.
In 1959, the committee reported favorably on legislation to extend
the Federal air pollution program (Public Law 86-365), and in 1960
a favorable committee report was made on a bill requiring increased
emphasis on research into the motor vehicle exhaust problem and a
-------
250 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
report to Congress on the results of such investigations (Public Law
86-493).
The executive branch of Government has also recognized the air
pollution problem and in 1954, at the request of President Eisenhower,
the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare appointed an ad hoc
Interdepartmental Committee on Community Air Pollution. In Janu-
ary 1955, the President stated in his special health message that—
As a result of industrial growth and urban development, the
atmosphere over some population centers may be approaching
the limit of its ability to absorb air pollutants with safety to
health. I am recommending an increased appropriation to the
Public Health Service for studies seeking necessary scientific
data and more effective methods of control.
President Kennedy has focused increased attention on the air pollu-
tion problem in recent years through a number of special messages to
the Congress.
In his special health message on February 7, 1963, President
Kennedy observed that there is overwhelming scientific evidence
linking air pollution to the aggravation of heart conditions and to
increases in susceptibility to chronic respiratory diseases, particularly
among older people. The President pointed out that economic damage
from air pollution amounts to as much as $11 billion every year in
the United States, of which $500 million represents agricultural losses
alone.
In making specific legislative recommendations for improvement of
the Nation's air pollution control effort, the President stated:
In the light of the known damage caused by polluted air, both
to our health and to our economy, it is imperative that greater
emphasis be given to the control of air pollution by communities,
States, and the Federal Government. We are currently spending
10 cents per capita a year in fighting a problem which cost an
estimated $65 per capita annually in economic losses alone. I
therefore recommend legislation authorizing the Public Health
Service of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare—
(a) to engage in a more intensive research program per-
mitting full investigation of the causes, effects, and control
of air pollution;
[p. 3]
(6) to provide financial stimulation to States and local
air pollution control agencies through project grants which
will help them to initiate or improve their control programs;
(c) to conduct studies on air pollution problems of inter-
state or nationwide significance; and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 251
(d) to take action to abate interstate air pollution along
the general lines of the existing water pollution control en-
forcement measures.
COMMITTEE HEARINGS
The Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety conducted hearings
on March 18 and 19,1963, on a number of bills to improve, strengthen,
and accelerate programs for the prevention and abatement of air
pollution. The bills are as follows: H.R. 4415 by Mr. Roberts of
Alabama; H.R. 3507 by Mr. Fulton of Pennsylvania; H.R. 4061 by
Mr. Rodino of New Jersey; and H.R. 4750 by Mr. Halpern of New
York. As a result of these hearings, a clean bill was introduced by
Mr. Roberts of Alabama (H.R. 6518).
PURPOSE OF LEGISLATION
This legislation would replace the Air Pollution Control Act (act of
July 14, 1955, Public Law 159, 84th Cong., as amended) with a new
version, a "Clean Air Act." The new act constitutes a complete
revision of existing law by strengthening and making more explicit
the authority of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
with respect to its activities in air pollution research, training, and
demonstrations. It is the intention of the committee that the Air
Pollution Control Act as revised by this bill shall become the basic
authority for appropriations for air pollution programs to be conducted
by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
In addition, two new programs are authorized: a 4-year program of
Federal grants to State, regional, and local air pollution control
agencies; and a program of limited Federal assistance and participa-
tion, under certain circumstances, in actions directed toward abate-
ment of particular air pollution problems.
APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZED
For fiscal 1964 not to exceed $5 million is authorized to be appro-
priated for grants to air pollution control agencies under the new
grant program. This authorization, together with the proposed appro-
priations of approximately $13 million for fiscal 1964 under existing
law, would bring the total authorized appropriations to approximately
$18 million for fiscal 1964. For fiscal 1965, not to exceed $20 million;
for fiscal 1966, not to exceed $30 million; and for fiscal 1967 not to
exceed $35 million are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the
provisions of the act, of which not to exceed $5 million in any fiscal
year shall be available for grants to air pollution control agencies.
[p. 4]
-------
252 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
EXISTING LAW AND PRESENT PROGRAMS
The existing authority of the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare with respect to air pollution is derived primarily from
the Air Pollution Control Act, Public Law 159, 84th Congress, ap-
proved July 14, 1955, as amended.
This act authorizes a program of research and technical assistance
to obtain data and to devise and develop methods for control and
abatement of air pollution by the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. The
act recognizes the primary responsibilities and rights of the States
and local governments in controlling air pollution, but authorizes
Federal grants-in-aid to air pollution control agencies to assist them
in the formulation and execution of their research programs directed
toward abatement of air pollution.
Under the provisions of the act, the Surgeon General is authorized
to prepare or recommend research programs; encourage cooperative
activities by State and local governments; conduct studies and re-
search and make recommendations with respect to any specific prob-
lem of air pollution, if requested; conduct research and make grants
for research, training, and demonstration projects; and to make
available to all agencies the results of surveys, studies, and investiga-
tions, research, and experiments relating to air pollution and
abatement.
Public Law 86-493, approved June 8, 1960, directed the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service to conduct a thorough study of
motor vehicle exhaust as it affects human health through the pollution
of air. A report on this study was published as House Document 489.
In 1962, the Air Pollution Control Act was amended by Public Law
87-761 so as to make permanent the requirement that the Surgeon
General conduct studies relating to motor vehicle exhaust. The act
was further amended so as to authorize appropriations to carry out the
act until June 30,1966. A summary of the air pollution programs con-
ducted by the Public Health Service under these authorizations is
set forth in the committee's 1962 report on extending the Air Pollution
Control Act (Kept. 2265, 87th Cong).
Although the Air Pollution Control Act, as amended, constitutes
the basic authority for the Department's activities in the field of air
pollution, sections 301 and 311 of the Public Health Service Act have
also been utilized as a basis for appropriations to support these activi-
ties. Section 301 is the basic section of the Public Health Service Act
with respect to the Surgeon General's authority relative to research,
research training, and related functions; section 311 is the basic section
authorizing Federal-State cooperation and technical assistance. In
addition, section 314(c) of the Public Health Services Act authorizes
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 253
grants to States, counties, etc., to assist in establishing and main-
taining adequate public health services, including grants for demon-
strations and for training of personnel for State and local health work.
Although the committee is advised that section 314(c) has not in fact
been used as a basis for grants to support public health activities
primarily related to air pollution, it would appear not to preclude
grants for that purpose.
The existing Air Pollution Control Act authorizes appropriations of
$5 million annually for each of the fiscal years beginning July 1, 1955,
and ending June 30, 1966. Under that act and sections 301 and 311
of the Public Health Service Act, approximately $2,000,000 was ex-
[p-5]
pended in 1955 for air-pollution research and technical assistance;
$1.7 million during fiscal year 1956; $2.7 million for 1957; $4 million
for each of 1958 and 1959; $4.3 million for 1960; $6 million for 1961;
$8.4 million for 1962; $11 million for 1963; and for fiscal year 1964 it
is anticipated expenditures will approximate $13 million, exclusive of
the $5 million for 1964 authorized under the new grant program pro-
posed in this legislation.
The committee has amended the bill to provide appropriations
ceilings for fiscal 1965,1966, and 1967. In order to insure the effective-
ness of these ceilings, the committee has also provided that no appro-
priation shall be authorized or made under section 301, 311, or 314 (c)
of the Public Health Service Act for any fiscal year, after the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1964, for any purpose for which appropriations
may be made under authority of this legislation. However, as dis-
cussed later in this report, the committee does not intend that this
restriction operate to prohibit appropriations under other provisions
of law for activities which may be only peripherally concerned with
air pollution.
SUMMARY OF LEGISLATION
FINDINGS AND PURPOSE
Section 1 of the proposed revision of existing law is a statement of
findings on the part of Congress necessitating the enactment of this
legislation and a statement of the purposes of the legislation. This is
essentially an expansion and clarification of the provisions of section 1
of existing law.
COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES AND UNIFORM LAWS
Subsections (a) and (c) of section 2 of the proposed revision of
existing law are essentially the same as the provisions of section 3 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
-------
254 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Subsection (b) of section 2 requires that the Secretary cooperate
with all Federal departments and agencies to assure the Federal air
pollution control program of all available Federal facilities and
resources.
RESEARCH, INVESTIGATION, TRAINING, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
This section is a revision of section 2 of existing law and is essentially
modeled after section 4 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Briefly, it requires the Secretary to establish a national research and
development program for prevention and control of air pollution, and
for that purpose to conduct research, render technical service, and
conduct investigations and research if requested to do so by appro-
priate air pollution control agencies, or if he deems the problems of air
pollution of national significance; and in addition, to conduct studies
relating to motor vehicle exhausts and to the effect of the discharge
of such exhausts on human health and the determination of standards
of safety for such discharge. For these purposes the Secretary is
authorized to collect and make available information on the subject,
to cooperate with all interested public and private agencies and insti-
tutions, to make grants for research, training, and demonstrations; to
introduce controls, to provide training for personnel, to establish
[p. 6]
research fellowships, to collect and disseminate basic data on chemical,
physical, and biological air quality and other information; to develop
effective practical processes, methods, and prototype devices for the
prevention or control of air pollution; and to establish criteria of air
pollution.
GRANTS
Section 4 proposes that not more than $5 million of the total amount
authorized to be appropriated by section 12 for any fiscal year shall be
available to make grants to air pollution control agencies to help
meet the cost of establishing and maintaining programs for the pre-
vention and control of air pollution. These sums are to be allotted to
the several States on the basis of population, the extent of the air
pollution problem, and the financial need of the State. From each
State's allotment the Secretary is authorized to make grants to air
pollution control agencies in an amount not to exceed two-thirds of
the cost of establishing and maintaining a particular air pollution
prevention or control program. The grants are to be made in accord-
ance with such terms and conditions as the Secretary finds necessary
to carry out this section. Provision is also made for the reallotment of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 255
those allotments not obligated because of insufficient approvable
applications.
The principal focus of any nationwide program to develop an
effective air pollution prevention and control effort must be the
establishment and strengthening of agencies in the States and the
larger municipalities. The committee has long emphasized that the
prevention and control of air pollution at its source is the primary
responsibility of States and local governments.
Studies by the Public Health Service indicate that all communities
in the United States having a population greater than 50,000 and
about 40 percent of the communities in the 2,500 to 50,000 brackets,
have air pollution problems. Only 17 States with air pollution pro-
grams expend more than $5,000 per year. Approximately $2 million
was spent by these States in 1961, of which more than half was spent
by the State of California.
In 1961, local air pollution control agencies spent approximately
$8.2 million. A survey by the Public Health Service found that about
6,000 communities have air pollution problems of varying degrees for
which active control programs should be initiated or strengthened.
Of the 218 urban places with more than 50,000 population having
major or moderate air pollution problems, only about one-half are
served by an air pollution control agency.
The objective of the grant program is to provide impetus to the
establishment and improvement of air pollution prevention and con-
trol programs in the States and local communities, not to provide a
substitute for State and local funds. The committee is aware of the
contention often made with respect to programs of Federal grants-
in-aid that such financial assistance stifles local initiative and results
in dependence on continuing Federal support. The committee con-
siders that this argument could not apply to this program. The rela-
tively modest amounts authorized to be appropriated for this purpose,
together with the State allotment formula and matching provisions of
the bill, will operate, in the committee's opinion, to encourage, not
discourage, local effort in financing new or expanded
[p. 7]
programs, or the improvement of existing programs. The committee
would expect the regulations of the Department with respect to the
grant program to be designed to carry out this objective.
Under the provisions of the bill, the Secretary would be authorized
to make grants directly to local air pollution control agencies, without
prior State approval. The committee would expect, however, that in
the administration of this program, the Department will take pre-
cautions to insure that a grant will be made only after appropriate
-------
256 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
consideration has been given to the views of the State air pollution
control authority (where such a State authority exists) with respect
to the particular program for which a grant is sought. This procedure
would assure, to a greater degree, that the objective of a planned
and coordinated statewide program would be achieved most efficiently
and economically.
ABATEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION
Section 5 establishes the manner for abating air pollution. In sub-
stance it is quite similar to the comparable provisions in section 8 of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Subsection (c) (1) (A) of section 5 establishes the procedure for the
initiation of a conference on an air pollution problem when there is
interstate pollution involved. Subsection (c)(l)(B) establishes pro-
cedures for the initiation of a conference in the case of an intrastate
air pollution problem. Subsection (c)(l)(C) authorizes the Secretary
to call a conference in the case of interstate air pollution on his own
initiative. After the conference the Secretary must allow at least 6
months for any remedial action which he recommends to be taken.
Thereafter, if the recommended remedial action is not taken, he may
call a public hearing before a hearing board appointed by him after
notice to the interested parties. The hearing board, after the hearing,
may recommend to the Secretary measures to secure abatement of the
pollution and the Secretary may send such recommendations to the
interested parties together with a notice specifying a reasonable time
(but not less than 6 months) to secure abatement of the air pollution.
If, after the expiration of the time set by the Secretary to secure
abatement, such abatement measures have not been taken, the Secre-
tary, in the case of intrastate pollution, shall send the findings and
record of the hearing together with his finding that action reasonably
calculated to secure abatement has not been taken, to the Governor
and the attorney general of such State, and at their request, may
provide technical and other assistance to assist the State in judicial
proceedings to secure abatement. In the case of interstate air pollu-
tion the Secretary may request the Attorney General to bring a suit
on behalf of the United States to secure abatement. He shall not make
such a request until he receives a certification from the Governor of
each State wherein the health and welfare of individuals are being
endangered by air pollution (other than the State in which the dis-
charge or discharges causing or contributing to such pollution origi-
nate) that such Governor has made a good faith effort to enter into an
agreement or compact with the State causing the pollution to secure
abatement thereof and has been unable to secure such agreement or
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 257
compact. The court is given jurisdiction to render such judgment
and orders as the public interest and equity of the case may require.
[p-8]
The purpose of this section is to provide authority for limited
Federal participation and assistance, under certain circumstances, in
actions directed toward abatement of particular air pollution problems.
The committee is impressed with the seriousness of the air pollution
problem and the need for more effective control of pollution as an im-
portant measure for preserving the public health and welfare.
The committee, however, wishes to clearly reaffirm its adherence to
the policy that primary responsibility for regulatory control of air
pollution is and should remain with duly constituted State and inter-
state authorities. It is well established that the protection of the
health and welfare of the citizens of a State is a proper subject for the
exercise of the State police power. Nevertheless, it is the committee's
opinion that there is a real need for limited Federal assistance designed
to encourage and foster cooperative efforts on the State and local
levels in delineating the scope and nature of particular problems and in
finding solutions to those problems. The bill provides specifically for
cooperation with the States, and the conference and hearing pro-
cedures authorized are intended to encourage and assist States and
local communities in their efforts to control air pollution, not to
usurp or preempt their rights, powers, or responsibilities in this field.
With respect to interstate pollution, i.e., where pollution originating
in one State affects the health and well-being of the people of another
State, the Secretary may request institution of Federal court action
but only after the prior administrative procedures have been ex-
hausted and only upon condition that the certification requirement
described above has been met. The committee believes that the
procedures provided constitute a reasonable balance between the
primary rights of the States to control air pollution within their
boundaries and the rights of States seriously affected by pollution
from another State to have available to them a practical remedy.
REQUIREMENTS OF REPORT
Section 6 authorizes the Secretary to require any person whose
activities causing or contributing to air pollution have been the sub-
ject of a conference under section 5 to file certain reports with respect
to times and quantities of pollutants discharged and the use by such
person of various devices and means to prevent or reduce that pollu-
tion. This information is to be considered confidential for the pur-
poses, of title 18, United States Code, section 1905. Failure to file such
-------
258 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
a report subjects the person in default to forfeit $100 a day to the
United States to be recoverable in a civil action. The Secretary may
remit or mitigate any such forfeiture.
COOPERATION OP FEDERAL AGENCIES
Section 7 requires all Federal departments and agencies to cooperate
with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and with air
pollution agencies in controlling air pollution discharges from any
Federal building, installation, or property.
ADMINISTRATION
Section 8 contains the usual provisions with respect to the adminis-
tration of the law.
[p. 9]
DEFINITIONS
Section 9 defines various terms used in the act, including "air pollu-
tion control agency," "State," "person," and "municipality."
OTHER AUTHORITY
Subsection (a) of section 10 provides that the act shall not be con-
strued as superseding or limiting the responsibilities and authorities of
the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare or of any other
Federal officer, department, or agency under any provision of law,
except to the extent provided in subsection (b) of this section 10.
Subsection (b) of section 10 prohibits any appropriation from being
authorized or made under sections 301, 311, and 314(c) of the Public
Health Service Act for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1964, and for
any subsequent fiscal year, for any purpose for which appropriations
may be made under authority of this act. The purpose of this sub-
section is to insure that this act will become the basic authority for
appropriations by the Federal Government for all air pollution pro-
grams. Obviously, in the case of programs which may be peripherally
concerned with air pollution, the committee does not intend that
onerous bookkeeping requirements be established to allocate to the
penny on a strict cost-accounting basis the air pollution aspects of
those programs, but it does intend that this legislation become the
authority for appropriations for all air pollution programs, in order
that the legislative committees of Congress may have, to an extent
which they presently do not have, a fuller understanding and control
of the true cost to the Federal Government of these air pollution
programs.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 259
SEPARABILITY
Section 11 contains the usual separability clause.
APPROPRIATIONS
Subsection (a) of subsection 12 authorizes an appropriation of not
more than $5 million for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1964, to carry
out the grant program established by section 4 of the act. Subsection
(b) of section 12 authorizes appropriations of up to $20 million for
the fiscal year 1965, $30 million for the fiscal year 1966, and $35 million
for the fiscal year 1967, These amounts represent the maximums
authorized to be appropriated and will permit Congress periodically
to reexamine the Federal air pollution programs to determine future
public policy in this area.
SHORT TITLE
Section 15 authorizes the short title of "Clean Air Act" for this
legislation.
Section 2 of the bill amends the formal title of the act of July 14,
1955, to make it more accurate as a result of the amendments made by
this legislation.
[p. 10]
AGENCY REPORTS
The reports of the various executive agencies on several of the bills
on which hearings were held as a result of which a clean bill, H.R.
6518, was introduced, are as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
March 15, 1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House oj Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : This letter is in response to your request of
March 9, 1963, for a report on H.R. 4415, a bill "to improve, strength-
en, and accelerate programs for the prevention and abatement of air
pollution," and your request of February 22, 1963, for a report on
H.R. 3507, a similar bill "to accelerate, extend, and strengthen the
Federal air pollution control program." This report also covers H.R.
4061, which is identical with H.R. 3507.
These bills would amend the act of July 14, 1955, as amended (42
U.S.C. 1857-1857g), to replace that act with a new version, a "Clean
Air Act," which would provide for an increased and intensified re-
search, investigation, and training program; would add new authority
-------
260 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
for financial grants to air pollution control agencies for establishing
and maintaining air pollution control programs; and would provide
new authority for action to abate air pollution. The major provisions
of the bills are summarized below:
H.R. 4415 would authorize the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare to establish a national research and development program for
the prevention and control of air pollution, including a directive to
study air pollution deriving from motor vehicle exhausts, and pro-
viding, among other things, authority to develop processes, methods,
and prototype devices for the prevention or control of air pollution;
to recommend criteria for air quality; to provide training; and to
collect and disseminate basic data.
The bill would also authorize a 5-year program of grants to State,
local, or regional air pollution control agencies for the establishment
or support of air pollution control programs. For this purpose, $5
million would be authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 1964,
$6 million for each succeeding fiscal year to and including fiscal year
1967, and $7 million for fiscal year 1968. Appropriations would be
allotted among the States on the basis of population, extent of the
air pollution problem, and financial need of the respective States
(measured by per capita income). Funds not obligated by the end of
the fiscal year for which they are allotted would be reallotted by the
Secretary. From each State's allotment, the Secretary would make
grants to air pollution agencies in an amount equal to two-thirds of
the cost of establishing and maintaining programs for the prevention
and control of air pollution, except that in the case of regional air
pollution control programs which meet criteria established by the
Secretary, in regulations, as necessary for the effective control of air
pollution in the area, grants would be in an amount equal to three-
fourths of the cost of establishing and maintaining the programs.
(Provision is made for grants to interstate air pollution control agen-
cies to be made from allotments of the constituent States.)
[p. 11]
As a part of the national research and development program for the
prevention and control of air pollution, the Secretary would be author-
ized to conduct investigations, research, and make surveys concerning
any specific problem of air pollution confronting any air pollution
control agency, if he is requested to do so by such agency, or if, in his
judgment, the problem is interstate in nature or of nationwide sig-
nificance. He would also be authorized to make recommendations for
the solution of such problems.
In addition, the bill would authorize the Secretary to take action to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 261
abate interstate air pollution along the general lines of the existing
water pollution control enforcement measures. In the case of air
pollution which is endangering the health or welfare of persons in a
State other than that in which the discharge originates, the Secretary
would call a conference of the local and other air pollution control
agencies of the States and areas involved either at the request of the
Governor of a State, a State air pollution agency, or a municipality
(with the concurrence of the State), or on his own initiative. Following
the conference, if the Secretary believes that effective progress is
not being made toward abatement and that the health or welfare of
any person is being endangered, he would be required to recommend
appropriate remedial action. If after 6 months appropriate remedial
action has not been taken, the Secretary would be required to call a
public hearing before an ad hoc hearing board of five or more persons
appointed by him. Each State involved would be given an oppor-
tunity to choose one member of the board; one member would be a
representative of the Department of Commerce; and at least a major-
ity of the board would be persons other than officers and employees of
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The board would
make findings as to whether pollution is occurring and whether effec-
tive progress toward abatement is being made, and would recommend
to the Secretary appropriate abatement measures. The findings and
recommendations of the board would be sent to those causing or
contributing to the pollution and to the control agencies concerned,
with a notice specifying a reasonable time (not less than 6 months) to
secure abatement of such pollution. If appropriate action is not taken
in the specified time, the Secretary would be authorized to request the
Attorney General to bring suit on behalf of the United States to secure
abatement of the pollution.
In the case of intrastate air pollution, the Secretary would call a
conference either upon the request of the Governor, the State air
pollution agency, or a municipality (with the concurrence of the
State agency). However, if a municipality has not made the request,
then the concurrence of a municipality involved—i.e., the munici-
pality where the pollution originates, or a- municipality affected by
the pollution—would be required. The Secretary would, however, not
call such a conference if, in his judgment, the effect of such pollution
is not of such significance as to warrant exercise of Federal jurisdic-
tion. The same procedural steps as those involved in the case of inter-
state pollution would be provided up to and through the hearing stage.
Enforcement, however, would remain with the State concerned. The
Secretary would send the findings and recommendations to the Gover-
nor and the attorney general of the State, and, if requested by the
-------
262 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Governor or attorney general, would provide technical and other
assistance necessary to assist the State in judicial proceedings to secure
abatement of the pollution under State or local law.
[p. 12]
A person whose air pollution activities have been the subject of a
conference under the above-described provisions could be required by
the Secretary to file a report furnishing such information as may be
reasonably required as to the pollutants involved and as to the use of
pollution control devices, and failure to furnish such information
within the required time would, if such failure continues for 30 days
after notice of default, give rise to a forfeiture of $100 per day re-
coverable by civil suit. (This provision is patterned on a similar one
in the Federal Trade Commission Act.)
One other provision of the bill deserves mention. It would provide
that research supported under the authority of the bill shall be pro-
vided for in such a manner that all patents, processes, products, uses,
and information resulting therefrom will "be available to the general
public." It is specifically provided that this section is not to be con-
strued to deprive the owner of any background patents of his rights
thereunder.
The need for a Federal program in air pollution control sufficiently
augmented and reconstituted to deal effectively with the national
responsibilities in this field was outlined by President Kennedy in his
1963 health message, presented to the Congress on February 7. The
President called for legislation in four broad areas of activity. He
asked the Congress for authority (a) to engage in a more intensive
research program permitting full investigation of the causes, effects
and control of air pollution; (6) to provide financial stimulation to
States and local air pollution control agencies through project grants
which will help them to initiate or improve their control programs;
(c) to conduct studies on air pollution problems of interstate or nation-
wide significance; and (d) to take action to abate interstate air pollu-
tion along the general lines of the existing water pollution control
enforcement measures.
The bill would provide the authorities requested by the President,
and we are in full accord with its objectives and, in most respects,
with the specific provisions to carry out those objectives. However,
the provisions of section 4, relating to grants for the support of air
pollution control programs, are in need of revision in certain respects.
In the first place, the requirement that grants under this section be
made for meeting a specified portion of the cost of establishing and
maintaining programs for prevention and control of air pollution
appears to imply continuing support which would apply to existing as
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 263
well as new programs, and would embrace the entire program of a
recipient agency until the end of the last fiscal year for which appro-
priations are authorized. This seems incompatible with the appro-
priation ceiling coupled with other fiscal requirements of the section.
Even at the present level of State and local expenditures, the pro-
posed annual appropriation authorization would be insufficient to
meet the required two-thirds (or in the case of regional programs)
three-fourths of the maintenance costs of existing programs. (Cur-
rently throughout the Nation, States and local government agencies
are expending more than $10 million annually in maintaining existing
programs.) No provision is made in the bill for prorating of grants in
the event of insufficient total appropriations.
There is, moreover, considerable disparity among and within the
States in their air pollution control problems and needs, and great
variation in the present readiness of States and communities to de-
velop or improve programs for air pollution control. The vital need at
[p. 13]
this early stage, as indicated in the President's message, is for flexible
authority to apply the limited Federal grant appropriations toward
stimulation of air pollution control programs by giving support to
the initiation of such programs where they do not now exist, and to the
expansion and improvement of programs now in being, rather than
furnishing continuing and programwide grant support of ongoing
programs. To this end, we recommend that the Secretary be author-
ized to make grants (of limited duration), within the appropriation
ceilings stated in the bill, to assist in meeting up to two-thirds (or up
to three-fourths in the case of regional projects) of the cost of projects
for the initiation, expansion, or improvement of air pollution control
programs, rather than the cost of "maintaining" such programs.
In the second place, a statutory allotment provision such as that
contained in the bill, which envisions distribution of funds according
to formula, is not, at this stage, well suited to the accomplishment of
these objectives. Such a provision would probably result in allotment
of sums where they are not needed and later reallotment, with a year's
delay in each instance. We therefore recommend deletion of the allot-
ment provisions of the bill, and insertion of a paragraph directing the
Secretary, in acting upon applications for grants, to take into con-
sideration the desirability of an equitable geographical distribution of
projects (giving due weight to the extent of the air pollution problem
in various areas of the Nation and other relevant factors). We feel
that these changes, and the larger Federal share for regional projects
as an incentive for collaborative action by two or more States or
municipalities, would make possible the most effective distribution of
526-101 O - 73 - 19
-------
264 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
limited Federal funds and would assure that Federal aid would be
directed toward those projects which are most directly related to the
national objectives of the program.
We would also suggest amendment of section 3 (a) (3) of the bill to
make clearly discretionary the provision which authorizes the Secre-
tary, if requested by an air pollution control agency, to conduct in-
vestigations and research or make surveys concerning any specific
problem of air pollution confronting that agency. This could be done
by inserting on page 4, line 24 of the bill, after the word "agency,"
the phrase "and in the judgment of the Secretary such problem is of
sufficient significance."
With respect to the intrastate abatement provisions in subsection
(c)(l)(B) of section 5 of the bill, we recommend changing the word
"shall" in line 16, page 11, to "may" thus giving the Secretary flexi-
bility and discretion in determining when to call a conference, so that
he could take into consideration not only the significance of the air
pollution problem but the extent to which the State and local agencies
have attempted to exercise their authorities under appropriate State
and local law.
Most of the provisions of H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4601 are identical
with, or very similar to, those of H.R. 4415 and the comments and
recommendations we have made above would apply to them as well.
We would, however, call your attention to the major differences be-
tween the bills.
Instead of the 5-year program of grants for the support of air pollu-
tion control programs authorized in H.R. 4415, a 10-year program
would be authorized in H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4601, with appropriation
authorizations varying between $5 and $7 million the first 5 years
and going to $10 million for each of the last 3 years of the program.
[p. 14]
We prefer the 5-year authorization of H.R. 4415 as being more appro-
priate for a new grants program and offering a timely opportunity for
congressional review after a reasonable period of experience under the
new program.
H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4601 would authorize the Secretary to estab-
lish, equip, and maintain regional field laboratory and research facili-
ties for the conduct of research and training relating to the prevention
and control of air pollution. This authority is not at the present time
necessary to carry out the research and training responsibilities under
these bills.
H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4601 would establish an Air Pollution Control
Advisory Board, consisting of the Secretary and nine members ap-
pointed by the President, to advise and make recommendations to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 265
the Secretary on matters of policy relating to his functions under the
act. We believe it preferable, however, to provide authority to estab-
lish by executive action such advisory committee or committees as
the Secretary, from time to time, may deem appropriate to the cir-
cumstances rather than using the more rigid statutory approach.
H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4601 would authorize the Secretary, when
action to secure abatement of an intrastate problem is not taken
following a hearing thereon, and with the written consent of the
Governor of the State concerned, to request the Attorney General of
the United States to bring suit on behalf of the United States to secure
abatement of the pollution. We prefer the enforcement provisions
included in H.R. 4415 which limit the Secretary's action in such cases
to notifying the State and, at its request, to render technical or other
assistance to the State in judicial proceedings to secure abatement of
the pollution under State or local law.
In brief, while the provisions of these bills are parallel in most
respects, and they would effectively implement the recommendations
in the President's health message, we prefer the provisions of H.R.
4415 and accordingly recommend its enactment with the modifications
indicated above.
We are advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there is no objec-
tion to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the
administration's program.
Sincerely,
(Signed) ANTHONY J. CELEBREZZE,
Secretary.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, D.C., March 18, 1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. HARRIS: This responds to your request for the views of
this Department on H.R. 4415, a bill to improve, strengthen, and
accelerate programs for the prevention and abatement of air pollution.
We recommend enactment of the bill but recommend that it be
amended as suggested below.
As the title of the bill states, it is intended to improve, strengthen,
and accelerate programs for the prevention and abatement of air
[p. 15]
pollution. The bill provides for air pollution prevention and technologi-
-------
266 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
cal source control activities within the Federal Government wherever
these can be provided by available resources. The Department of the
Interior has been active in air pollution abatement research and in-
vestigations since before 1912, in which year its Bureau of Mines
published three bulletins on causes and means of preventing smoke
emissions from coal-burning equipment. Publications followed shortly
that recorded work of the Bureau of Mines on control of fumes from
metallurgical processes and on developing adequate ventilation stand-
ards for automotive vehicular tunnels. Through the years that fol-
lowed until mid-1954, during which period the major assigned Federal
responsibilities regarding air pollution were concentrated within this
Department, a long and impressive list of achievements and their
documenting publications was developed by the Bureau of Mines.
Since 1955, this Department has been pleased to cooperate, through
its Bureau of Mines, in the Federal air pollution abatement program
that became a primary responsibility of the Public Health Service
under Public Law 84-159. The Bureau of Mines air pollution interests
center around technologic developments for the control of the sources
of pollution which result from the production, processing, and utiliza-
tion of minerals, mineral fuels, and their products. Bureau research
on automobile and diesel engine exhaust has materially contributed to
the knowledge on this subject. Research on the problem of reducing
air pollution from thermal powerplants and other industrial, fuel-
burning installations has provided much needed new information on
the development of economic means for reducing the concentration of
sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen in the effluent gases from the
stack.
We favor the enactment of H.R. 4415 because we believe there is a
need for increased emphasis on air pollution abatement and because
the bill provides the means and encouragement for the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare to utilize fully the resources available
to him from agencies such as our own that have much to offer to the
Federal program of air pollution abatement.
Section 5(e)(l) provides for a public hearing to be held in or near
one or more of the places where the discharge or discharges causing or
contributing to pollution originate, before a hearing board of five or
more perons appointed by the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare. This section also provides that at least one member of the
hearing board shall be a representative of the Department of Com-
merce. Because operations involving production, processing, or utili-
zation of mineral substances are major sources of air pollution, we
believe that in many hearings this Department should be represented
on the hearing board. We recognize that other Federal agencies may
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 267
also have a similar need, and we recommend that the bill be amended
as follows:
On page 13, lines 7-9, delete "at least one member shall be a repre-
sentative of the Department of Commerce," and substitute "and each
Federal agency that has a substantial interest in the subject matter
shall be given an opportunity to select one member of such hearing
board,".
[p. 16]
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to
the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administra-
tion's program.
Sincerely yours,
JOHN M. KELLY,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, March 25, 1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR CONGRESSMAN HARRIS: This is in response to your request
for our comments on H.R. 4415, a bill to improve, strengthen, and
accelerate programs for the prevention and abatement of air pollution.
In his health message to the Congress last month the President
called attention to the compelling need for greater emphasis on the
control of air pollution by the local communities, States, and Federal
Government. Evidence linking air pollution with the aggravation of
certain illnesses, and the annual costs from an economic standpoint
totaling about $11 billion were cited in the message as making action
imperative.
We strongly urge the enactment of legislation in line with the
recommendations of the President in his health message. However,
we defer to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare as to
the specific provisions which such legislation should contain.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the
submission of this report from the standpoint of the administration's
program.
Yours sincerely,
W. WlLLARD WlRTZ,
Secretary of Labor.
-------
268 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, D.C., March 19, 1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your requests for com-
ments on H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4415, bills to strengthen the air pollution
control program.
This Department favors the enactment of legislation for this pur-
pose. The bills would authorize the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare to engage in a more intensive national research program
permitting full investigation of the causes, effects, and control of air
pollution through encouragement of State and local cooperation with
Federal departments and agencies. Additionally, the bills provide for
grants to air pollution control agencies to assist them in meeting the
costs of establishing and maintaining their programs.
This Department has a direct interest in the abatement of air
pollution as it affects human health. Additionally, individuals who
produce, handle, process, and market farm and forest products,
[p. 17]
including animals, crop plants, and forest trees upon which this
country depends for food, fiber, shelter, and other materials, are
affected adversely by air pollutants. Adverse effects include not only
the impairment of health and comfort to the individual, but also
normal growth and development of farm animals and plants, and of
forest trees.
Air pollution, especially from effluents containing fluorine, sulfur,
and other compounds and combustion products, has been demon-
strated to cause extensive crop, livestock, and forest damage. This
Department has authority and will undertake such research and other
appropriate action in the abatement of air pollution affecting agricul-
ture as the relative importance of such problems make it necessary to
include funds for them in budget requests.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that enactment of legislation
along the lines of H.R. 4415 would be in accord with the program of
the President.
Sincerely yours,
ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, Secretary.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 269
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., March 26,1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of March 9,
1963, for comments on H.R. 4415, a bill "to improve, strengthen, and
accelerate programs for the prevention and abatement of air pollu-
tion," and your request of February 22, 1963, for comments on H.R.
3507, a similar bill, "to accelerate, extend, and strengthen the Federal
air pollution control program."
These bills would replace the act of July 14, 1955, as amended (42
U.S.C. 1857-1857g), with a new act which is to be known as the Clean
Air Act. This new act provides authority for (1) intensified research,
investigation, and training programs; (2) financial grants to State
municipal, and other air pollution control agencies; and (3) Federal
action to abate interstate air pollution and, under certain conditions,
to provide assistance to States and municipalities in the abatement of
intrastate air pollution.
On February 7, 1963, the President sent to the Congress a special
message on improving American health, which called for the enactment
of new legislation to strengthen and intensify Federal air pollution
control efforts in four broad areas, as follows:
"(a) To engage in a more intensive research program permitting
full investigation of the causes, effects, and control of air pollution
"(b) To provide financial stimulation to States and local air
pollution control agencies through project grants which will help
them to initiate and improve their control programs.
"(c) To conduct studies on air pollution problems of interstate
or nationwide significance.
[p. 18]
"(d) To take action to abate interstate air pollution, along the
general lines of the existing water pollution control enforcement
measures."
Both bills, H.R. 4415 and H.R. 3507, appear to be generally re-
sponsive to the needs in this field as outlined by the President. In his
report to you on these bills, the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare has indicated the reasons for generally preferring the pro-
visions of H.R. 4415 to those of H.R. 3507. The Bureau of the Budget
concurs in the report of the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare and, for the reasons stated in the Secretary's report, believes
that H.R. 4415 more appropriately meets the needs in this field.
-------
270 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
We wish to call your attention specifically to section 4 of H.R. 4415,
which authorizes grants for support of air pollution control programs.
The report of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare recom-
mends a substantial revision of this section, since it authorizes a
formula grant program for providing continuing support of air pollu-
tion control agencies rather than project grants to initiate and improve
such programs, as called for by the President.
It is our view that Federal grants to State and local air pollution
control agencies should be to initiate, stimulate, and improve air
pollution control programs in those areas with the greatest need and
problem. The bill rightly recognizes the primary responsibility of
States and municipalities for the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion. Since there is considerable disparity among the States and
localities both as to the seriousness of the air pollution problem and
their efforts to deal with the problem, the objective of a Federal grant
program at this time should be to provide short-term assistance
directed toward initiating or strengthening control programs in those
States and localities which have the most severe air pollution problems.
We, therefore, recommend the following: (1) That section 4 be
amended to provide for Federal project grants of limited duration for
the purpose of initiating or strengthening air pollution control pro-
grams; (2) that authority be provided so that these grants could be
made on a flexible basis, with provision that the Federal Government
could match up to 66 percent of new project costs on State or local
projects, and that special financial incentives could be provided for
regional air pollution control programs which meet criteria established
by the Secretary; and (3) that Federal grant support be provided on a
declining basis over the duration of the projects in order to facilitate
the gradual assumption of financial support for the control programs
by the States and localities.
We have one further specific comment to make on H.R. 4415. The
last sentence of subsection (c) of section 6 (which provides for certain
reports to be made to the Secretary in enforcement cases and spells
out the penalties for failure to make such reports) states that "The
costs and expenses of such prosecution shall be paid out of the appro-
priation for the expenses of the courts of the United States." Since
executive powers are to be exercised under this subsection, it would be
inappropriate for the courts to bear the costs and expenses of carrying
out this function. On this basis, we recommend deletion of this
sentence.
The effect of this proposed deletion would be that any costs and
expenses resulting from subsection (c) would be paid from appropria-
tions to the Department of Justice.
[p. 19]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 271
Subject to the above considerations, you are advised that legislation
along the lines of H.R. 4415 would be in accord with the program of
the President.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) PHILLIP S. HUGHES,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference.
GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
Washington, D.C., March 20, 1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in further reply to your requests for
the views of this Department concerning H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4415,
bills to extend, accelerate, and strengthen air pollution prevention
and control programs.
The President in his message of February 7, 1963, to the Congress
relative to the health program recognized the damage caused by air
pollution to the health and economy of our country, and stressed that
greater emphasis be given to air pollution control by communities,
States, and the Federal Government. He made the following recom-
mendation :
"I therefore recommend legislation authorizing the Public Health
Service of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare—
"(a) To engage in a more intensive research program permitting
full investigation of the causes, effects, and control of air pollution;
"(b) To provide financial stimulation to States and local air
pollution control agencies through project grants which will help
them to initiate or improve their control programs;
"(c) To conduct studies on air pollution problems of interstate
or nationwide significance; and
"(d) To take action to abate interstate air pollution along the
general lines of the existing water pollution control enforcement
measures."
We have reviewed the subject bills and both appear to implement
the recommendation of the President. The major differences in the
bills concern the extent and duration of the grant programs and the
provisions relating to enforcement measures against air pollution.
Also, H.R. 3507 would provide for the establishment in the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare of an Air Pollution Control
Advisory Board composed of the Secretary of HEW as Chairman and
nine non-Government members to be appointed by the President.
This Department has consistently supported a vigorous Federal
-------
272 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
program in air pollution since its inception in 1955. Both the Weather
Bureau and the National Bureau of Standards have direct interests in
air pollution programs. Accordingly, we favor enactment of legislation
such as H.R. 3507 and H.R. 4415. However, since the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare would be responsible for the adminis-
tration of such legislation, we would defer to their views as to which
bill would provide the most effective implementation of the President's
recommendation.
[p. 20]
We do offer for your consideration the following specific comment
concerning these bills:
Section 3(b)(7) of both bills relating to research, investigation,
training, and other activities should be clarified to insure the most
efficient use of Federal competence. We suggest this section be revised
to read:
"(7) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other Federal
departments and agencies, and using the facilities of such depart-
ments and agencies where suitable, and with other public or private
agencies, institutions, and organizations having related responsi-
bilities, basic data on chemical, physical, and biological air
quality and other information pertaining to air pollution and the
prevention and control thereof;".
The Bureau of the Budget advised there would be no objection to
the submission of this report to the committee.
Sincerely,
ROBERT E. GILES.
GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,
Washington, D.C., March 20,1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your request for the
views of the Department of Defense with respect to H.R. 3507 and
H.R. 4415, 88th Congress, bills relating to air pollution control.
The purpose of the bills is to extend and strengthen the Federal air
pollution control program.
In his message of February 7,1963, relative to a health program, the
President recommended legislation authorizing the Public Health
Service of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare—
(a) to engage in a more intensive research program permitting
full investigation of the causes, effects, and control of air pollution;
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 273
(6) to provide financial stimulation to States and local air
pollution control agencies through project grants which will help
them to initiate or improve their control programs;
(c) to conduct studies on air pollution problems of interstate or
nationwide significance; and
(d) to take action to abate interstate air pollution along the
general lines of the existing water pollution control enforcement
measures.
The Department of Defense endorses legislation to accomplish the
purposes set forth above. However, this Department defers to the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare as to the wording of
the legislation, inasmuch as it would be administered by that Depart-
ment.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the
administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of
this report for the consideration of the committee.
Sincerely,
(Signed) JOHN T. McNAUGHTON.
[p. 21]
FEDERAL AVIATION AGENCY,
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR,
Washington, D.C., April 16,1963.
Hon. OREN HARRIS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your letters of February
22, 1963, and March 9, 1963, requesting the views of this Agency on
H.R. 3507, a bill to accelerate, extend, and strengthen the Federal air
pollution control program, and H.R. 4415, a bill to improve, strengthen,
and accelerate programs for the prevention and abatement of air
pollution.
Since the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare will ad-
minister any pollution abatement program which is authorized by the
Congress, we defer to the views of that Department on the named
bills.
We would note, however, that one of the findings of these bills is
that air pollution poses hazards to air transportation. While smoke
and smog and other pollutants detract from optimum flying conditions
at times, we have no evidence that air pollution currently constitutes
a condition of danger to flight.
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection
-------
274 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
from the standpoint of the administration's program to the submission
of this report to your committee.
Sincerely,
(Signed) N. E. Halaby,
N. E. HALABY,
Administrator.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as re-
ported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is
enclosed in black brackets and new matter is printed in italic):
ACT OF JULY 14, 1955
[AN ACT To provide research and technical assistance relating to air pollution
control
[Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That in recognition of the
dangers to the public health and welfare, injury to agricultural crops
and livestock, damage to and deterioration of property, and hazards
to air and ground transportation, from air pollution, it is hereby de-
clared to be the policy of Congress to preserve and protect the primary
responsibilities and rights of the States and local governments in con-
trolling air pollution, to support and aid technical research to devise
and develop methods of abating such pollution, and to provide Federal
technical services and financial aid to State and local government air
pollution control agencies and other public or private agencies and
institutions in the formulation and execution of their air pollution
abatement research programs. To this end, the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service (under the supervision and direction of the Secretary
[p. 22]
of Health, Education, and Welfare) shall have the authority relating
to air pollution control vested in them respectively by this Act.
[SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful in-
vestigation and in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State
and local government air pollution control agencies, with other public
and private agencies and institutions, and with the industries involved,
to prepare or recommend research programs for devising and develop-
ing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For the purpose
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 275
of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to make joint
investigations with any such agencies or institutions.
l(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities
by State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of
air pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air
pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in
the Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State
and local government air pollution control agencies, and other public
and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; and (4)
make available to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, other public and private agencies and institutions, and
industries, the results of surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and abatement
thereof.
[SEC. 3. (a) The Surgeon General may, upon request of any State or
local government air pollution control agency, conduct investigations
and research and make surveys concerning any specific problem of air
pollution confronting such State or local government air pollution
control agency with a view to recommending a solution of such
problem.
I(b) In view of the nationwide significance of the problems of air
pollution from motor vehicles, the Surgeon General shall conduct
studies of the amounts and kinds of substances discharged from the
exhausts of motor vehicles and of the effects of the discharge of such
substances, including the amounts and kinds of such substances
which, from the standpoint of human health, it is safe for motor
vehicles to discharge into the atmosphere.
[SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time
to time reports of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments made under the authority of this Act as he may consider
desirable, together with appropriate recommendations with regard to
the control of air pollution.
[SEC. 5. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the eleven
fiscal years during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June
30,1966, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it to carry out its functions
under this Act and, in furtherance of the policy declared in the first
section of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies, and other public and private
agencies and institutions, and to individuals, for surveys and studies
and for research, training, and demonstration projects, and (2) enter
into contracts with public and private agencies and institutions and
-------
276 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
individuals for surveys and studies and for research, training, and
demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and contracts may be
made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised
[p. 23]
Statutes. Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid and contracts shall
remain available until expended, and shall be allotted in accordance
with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare.
[SEC. 6. When used in this Act—
I (a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the
State health authority, except that in the case of any State in which
there is a single State agency other than the State health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing State laws relating to the
abatement of air pollution, it means such other State agency;
[(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency"
means a city, county, or other local government health authority,
except that in the case of any city, county, or other local government
in which there is a single agency other than the health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating
to the abatement of air pollution, it means such other agency; and
[(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
[SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority of
any department or agency of the United States to conduct or make
grants-in-aid or contracts for research and experiments relating to air
pollution under the authority of any other law.
[SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress that
any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any
building, installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable
and consistent with the interests of the United States and within any
available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency or any State
or local government air pollution control agency in preventing or
controlling the pollution of the air in any area insofar as the discharge
of any matter from or by such property may cause or contribute to
pollution of the air in such area.]
[p. 24]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 277
l.le(2) SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
S. REP. No. 638, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963)
CLEAN AIR ACT
NOVEMBER 7 (legislative day, OCTOBER 22) 1963.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. MUSKIE, from the Committee on Public Works, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 432]
The Committee on Public Works, to whom was referred the bill
(S. 432) to accelerate, extend, and strengthen the Federal air pollution
program, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with
amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendments are indicated in the bill as reported and are shown
by linetype and italic.
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 432, as amended, is to—
(1) Replace the Air Pollution Control Act (act of July 14,1955,
Public Law 159, 84th Cong., as amended) in its entirety with a
new version, a Clean Air Act.
(2) Express the findings of the act that the increase in air
pollution and the complexity of the problem of air pollution has
been brought about by urbanization, industrial development,
and the increasing use of motor vehicles. The act further recog-
nizes the damage to the public health and welfare and the
economic losses resulting from air pollution. It indicates also
that the primary responsibility for the prevention and control of
air pollution rests with State and local governments and that
Federal financial assistance and leadership is essential.
(3) Express the purposes of the act to protect the Nation's air
resources, to continue and extend the national research and
development program, to provide technical and financial assist-
ance, and to encourage and assist the development and operation
of air pollution control programs.
-------
278 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(4) Encourage cooperative activities by State and local govern-
ments for control of air pollution and uniform State and local
[p.l]
laws. Authorize the Federal Government to participate in such
measures.
(5) Grant the consent of Congress to two or more States to
negotiate and enter into agreements or compacts (requiring
ultimate approval by Congress) for the prevention of air pollution,
and the establishment of such agencies as may be necessary to
make effective such agreements or compacts.
(6) Authorize a broad program of research, investigations,
training, and other activities relating to air pollution control.
(7) Authorize the compilation and publication of criteria re-
flecting accurately the latest scientific knowledge indicating the
type and extent of effects which may be expected from the
presence of air pollutants, such criteria to be revised in accordance
with latest developments in scientific knowledge.
(8) Authorize grants to air pollution control agencies to de-
velop, establish, and improve programs for the prevention and
control of air pollution, specifying that grants to air pollution
agencies shall not exceed 20 percent of total funds authorized.
(9) Authorize grants up to two-thirds of the cost of developing,
establishing, and improving air pollution control programs to air
pollution control agencies, and up to three-fourths of such costs
to intermunicipal or interstate air pollution control agencies.
(10) Authorize a procedure to carry out abatement actions
whenever the health and welfare of persons is being endangered
by air pollution.
(11) Direct the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
to encourage continued efforts on the part of the automotive and
fuel industries to prevent pollutants from being discharged from
the exhaust of automotive vehicles.
(12) Authorize the establishment of a technical committee to
evaluate progress in the development of automotive pollution
control devices and fuels, and to develop and recommend research
programs which would lead to the development of such devices
and fuels; also to make the necessary reports on the findings with
respect to results obtained and steps necessary to alleviate or
reduce pollution from these sources.
(13) Recognize the need for cooperation by Federal depart-
ments in controlling air pollution from installations under their
jurisdiction and authorizing a procedure whereby the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare may establish pollutant
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 279
sources for which a permit must be obtained in cases where any
matter is being discharged into the air which may add to the over-
all air pollution problem.
(14) Authorize establishment of such regulations as are neces-
sary for the effective administration of the bill and provide for
accountability of financial assistance furnished under the act.
(15) Authorize fiscal year funds for 1964 to be used for the
purposes of this bill, and authorize funds as follows: Fiscal year
1965, $25 million; fiscal year 1966, $30 million; fiscal year 1967,
$35 million; fiscal year 1968, $42 million; and fiscal year 1969,
$50 million.
[p. 2]
GENERAL STATEMENT
The Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution held hearings
on various legislative proposals relating to air pollution on September
9, 10, and 11, 1963. The bills dealing with air pollution which were
considered by the committee are as follows: S. 432, S. 444, S. 1009,
S. 1040, S. 1124, and H.R. 6518.
Testimony and statements were received from witnesses represent-
ing conservation groups, industry, State and local governments, labor,
Federal officials, and other interested parties.
The testimony received demonstrated that the problem of air pollu-
tion grows more serious across the Nation and that current efforts
are meeting with only limited success in many areas.
It is the view of the committee that the bill being considered will
provide an orderly approach to air pollution control and is very
essential.
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
Air is probably the most important of all our natural resources.
Everyone is aware that we need fresh air every few seconds in order to
live. Less well known are the enormous demands upon our air supply—
measurable in thousands of cubic miles annually—to sustain our
modern technological way of life. Far more air than fuel, even in
terms of actual weight, is used in all combustion processes, from
burning gasoline in the family car to burning coal in a huge electric
powerplant.
The combustion processes replace usable air with potentially harm-
ful pollutants, and the capability of the atmosphere to disperse and
dilute these pollutants—especially in urban areas where people,
vehicles, and industries tend to congregate in even greater numbers—
is strictly limited.
Polluted air, like polluted water, is costly to our economy as well
526-701 O - 73 - 20
-------
280 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
as a hazard to our health. To assure safe drinking water, our com-
munities install treatment works and purification processes for the
water which enters the distribution systems. Similar purification and
distribution systems for air are impractical. Consequently, to pro-
vide safe air for its citizens, the community must curtail the discharge
of pollutants into the air.
Polluted air is not contained in a specific area but is carried from
one political jurisdiction to another. It does not know State lines or
city limits. Providing air of good quality to all of our people is a
challenge and an obligation for Government operations on all levels.
This problem was recognized by President Eisenhower in his special
health message of January 1955 and by President Kennedy, who has
focused increased attention on the air pollution problem through his
special health message to Congress on February 7, 1963.
The Congress also recognized the problem of air pollution and
enacted legislation dealing with the problem. However, a period of
over 8 years has elapsed since enactment of the first identifiable Fed-
eral program in air pollution. This first step was taken with Public
Law 159, 84th Congress, which was approved on July 14, 1955. This
law authorized a program of research and technical assistance with
some provisions for Federal grants in aid to air pollution control
agencies to assist them in the formulation and execution of their
research programs directed toward abatement of air pollution.
[p. 3]
A subsequent amendment (Public Law 86-493) directed the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service to conduct a thorough study of
motor vehicle exhaust as it affects human health through pollution of
air. A report on this study was published as House Document 489 in
June 1962. The act of 1955 also was amended so as to authorize
appropriations to carry out the act until June 30, 1966.
Although the Air Pollution Control Act, as amended, constitutes
the basic authority for the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare activities in the field of air pollution, sections 301 and 311 of
the Public Health Service Act have also been utilized as a basis for
appropriations to support these activities. Section 301 is the basic
section of the Public Health Service Act with respect to the Surgeon
General's authority relative to research, research training, and re-
lated functions; section 311 is the basic section authorizing Federal-
State cooperation and technical assistance. In addition, section 314(c)
of the Public Health Services Act authorizes grants to States, counties,
etc., to assist in establishing and maintaining adequate public services,
including grants for demonstrations and for training of personnel for
State and local health work. Although the committee is advised that
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 281
section 314 (c) has not in fact been used as a basis for grants to support
public health activities primarily related to air pollution, it would
appear not to preclude grants for that purpose.
The existing Air Pollution Control Act authorizes appropriations
of $5 million annually for each of the fiscal years beginning July 1,
1955, and ending June 30, 1966. Under that act and sections 301 and
311 of the Public Health Service Act, approximately $200,000 was
expended in 1955 for air pollution research and technical assistance;
$1.7 million during fiscal year 1956; $2.7 million for 1957; $4 million
for each of 1958 and 1959; $4.3 million for 1960; $6 million for 1961;
$8.4 million for 1962; $11 million for 1963; and for fiscal year 1964 it
is anticipated expenditures will approximate $13 million, exclusive of
the $5 million for 1964 authorized under the new grant program pro-
posed in this legislation.
The present program has been most helpful in the initiation of
activities in connection with air pollution control and has defined im-
portant facets of the problem and provided guidance to States and
communities in assessing the value of their problem and demonstrating
remedial measures. However, there is increasing evidence that air
pollution is causing many physical ailments and that damage from
air pollution amounts to many billion dollars annually and that con-
trol programs must be accelerated.
One-third of the States have established programs to deal with air
pollution, but most of these are, so far, quite limited in scope. Local
government programs, where they exist, are generally understaffed
and without sufficient financial and trained manpower resources to
meet their needs properly. Only 34 local programs have annual budg-
ets exceeding $25,000 and 7 of these are in California. Of the other
51 local air pollution control agencies, 21 try to function on less than
$10,000 per year. In the past decade, despite a 30-percent increase in
urban population, there has been, outside of California, no overall
increase in manpower to combat air pollution at the local level.
It has been estimated that in 1961 major air pollution problems
existed in 308 urban places. This represents an increase of 84 in a
[P. 4]
decade. About 7,300 places, housing 60 percent of the population, are
confronted with air pollution problems of one kind or another.
The American public looks forward to a growing population, an
expanding economy, and an improving state of well-being. Essential
to this is clean air. To compensate for past neglect of air quality con-
servation, a greater effort is required now, by the public, by industry,
and by governmental agencies at all levels. The nationwide character
of the air pollution problem requires an adequate Federal program to
-------
282 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
lend assistance, support, and stimulus to State and community pro-
grams.
There is a need for compilation and publication of air quality
criteria in terms of known and suspected effects on what is necessary
for the protection of human health and welfare, agriculture, and
property.
A number of States do not have air pollution control laws; others
have laws which have control authority only, or no control authority,
but local option legislation and research and technical assistance
authority.
It is quite evident that an aggressive program of research needs to
be directed toward providing assistance in developing appropriate
State and local air pollution control laws and criteria. There is also a
need for nationwide enforcement and criteria, and, in addition, con-
sideration needs to be given to the international aspect of air pollution.
MAJOR PROVISIONS OF BILL
FINDINGS AND PURPOSE
Section 1.—This section of the proposed revision of existing law is
an expansion and clarification of the provisions of section 1 of existing
law and there are several portions of this section which merit particular
attention.
The act recognizes that the growth and complexity of air pollution
is the result of our continuing urbanization and industrialization along
with our improved mobility through the increasing use of motor
vehicles.
The act recognizes the primary responsibilities of the States and
local governments for the prevention and control of air pollution.
However, it finds that a predominant part of the Nation's population
is located in rapidly expanding metropolitan and other areas, many
of which cross lines of local jurisdictions and in some cases involve
two or more States.
It finds that to protect the Nation's interest a Federal program of
financial assistance and leadership is essential to the development of
effective State, local, and regional programs to prevent and control
air pollution.
The purposes of this legislation are such as to go beyond the limited
activities under existing law in the fields of research, technical assist-
ance, and training. The legislation would permit the initiation of an
accelerated national developmental program and research program.
Financial and technical assistance would be made available to
State and local governments for the development and execution of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 283
their air pollution prevention and control programs. This legislation
recognizes the importance of protecting our air resources and accord-
[P-6]
ingly provides not only for research and developmental programs, but
also provides for procedures to be followed in enforcing air pollution
abatement.
COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES AND UNIFORM LAWS
Section 2.—This section expands the cooperative activities under
section 2 of existing law by authorizing the Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare to not only encourage cooperative activities by
State and local governments but he is also required to cooperate with
and encourage cooperative activities by all Federal departments and
agencies. The Secretary is authorized to encourage the enactment of
uniform State and local laws where practicable, and to encourage the
making of agreements and compacts between States. The consent of
Congress is given to the negotiation of such compacts or agreements
for cooperative effort, mutual assistance, and enforcement of their
respective laws and for the establishment of such agencies as may be
desirable to effectuate such agreements or compacts. Such compacts
or agreements must be approved by the Congress before they become
binding or obligatory.
RESEARCH, INVESTIGATION, TRAINING, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
Section 3.—This section is a revision of parts of sections 2, 3, 4,
and 5 of existing law resulting in the bringing together in one section
the relevant provisions essential to the conduct of research, investiga-
tion, training, and other aspects essential in a comprehensive program.
Briefly, it requires the Secretary to establish a national research and
development program for prevention and control of air pollution, and
for that purpose to conduct research, render technical service, and
conduct investigations and research if requested to do so by appropri-
ate air pollution control agencies, or to do so on his own initiative if
the problem of air pollution is interstate in nature. For these purposes
the Secretary is authorized to collect and make available information
on the subject; to cooperate with all interested public and private
agencies and institutions; to make grants for research, training, sur-
veys, studies, and demonstrations; to contract for these purposes; to
establish research fellowships; to collect and disseminate basic data
on chemical, physical, and biological effects of varying air quality; to
develop effective and practical processes, methods, and prototype
devices for the prevention and control of air pollution; and to compile
-------
284 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
and publish for informational purposes criteria relating to air pol-
lutants which may be harmful to the public health or general welfare.
The Secretary is expected to cooperate with State, interstate, and
local air pollution agencies in order to avoid duplication of effort and
to insure timely exchange of communication. But the committee
believes that such cooperation should not be used as a barrier to
research by it being withheld.
This section further requires the Secretary to specifically initiate,
among others, a program of research directed toward the development
of improved, low-cost techniques for extracting sulfur from fuels.
The committee is impressed with the research results developed
thus far showing the adverse effects on health and welfare of our
[p. 6]
people by air pollutants. Of particular concern are the results showing
the relationship of sulfur compounds in the air, from the combustion
of fuels, and the incidence of the common cold and upper respiratory
infections.
The committee has been informed by an expert in the field that
significant advances are currently being made in the fields of pediatric
nutrition, microbiology, and the social sciences that are affecting
sickness and death rates, but that there needs to be a corresponding
additional stimulation of research on the effects of the air we breathe
on the health of ourselves and our children. It has been suggested
that research and pilot studies be carried on in order to accurately
assess the importance of air pollution in causing asthma and other
pulmonary diseases. For this purpose it has been suggested that a
climatron or a universal climate control chamber be constructed
which would permit evaluation of the effects of air pollution on such
diseases. It is the intention of the committee that both the problems
of sulfur compounds and asthma and pulmonary diseases be pursued
in greater depth, and that the efforts for the development of methods
to alleviate ftiese problems be intensified as rapidly as possible.
The committee also feels that particular emphasis should be placed
on research and surveys on the harmful effects on the health or welfare
of our people by the various known air pollution agents and the
compilation and publication of criteria reflecting the kind and extent
of such effects that may be expected from the presence of air pollution
agents. A great many people know, in a general way, of the effects of
air pollution; however, little is known as to the degree of ambient air
quality desired since an organized scientific appraisal of the medical,
social, and economic problems posed by air pollution has been under-
way for only about a decade. Scientific criteria would show the harm-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 285
ful effects of various air pollutants and the tolerable levels of air pollu-
tion.
The committee is extremely anxious to see an all-out effort made to
carry out research, investigations, and training in control of air
pollution. The committee expects that the most extensive program
possible should be undertaken. It is assumed by the committee that
the Secretary will give consideration to the establishment of field
research facilities relative to air pollution problems and it is expected
that he will advise Congress if additional authorizations are needed
to accomplish this program.
GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
Section k-—This section provides that up to 20 percent of the total
amount authorized to be appropriated may be available to make
grants to air pollution control agencies. The Secretary would be
authorized to make grants in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost
of developing, establishing, or improving programs for the prevention
and control of air pollution. Further, authority is provided for the
Secretary to make such grants to intermunicipal and interstate agen-
cies in an amount up to three-fourths of such costs for the develop-
ment, establishment, or improvement of regional air pollution preven-
tion and control programs. The grants are to be made in accordance
with such terms and conditions as the Secretary finds necessary to
carry out this section giving due consideration to population, extent
of the actual
[P-7]
or potential air pollution problem, and financial need of the respective
agencies. Finally, this section establishes a limit on the program grant
funds to be expended in any one State at not more than 12 J^ percent
of such funds. Any agency receiving such a grant shall not reduce its
funds from the preceding fiscal year.
Studies by the Public Health Service indicate that all communities
in the United States having a population greater than 50,000, and
about 40 percent of the communities in the 2,500 to 50,000 brackets,
have air pollution problems. Only 17 States with air pollution pro-
grams expend more than $5,000 per year. Approximately $2 million
was spent by these States in 1961, of which more than half was spent
by the State of California.
In 1961, local air pollution control agencies spent approximately
$8.2 million. A survey by the Public Health Service found that about
6,000 communities have air pollution problems of varying degrees for
which active control programs should be initiated or strengthened.
-------
286 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Of the 333 places with more than 50,000 population having major or
moderate air pollution problems, only about one-half are served by an
air pollution control agency.
The objective of the grant program is to provide impetus to the
establishment and improvement of air pollution prevention and con-
trol programs in the States and local communities but not to provide
a substitute for State and local funds.
By "financial need" of an agency, the committee intends that more
than mere budgetary limitations of the agency be considered. The
capability of the community or communities supporting the agency,
taking into account such factors as financial resources, bonding limita-
tions, per capita income, market values of property, and other rele-
vant factors, should guide the Secretary's decisions. For example, if
two communities, each having an air pollution control agency, possess
approximately the same tax resources, per capita income, and market
valuation of properties within their corporate limits, and have the
same bonding limitations, preference would be indicated in the case
of the agency supported by a community which has bonded itself to
the maximum, as against the agency supported by a community which
has not done so.
The funds authorized to be appropriated for this purpose, together
with the formula and matching provisions of the bill, should operate,
in the committee's opinion, to encourage local effort in financing new
or expanded programs, or the improvement of existing programs.
The committee would expect the regulations of the Department with
respect to the grant program to be designed to carry out this objective.
The committee believes that the primary responsibility for the
prevention and control of air pollution should remain with the State
and local governments and accordingly is convinced that the stimula-
tion provided by the grant program will help to expand the local
programs. The committee urges that the funds allocated be utilized
to expand and initiate local research and control programs.
Under the provisions of the bill, the Secretary would be authorized
to make grants directly to local air pollution control agencies without
prior State approval. The committee would expect, however, that in
the administration of this program, the Department will take pre-
cautions to insure that a grant will be made only after appropriate
consideration has been given to the views of the State air pollution
[P. 8]
control authority (where such a State authority exists) with respect
to the particular program for which a grant is sought. This procedure
would assure, to a greater degree, that the objective of a planned and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 287
coordinated statewide program would be achieved most efficiently
and economically.
ABATEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION
Section 5.—This section establishes the manner for Federal action
in abating air pollution. It is nearly identical to the comparable pro-
visions in section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
Subsection (c) (1) (A) of section 5 establishes the procedure for the
initiation of a conference on an air pollution problem when there is
interstate pollution involved. Subsection (c)(l)(B) establishes pro-
cedures for the initiation of a conference in the case of an intrastate
air pollution problem. Subsection (c)(l)(C) authorizes the Secretary,
after consultation with State officials, to call a conference in the case
of interstate air pollution on his own initiative. The Secretary must
invite the cooperation of any municipal, State, or interstate air pollu-
tion control agencies to participate in the making of any surveys or
studies forming the basis of conference action. This is to allow the
agencies to know what is being done in their area, but failure to accept
the invitation should not deter the Secretary from acting. After the
conference the Secretary must allow at least 6 months for any remedial
action; if remedial action is not taken, he may call a public hearing
before a hearing board appointed by him after notice to the interested
parties. The hearing board, after the hearing, may recommend to the
Secretary measures to secure abatement of the pollution and the Secre-
tary shall send such recommendations to the interested parties to-
gether with a notice specifying a reasonable time (but not less than
6 months) to secure abatement of the air pollution. If, after the ex-
piration of the time set by the Secretary to secure abatement, such
abatement measures have not been taken, the Secretary, in the case
of intrastate pollution, may with the written consent of the Governor
request the Attorney General to bring suit on behalf of the United
States to secure abatement. In the case of interstate air pollution the
Secretary may request the Attorney General to bring a suit on behalf
of the United States to secure abatement.
This section also authorizes the Secretary, in connection with any
conference called, to require any person whose activities result in
causing or contributing to air pollution to file a report with respect
to character, kind, and quantities of pollutants discharged and the
use by such person of various devices and means to prevent or reduce
that pollution. After the conference has been held with respect to
such pollution the Secretary shall require such reports from the person
whose activities result in such pollution only to the extent recom-
-------
288 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
mended by such conference. No person would be required in such
report to divulge trade secrets or secret processes and all information
is to be considered confidential for the purposes of title 18, United
States Code, section 1905. Failure to file such a report subjects the
person in default to forfeit $100 a day to the United States to be
recoverable in a civil action. The Secretary may remit or mitigate
any such forfeiture.
It is not the purpose of this section to displace State, local, or inter-
state action to abate air pollution but rather to provide authority for
[p. 9]
limited Federal participation and assistance under certain circum-
stances directed toward the abatement of specific air pollution
problems.
The committee in its desire to protect the primary rights of the
States and local governments and its proper concern for the national
interest is of the opinion that the limited Federal authority provided
by this section would be of benefit to the Nation as a whole. The
conference and hearing procedures are intended as a mechanism of
resolving problems and encouraging remedial or preventive action.
The continuing growth and complexity of the air pollution problem
requires effective legislative action to protect the health and welfare
of our citizens. We breathe the air as it comes to us, polluted or other-
wise, and individual protective efforts are ineffectual. Society requires
appropriate protection of its vital interests. The committee believes
this section is vital to achieving that purpose.
The authority given the Secretary to require reports relating to the
discharge of pollutants and their control is essential in the view of the
committee to permit effective implementation of the abatement
authorities. To secure the necessary information without such a re-
quirement would necessitate the right of entry onto private property
for investigative purposes and would result in the need for significantly
enlarged staffs and also require an inordinate expenditure of funds.
AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE AND FUEL POLLUTION
Section 6.—This section authorizes the Secretary to encourage the
continued effort on the part of automotive and fuel industries to
develop devices and fuels to prevent air pollution. The Secretary is
required to appoint an equal number of representatives of the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare and the automotive and fuel
manufacturing industries to a technical committee to evaluate prog-
ress in the development of means to reduce air pollution. This techni-
cal committee will serve in a liaison capacity to evaluate progress in
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 289
the development of devices and fuels to prevent pollutants from being
discharged from the exhaust of automotive vehicles. The committee
would also develop and recommend research programs to achieve
these purposes.
It is further provided that 1 year after enactment and semiannually
thereafter, the Secretary is to report to Congress on measures taken
toward the solution of the vehicle exhaust pollution problem and his
recommendations for additional legislation, if necessary.
The automotive vehicle is a major contributor to the problem of air
pollution. The committee is of the opinion that a concerted effort
involving intensification of research is essential to discover the most
effective means for the control of motor vehicle pollution. The estab-
lishment of a committee with appropriate representation would permit
a greater degree of coordination and cooperation between Government
and industry for this purpose.
The magnitude of this problem is such as to require continuing
surveillance on the part of the Congress. Further, in the event that
voluntary cooperation is not producing the desired results in a reason-
able period of time, then the Congress could give further consideration
as to necessary legislation.
IP- 10]
COOPERATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES TO CONTROL AIR POLLUTION FROM
FEDERAL FACILITIES
Section 7.—This section requires all Federal departments and agen-
cies to cooperate with the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare and with air pollution agencies in controlling air pollution
discharges from any Federal building, installation, or property. Fur-
ther, the Secretary is authorized to establish classes of potential
pollution sources for which any Federal department or agency would
be required to obtain a permit from the Secretary before discharging
any matter into the air. The Secretary is required to report each
January to the Congress the status of such permits and compliance
with this provision.
The cooperation of Federal departments and agencies in controlling
the discharge of air pollutants from buildings, installations, or other
property over which they have jurisdiction has not been equal to the
leadership role in air pollution control rightfully contemplated for the
Federal Establishment. Accordingly, the committee has provided for
a permit system, to be administered by the Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare, which will assure effective cooperation in the
control of pollution from these installations.
-------
290 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
ADMINISTRATION
Section 8.—This section contains the usual provisions with respect
to the administration of the legislation. Specifically, this section
authorizes the Secretary to prescribe necessary regulations to carry
out its functions. Further, personnel of the Public Health Service may
be detailed, upon request, to an air pollution control agency to carry
out the provisions of the act. Finally, the Secretary is authorized to
make payments under grants in installments, in advance, or by way
of reimbursement.
The committee considers these authorities desirable and necessary
for effective administration of the act.
DEFINITIONS
Section 9.—This section defines various terms used in the act
including "air pollution control agency," "State," "person," and
"municipality."
Testimony and data presented to the committee during the course
of hearings before the subcommittee and staff investigations indicated
that, in addition to its impact upon health, air pollution has adverse
effects on the public welfare in such areas as agricultural crops and
livestock, property, and transportation. It is the intention of the
committee that where the act refers to adverse effects on welfare it is
to apply to meaningful injury, damage, deterioration, or hazards in
those and such other areas of injury as experience may disclose.
OTHER AUTHORITY NOT AFFECTED
Section 10.—Subsection (a) of section 10 provides that the act shall
not be construed as superseding or limiting the responsibilities and
authorities of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare or of
any other Federal officer, department, or agency under any provision
[P. ll]
of law, except to the extent provided in subsection (b) of this section
10.
Subsection (b) of section 10 prohibits any appropriation from being
authorized or made under sections 301, 311, and 314(c) of the Public
Health Service Act for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1964, and for
any subsequent fiscal year, for any purpose for which appropriations
may be made under authority of this act. The purpose of this subsec-
tion is to insure that this act will become the basic authority for
appropriations by the Federal Government for all air pollution pro-
grams. In the case of programs which may be peripherally concerned
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 291
with air pollution, the committee does not intend that bookkeeping
requirements be established to allocate to the penny on a strict cost-
accounting basis the air pollution aspects of those programs, but it.
does intend that this legislation become the authority for appropria-
tions for all air pollution programs, in order that the legislative com-
mittees of Congress may have, to an extent which they presently do
not have, a fuller understanding and control of the true cost to the
Federal Government of these air pollution programs.
RECORDS AND AUDIT
Section 11.—This section authorizes the Secretary to prescribe
keeping records which would disclose the amount and disposition of
the proceeds of Federal assistance received, the amount received from
other sources, and such other records as will facilitate an effective
audit.
Finally, the Secretary and the Comptroller General or their repre-
sentatives are authorized access for the purpose of audit and examina-
tion to any books, records, and other documents pertinent to the
grants received under the act.
In view of the expansion of the grant programs, the committee
believes it would be appropriate that a system of audits be provided
to assure that grant funds are used for the purpose intended. Accord-
ingly, provisions to accomplish this have been included.
SEPARABILITY
Section 12.—This section contains the usual separability clause.
APPROPRIATIONS
Section 13.—Subsection (a) of subsection 13 authorizes the use of
funds appropriated by Public Law 88-136 under air pollution to
carry out the purposes of the act. Subsection (b) of section 13 authorizes
appropriations of up to $25 million for the fiscal year 1965, $30 million
for the fiscal year 1966, $35 million for the fiscal year 1967, $42 million
for the fiscal year 1968, and $50 million for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1969. These amounts represent the maximums authorized to
be appropriated and will permit Congress periodically to reexamine
the Federal air pollution programs to determine future public policy
in this area.
The committee considers these amounts as quite modest in view of
the nature and extent of the air pollution problem and the danger to
the Nation's health and welfare.
[p. 12]
-------
292 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
SHORT TITLE
Section 14-—This section authorizes the short title of "Clean Air
Act" for this legislation.
Section 2 of the bill amends the formal title of the act of July 14,
1955, to make it more accurate as a result of the amendments made by
this legislation.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with subsection (4) of rule XXIX of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill as
reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted
is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic.
AN ACT
[To provide research and technical assistance relating to air pollution controlj
To provide for air pollution prevention and control activities of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, and for other purposes
[That in recognition of the dangers to the public health and welfare,
injury to agricultural crops and livestock, damage to and deterioration
of property, and hazards to air and ground transportation, from air
pollution, it is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress to preserve
and protect the primary responsibilities and rights of the States and
local governments in controlling air pollution, to support and aid
technical research to devise and develop methods of abating such
pollution, and to provide Federal technical services and financial aid to
State and local government air pollution control agencies and other
public or private agencies and institutions in the formulation and
execution of their air pollution abatement research programs. To this
end, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service (under the supervision and direc-
tion of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare) shall have
the authority relating to air pollution control vested in them respec-
tively by this Act.
[SEC. 2. (a) The Surgeon General is authorized, after careful investi-
gation and in cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State
and local government air pollution control agencies, with other public
and private agencies and institutions, and with the industries involved,
to prepare or recommend research programs for devising and develop-
ing methods for eliminating or reducing air pollution. For the purpose
of this subsection the Surgeon General is authorized to make joint
investigations with any such agencies or institutions.
[(b) The Surgeon General may (1) encourage cooperative activities
by State and local governments for the prevention and abatement of
air pollution; (2) collect and disseminate information relating to air
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 293
pollution and the prevention and abatement thereof; (3) conduct in
the Public Health Service, and support and aid the conduct by State
and local government air pollution control agencies, and other public
and private agencies and institutions of, technical research to devise
and develop methods of preventing and abating air pollution; and
(4) make available to State and local government air pollution control
agencies, other public and private agencies and institutions, and in-
dustries, the results of surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
[p. 13]
experiments relating to air pollution and the prevention and abatement
thereof.
[SEC. 3. The Surgeon General may, upon request of any State or
local government air pollution control agency, conduct investigations
and research and make surveys concerning any specific problem of air
pollution confronting such State or local government air pollution
control agency with a view to recommending a solution of such
problem.
[(b) In view of the nationwide significance of the problems of air
pollution from motor vehicles, the Surgeon General shall conduct
studies of the amounts and kinds of substances discharged from the
exhausts of motor vehicles and of the effects of the discharge of such
substances, including the amounts and kinds of such substances which,
from the standpoint of human health, it is safe for motor vehicles to
discharge into the atmosphere.
[SEC. 4. The Surgeon General shall prepare and publish from time
to time reports of such surveys, studies, investigations, research, and
experiments made under the authority of this Act as he may consider
desirable, together with appropriate recommendations with regard to
the control of air pollution.
[SEC. 5. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for each of the eleven
fiscal years during the period beginning July 1, 1955, and ending June
30,1966, not to exceed $5,000,000 to enable it to carry out its functions
under this Act and, in furtherance of the policy declared in the first
section of this Act, to (1) make grants-in-aid to State and local govern-
ment air pollution control agencies, and other public and private
agencies and institutions, and to individuals, for surveys and studies
and for research, training, and demonstration projects, and (2) enter
into contracts with public and private agencies and institutions and
individuals for surveys and studies and for research, training, and
demonstration projects. Such grants-in-aid and contracts may be
made without regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised Stat-
utes. Sums appropriated for such grants-in-aid and contracts shall
-------
294 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
remain available until expended, and shall be allotted in accordance
with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare.
[SEC. 6. When used in this Act—
[(a) The term "State air pollution control agency" means the State
health authority, except that in the case of any State in which there is
a single State agency other than the State health authority charged
with responsibility for enforcing State laws relating to the abatement
of air pollution, it means such other State agency;
[(b) The term "local government air pollution control agency"
means a city, county, or other local government health authority,
except that in the case of any city, county, or other local government
in which there is a single agency other than the health authority
charged with responsibility for enforcing ordinances or laws relating
to the abatement of air pollution, it means such other agency; and
I(c) The term "State" means a State or the District of Columbia.
[SEC. 7. Nothing contained in this Act shall limit the authority of
any department or agency of the United States to conduct or make
grants-in-aid or contracts for research and experiments relating to air
pollution under the authority of any other law.
[p. 14]
[SEC. 8. It is hereby declared to be the intent of the Congress that
any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any
building, installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable
and consistent with the interests of the United States and within
any available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, and with any interstate agency or
any State or local government air pollution control agency in pre-
venting or controlling the pollution of the air in any area insofar as
the discharge of any matter from or by such property may cause or
contribute to pollution of the air in such area.]
[p. 15]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 295
l.le(3) COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
H.R. REP. No. 1003, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963)
CLEAN AIR ACT
DECEMBER 5, 1963.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama, from the committee of conference,
submitted the following
CONFERENCE REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 6518]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 6518) to
improve, strengthen, and accelerate programs for the prevention and
abatement of air pollution, having met, after full and free conference,
have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective
Houses as follows: [See Clean Air Act as Passed.]
[P. l]
STATEMENT OF THE MANAGERS ON THE PART OF THE
HOUSE
The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate
to the bill (H.R. 6518) to improve, strengthen, and accelerate pro-
grams for the prevention and abatement of air pollution, submit the
following statement in explanation of the effect of the action agreed
upon by the conferees and recommended in the accompanying con-
ference report:
GENERAL STATEMENT
The House bill amended the entire act of July 14,1955, the existing
statute on air pollution.
The Senate amendment struck out all after the enacting clause of
the House bill and inserted a complete revision of such act of July 14,
1955.
The proposed conference substitute is also a complete revision of the
act of July 14, 1955, and, except for minor clerical, technical, and
526-701 O - 73 - 21
-------
296 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
conforming amendments, the differences between the House bill and
the proposed conference substitute are as follows:
INVESTIGATIONS, RESEARCH, AND SURVEYS
Paragraph (3) of subsection (a) of section 3 of the act, as revised by
the House bill, authorized the Secretary to conduct investigations
and research and to make surveys concerning any specific problem of
air pollution confronting any air pollution control agency.
The Senate amendment authorized these investigations, research,
and surveys to be made in cooperation with air pollution control
agencies.
The proposed conference substitute adopts the language of the
Senate amendment.
Paragraph (3) further authorized these investigations, research, and
surveys to be made if, in the judgment of the Secretary, the problem
might affect or be of concern to communities in various parts of the
Nation.
The Senate amendment deleted this provision.
The proposed conference substitute is the same as the Senate amend-
ment in this regard and does not contain this provision of the House
bill.
AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE AND FUEL POLLUTION
As it would have been rewritten by the House passed bill, section 3
of the act would have required the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, as a part of a national research and development pro-
gram for the control and prevention of air pollution, to conduct
specified studies with respect to motor vehicle exhaust fumes.
These provisions were deleted in the Senate amendment and are
not in the conference substitute. However, the Senate amendment
added
[p. ll]
a new section 6 to the act requiring the Secretary to encourage con-
tinued efforts on the part of the automotive and fuel industries to
develop devices and fuels to prevent pollutants from being discharged
from the exhaust of automotive vehicles. For this purpose, the
Secretary would be required to maintain liaison with automotive
manufacturers and fuel producers and to appoint a technical com-
mittee consisting of an equal number of representatives of the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare and of such manufac-
turers and producers. This technical committee would meet at the call
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 297
of the Secretary in order to evaluate progress in the development of
such devices and fuels and to develop and recommend research pro-
grams which could lead to the development of such devices and fuels.
The Secretary would report to the Congress on measures taken toward
the resolution of the vehicle exhaust pollution problem and efforts to
improve fuels, including, among other things, his recommendations for
additional legislation, if necessary, to regulate the discharge of pollut-
ants from automotive exhausts. Such a report would be made to the
Congress 1 year after enactment of this legislation and semiannually
thereafter.
The House passed bill had no provisions comparable to section 6 of
the act as it would be rewritten in the Senate amendment. These
provisions are included in the conference substitute with a modifica-
tion so that the Secretary would also be required to maintain liaison
with, and have representatives on the technical committee from,
exhaust control device manufacturers.
SULFUR RESEARCH
As it would be rewritten in the Senate amendment, section 3 of the
act would require the Secretary, as a part of the national research and
development program for the control and prevention of air pollution,
to initiate and conduct a program of research directed toward the
development of improved, low-cost techniques for extracting sulfur
from fuels.
The House passed bill had no comparable provisions.
In this respect, the conference substitute is the same as the Senate
amendment. The conferees wish to point out that these provisions do
not emphasize an area of air pollution research for which authority
appears elsewhere in this legislation, but rather gives specific authority
for a program of research directed toward the development of im-
proved, low-cost techniques for extracting sulfur from all fuels on the
assumption that sulfur and its byproducts resulting from the combus-
tion of fuels constitute some of the major pollutants of the atmosphere.
PURPOSES FOR WHICH GRANTS MAY BE MADE
Paragraph (3) of subsection (b) of section 3 of the act as revised by
the House bill authorized the Secretary to make grants to air pollution
control agencies whether public or nonprofit private agencies, institu-
tions, and organizations, and to individuals for research, training
projects, and demonstrations.
The Senate amendment permitted these grants to be made to the
-------
298 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
same agencies, institutions, organizations, and individuals as the
House bill but for the purposes stated in paragraph (1) of subsection
[p. 12]
(a) of section 3. Paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of section 3 of the
revised act provides that the Secretary shall conduct and promote the
coordination and acceleration of research, investigations, experi-
ments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the
causes, effects, extent, prevention, and control of air pollution.
The proposed conference substitute is the same as the Senate
amendment in this respect.
RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION OP CRITERIA
Both the House bill and Senate amendment provide that the
Secretary shall conduct, and promote the coordination and accelera-
tion of, research, investigations, experiments, training demonstrations,
surveys and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention,
and control of air pollution.
In addition, section 3(c)(l) of the Senate amendment provided that
in carrying out his duties under the aforementioned authority, the
Secretary shall conduct research on, and survey the results of other
scientific studies on, the harmful effects on the health or welfare of
persons by the various known air pollution agents (or combination of
agents). The House bill contained no comparable provisions. The
conference substitute is, in this respect, the same as the Senate
amendment.
Section 3(c)(2) of the Senate amendment provided that whenever
the Secretary determines that there is a particular air pollution agent
(or combination of agents) present in the air in certain quantities, pro-
ducing effects harmful to the health or welfare of persons, he shall
compile and publish criteria reflecting accurately the latest scientific
knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of such effects
which may be expected from the presence of such air pollution agent
(or combination of agents) in the air in varying quantities. The
Senate amendment further required that such criteria be published
for informational purposes only and made available to municipal,
State, and interstate air pollution control agencies and required the
Secretary to revise such criteria whenever necessary to reflect accu-
rately developing scientific knowledge.
The House bill contained no comparable provisions and the con-
ference substitute is, in this respect, the same as the Senate amendment
with the exception that the requirement that this criteria be published
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 299
for informational purposes only has been modified to eliminate the
requirement that it be published "only" for informational purposes.
GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
Section 4 of the act as revised by the House bill provided that not
more than $5 million of the total amount authorized to be appropriated
by section 12 of the revised act for any fiscal year should be available
to make grants to air pollution control agencies to help meet the cost
of establishing and maintaining programs for the prevention and
control of air pollution. These sums were to be allocated to the several
States on the basis of population, the extent of the air pollution
problem, and the financial need of the State. From each State's
allotment the Secretary is authorized to make grants to air pollution
control agencies in an amount not to exceed two-thirds of the cost of
establishing and maintaining programs for the prevention and control
[p- 13]
of air pollution. Those allotments not obligated because of insuffi-
cient approvable applications were to be reallocated by the Secretary.
The Senate amendment struck out all of section 4 as revised by
the House bill and inserted in lieu thereof an authorization that not
to exceed 20 percent of the total of all sums authorized to be appro-
priated for this act could be used to make grants to air pollution con-
trol agencies for developing, establishing, or improving programs for
the prevention and control of air pollution. These grants would be
made in amounts up to two-thirds of the cost of such programs except
in the case of developing, establishing, or improving regional air pollu-
tion programs in which case the grant may not exceed three-fourths
of the cost of such program. The grants were to be made in accordance
with such terms and conditions as the Secretary finds necessary to
carry out the section and he is required, as far as practicable, to give
due consideration to population, the extent of the actual or potential
air pollution problem, and the financial need of the respective air
pollution control agencies. It further provided that any agency re-
ceiving such grant shall not have reduced its non-Federal funds in the
preceding fiscal year during the fiscal year in which it receives such
grant. It also required that no grant be made until the Secretary has
consulted with appropriate officials designated by the Governor or
Governors of the State or States affected. In addition, it limited the
amount to be expended in any one State to not more than 12 J^ per-
cent of the grant funds appropriated for purposes of the act.
The proposed conference substitute is substantially identical with
-------
300 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
the provisions of the Senate amendment except for clarifying amend-
ments designed to insure (1) that not more than 20 percent of the
annual appropriation made to carry out the act shall be available
for grants and (2) that no agency whose expenditures of non-Federal
funds for air pollution program during a fiscal year will be less than
its expenditures for such programs during the preceding year shall be
eligible to receive any grant during that fiscal year.
CONFERENCES ON ABATEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION
Under both the House-passed bill and the Senate amendment
thereto, one of the principal means of bringing about abatement of
air pollution in a State or States which endangers the health or welfare
of any persons is by the calling of a conference. The conferees at any
such conference would be representatives of air pollution control
agencies for the place where such pollution originates and for the place
affected by such pollution.
The House-passed bill would have permitted the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare to call such a conference whenever
he had reason to believe, on the basis of reports, surveys, or studies,
that any air pollution is endangering the health or welfare of persons
in a State other than in which the pollutants originate.
The Senate amendment requires the Secretary (1) to consult with
State officials of all affected States before calling a conference in such
a case and (2) to invite the cooperation of any municipal, State, or
interstate air pollution control agencies having jurisdiction in the
affected area on any surveys or studies forming the basis of conference
action.
The conference substitute is the same in this respect as the Senate
amendment.
[P. H]
MEMBERSHIP OF HEARING BOARD
Section 5(e)(l) of the act as revised by the House bill provided that
the hearing board convened for the purpose of conducting a public
hearing on an air pollution problem shall consist, in part, of at least
one representative of the Department of Commerce and one member
of the Department of the Interior.
The Senate amendment substituted a provision requiring that each
Federal agency having a substantial interest in the subject matter as
determined by the Secretary be given an opportunity to select one
member of the hearing board, and, stipulated that one member shall
be a representative of the appropriate interstate air pollution agency
(if, one exists).
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 301
The conference substitute retains the Senate provision, with a
modification that not only each Federal agency but each Federal
department or instrumentality which has a substantial interest in the
subject matter shall be given such opportunity.
ABATEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION
Section 5 (f) of the act as revised by the House bill provided that if,
after the expiration of the time set by the Secretary to secure abate-
ment, such abatement measures have not been taken, the Secretary,
in the case of intrastate pollution, shall send the findings and record of
the hearing together with his finding that action reasonably calculated
to secure abatement has not been taken, to the Governor and the
attorney general of the State, and at their request, may provide
technical and other assistance to assist the State in judicial proceedings
to secure abatement. In the case of interstate air pollution the Secre-
tary was authorized to request the Attorney General to bring a suit on
behalf of the United States to secure abatement. He was prohibited
from making such a request until he received a certification from the
Governor of each State wherein the health and welfare of individuals
are being endangered by air pollution (other than the State in which
the discharge or discharges causing or contributing to such pollution
originate) that such Governor has made a good faith effort to enter
into an agreement or compact with the State causing the pollution to
secure abatement thereof and has been unable to secure such agree-
ment or compact.
The Senate amendment struck out these provisions of the House
bill and inserted in lieu thereof the requirement that if action reason-
ably calculated to secure abatement within the specified time is not
taken, the Secretary, in the case of interstate air pollution, may
request the Attorney General to bring a suit on behalf of the United
States to secure abatement, and in the case of intrastate air pollution
shall, at the request of the Governor of such State, provide technical
and other assistance necessary to assist the State in judicial pro-
ceedings to secure abatement under State or local law or, if requested
by the Governor of the State, authorizes the Secretary to request the
Attorney General to bring suit on behalf of the United States to secure
abatement of the pollution.
The proposed conference substitute is the same as the Senate
amendment except for certain clarifying amendments to insure that
the request of the Governor of the State must be obtained before the
Secretary can request the Attorney General to bring suit to secure
[p. 15]
-------
302 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
abatement of intrastate pollution and a clarifying amendment to
provide that subsection (g) relating to evidence in court in a suit be
restricted to those suits brought in U.S. courts.
REPORTS
The House bill contained a provision authorizing the Secretary to
require certain reports from any person whose activities result in the
emission of air pollutants causing or contributing to an air pollution
problem which has been the subject of a conference.
The Senate amendment provided that such reports may be required
in connection with any such conference.
The conference substitute is, in this respect, the same as the Senate
amendment.
The House bill and Senate amendment authorized the Secretary
to prescribe the form of the report, furnishing such information as
may reasonably be required as to the character, kind, and quantity
of pollutants discharged and the use of devices or other means to
prevent or reduce the emission of pollutants by the person filing such
report. The Senate amendment further provided that such report
is to be based on existing data and that after a conference has been
held, the Secretary shall require such reports only to the extent
recommended by such conference.
The conference substitute retains these modifications.
In addition, the Senate amendment provided that no person shall
be required in such report to divulge trade secrets or secret processes,
and this language has been retained in the conference substitute.
PERMITS FOR FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
The Senate amendment provided in subsection (d) of section 7 of
the revised act that the Secretary may establish classes of potential
pollution sources for which Federal departments or agencies shall
before discharging any matter into the air in the United States obtain
a permit prior to such discharge. These permits would be issued only
at specified periods of time and subject to revocation if the Secretary
finds the pollution is endangering the health and welfare of any
persons. Plans, specifications, and other information which the
Secretary deems relevant must be submitted to him in connection
with the issuance of these permits, and he is requested to report to
Congress each January the status of such permits and the compliance
therewith.
The House bill contained no similar provisions.
The proposed conference substitute adopts the provisions of the
Senate amendment in this regard.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 303
ADMINISTRATION
The House bill authorized the Secretary to prescribe such pro-
cedural regulations as are needed to carry out his functions under the
act.
The Senate amendment eliminated the word "procedural" as being
too restrictive upon the authority which the Secretary needs to carry
out the act.
The proposed conference substitute is the same as the Senate
amendment in this regard.
[p. 16]
DEFINITIONS
The Senate amendment included American Samoa within the
definition of the term State.
The House bill did not include American Samoa.
The proposed conference substitute is the same as the Senate
amendment.
The Senate amendment added a subsection (g) to section 9 of the
revised act to provide that all language referring to adverse effects on
welfare shall include but not be limited to injury to agriculture crops
and livestock, damage to and the deterioration of property, and
hazards to transportation.
The House bill contained no equivalent provision.
The proposed conference substitute is the same as the Senate
amendment in this regard.
RECORDS AND AUDITS
The Senate amendment provides in subsection (a) of section 11 of
the revised act that every recipient of assistance will keep such
records as the Secretary shall prescribe including those which fully
disclose the amount and disposition by the recipient of the proceeds
of assistance, the total cost of the project or undertaking in which the
assistance is given or used, the amount of that portion of the cost
supplied by other sources and such other records which will facilitate
an effective audit. Subsection (b) of this section provides that the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Comptroller
General or their agents shall have access, for the purpose of audit and
examination, to books, documents, papers, and records of the recipient
that are pertinent to the grants received under this act.
The House bill contained no equivalent provision.
The proposed conference substitute adopts the provisions of the
Senate amendment.
-------
304 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
APPROPRIATIONS
Subsection (b) of section 13 of the act as revised by the House bill
provides authorization of not to exceed $20 million for fiscal year
1965, not to exceed $30 million for the fiscal year 1966, and not to
exceed $35 million for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967.
The Senate amendment to this provision increased the authorization
from $20 million to $25 million for fiscal year 1965, adopted the
amounts provided in the House bill for the fiscal years 1966 and 1967
and added authorizations of not to exceed $42 million for fiscal year
1968, and $50 million for fiscal year 1969.
The proposed conference substitute is the same as the provisions
of the House bill with the exception of the authorization for fiscal
year 1965 which was increased from not to exceed $20 million to not
to exceed $25 million as provided by the Senate amendment. It is
the understanding of the conferees that limiting the program to 3
fiscal years will permit legislative committees in both Houses of
[p. 17]
Congress to reexamine this program within a relatively short period of
time and, assuming the expectations for the program are realized,
will permit the Congress to provide necessary increases in authoriza-
tions for future fiscal years. The conferees recognize that air pollution
constitutes one of our national problems and that as our population
grows and as urbanization expands this may require increased fiscal
support of air pollution programs.
ORBN HARRIS,
KENNETH A. ROBERTS,
GEORGE M. RHODES,
LEO W. O'BRIEN,
PAUL G. ROGERS,
JOHN B. BENNETT,
PAUL F. SCHENCK,
ANCHER NELSEN,
DONALD G. BROTZMAN,
Managers on the Part of the House.
[P. 18]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
305
l.le(4) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 109 (1963)
l.le(4) (a) July 24: Considered and passed House, pp. 13273-13281;
13283-13285
CLEAN AIR ACT
Mr. ROLLING. Mr. Speaker, by di-
rection of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 440 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read as follows:
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolu-
tion it shall be in order to move that the House
resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the considera-
tion of the bill (H.R. 6518) to improve, strengthen,
and accelerate programs for the prevention and
abatement of air pollution. After general debate,
which shall be confined to the bill and shall con-
tinue not to exceed one hour, to be equally divided
and controlled by the chairman and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce, the bill shall be read for
amendment under the five-minute rule. At the
conclusion of the consideration of the bill for
amendment, the Committee shall rise and report
the bill to the House with such amendments as may
have been adopted, and the previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the bill and amend-
ments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit.
Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield
30 minutes to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia [Mr. SMITH]; and pending that,
I yield myself such time as I may con-
sume.
As the reading of the resolution shows,
it provides for an open rule with 1 hour
of debate on H.R. 6518, which is entitled
the "Clean Air Act," and which would
replace the Air Pollution Control Act
of 1955.
To my knowledge there is no opposi-
tion to the rule, and I therefore reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of California. Mr. Speak-
er, I yield myself such time as I may use
and ask unanimous consent to revise
and extend my remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of California. Mr. Speak-
er, House Resoution 440 provides an
open rule of 1 hour general debate for
the consideration of H.R. 6518, a bill
entitled "Clean Air Act." The purpose
of this measure is to improve, strengthen,
and accelerate programs for the preven-
tion and abatement of air pollution.
Air pollution is a serious national prob-
lem. I am certain that any Member who
has been in Los Angeles at any time when
smog was present realizes the serious-
ness of the situation. I understand that
there are many other cities throughout
the United States that are faced with
this problem. The pollutants come from
many sources—from furnaces which
heat homes, offices, and public buildings;
from burning of domestic and industrial
waste; from motor vehicle exhaust; from
industrial processes which release chem-
ical vapors; and from combustion of
fuels for the generation of power.
Great progress has been made, but
the problem is far from settled. I do not
know the actual figure, but I am certain
that the city and county of Los Angeles
"and the State of California, as well as
private enterprise, have spent millions
of dollars in attempting to eliminate
smog from the area.
This measure will authorize a total
of $90 million to be used to try and help
solve the problem. Of this, $5 million
is for fiscal year 1964, $20 million for
fiscal year 1965, $30 million for fiscal
year 1966 and $35 million for fiscal year
1967. In other words, a total of $90
million over the next 4 years. The
money will primarily be used for re-
search, investigation and training by the
Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, particularly the Public Health
Service.
According to the testimony before the
Rules Committee and the report, H.R.
6518 requires the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare to establish a
national research and development pro-
-------
306
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
gram for prevention arid control of air
pollution, and for that purpose to con-
duct research, render technical service,
and conduct investigations and research
if requested to do so by appropriate air
pollution control agencies, or if he deems
the problems of air pollution of national
significance; and, in addition, to conduct
studies relating to motor vehicle ex-
hausts and to the effect of the discharge
of such exhausts on human health and
the determination of standards of safety
for such discharge. For these purposes
the Secretary is authorized to collect and
make available information on the sub-
ject, to cooperate with all interested pub-
lic and private agencies and institutions,
to make grants for research, training,
and demonstrations; to introduce con-
trols, to provide training for personnel,
to establish research fellowships, to col-
lect and disseminate basic data on chem-
ical, physical, and biological air quality
and other information; to develop effec-
tive practical processes, methods, and
prototype devices for the prevention or
control of air pollution; and to establish
criteria of air pollution.
The bill also sets up a procedure
whereby under certain circumstances,
the Federal Government can proceed to
secure abatement of serious situations
and violations.
Mr. Speaker, I realize that this meas-
ure will extend the Federal jurisdiction
into another field which possibly is a
more local than Federal problem. By
the same token, I believe that the tax-
payers in these areas where air pollution
exists are willing to do anything they
can to help clean up the air. It is occa-
sionally stated that if the city officials
can place the responsibility on county
officials, they will do so. It probably fol-
lows that county officials may feel the
same way about the State, and the State
may feel the same way about the Federal
Government. I would certainly hope
that in the passage of this legislation,
city, county, and State officials will not
come to the conclusion that the Federal
Government has taken over this field
and that they thus will have no responsi-
bility in the future. It seems to me that
this is a problem that requires the atten-
tion and best efforts of all of these groups
working closely together. I would also
hope that this money is not used to du-
plicate research which has been hereto-
fore conducted by local communities or
States, as well as any universities. I
would hope that all results of research by
the various organizations will be readily
gathered together and disseminated to
the communities that it may benefit and,
in turn, the Federal research program
will continue from that point.
I would further hope that the subcom-
mittee of the House Interstate and For-
eign Commerce Committee having juris-
diction over this matter will devote their
close attention to the developments un-
der this program in order to determine
that the $90 million is spent wisely.
[p. 13273]
I support the bill, Mr. Speaker, I know
of no objection to the rule and urge its
adoption. I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I move
the previous question.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on agreeing to the resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
IN THE COMMITTEE OP THE WHOLE
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Speaker, I move that the House resolve
itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the
consideration of the bill (H.R. 6518) to
improve, strengthen, and accelerate pro-
grams for the prevention and abatement
of air pollution.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the House resolved itself
into the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the con-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
307
sideration of the bill, H.R. 6518, with Mr.
ULLMAN in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill,
By unanimous consent, the first read-
ing of the bill was dispensed with.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule,
the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ROB-
ERTS] will be recognized for 30 minutes
and the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
SCHBNCK] will be recognized for 30 min-
utes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS).
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may require.
Mr. Chairman, I am happy to recom-
mend to the favorable consideration of
this distinguished body the bill, H.R.
6518, which is designed to assist in the
prevention and control of one of the Na-
tion's most serious health and economic
problems—that of pollution of our air,
which, without exaggeration, has become
a national disgrace.
Air pollution problems have existed in
varying degrees of intensity for many
years in most of the Nation's metropoli-
tan centers.
The swift growth of our technological
society has produced a high level of
material benefits for the people but has
also generated a high level of actual and
potential problems caused by contami-
nation of our environment.
These contaminating elements come
from many sources—from furnaces
which heat homes, offices, and public
buildings; from motor vehicle exhausts;
from burning of domestic and industrial
waste; from industrial processes which
release chemical vapors; and from com-
bustion of fuels for the generation of
power.
Air pollution imposes a heavy burden
on our economy, causing extensive dam-
age through its effects on animals and
plant life, corrosion and soiling of mate-
rials and structures, depreciation of
property values, interference with air
and surface transport, and losses of un-
burned fuels. It has been estimated
that economic damage from air polluting
amounts to as much as $11 billion each
year in the United States; $500 million
of this figure represents agricultural
losses alone. Air pollution thus costs an
estimated $65 per capita annually in eco-
nomic losses alone.
The adverse effects on human health
caused by air pollution are of even greater
concern, although obviously health is
too precious to be measurable in terms
of dollars.
Research conducted over the past few
years has produced overwhelming evi-
dence linking air pollution to the ag-
gravation of heart conditions and to in-
creases in acute and chronic respiratory
diseases. Specific diseases associated in
one degree or another with air pollution
are lung cancer, emphysema, chronic
bronchitis, and asthma. And the irrita-
tion caused our eyes, noses, and general
sensibilities by the blight of air pollu-
tion in most of our urban areas is a
vexatious problem with which many of
us are all too familiar.
It is not difficult to understand the
nature of this threat when one realizes
that only a small part of the vast sup-
ply of our air resources is available for
use in any single location. In general,
the sources of air pollution are concen-
trated where people are concentrated.
Over one-half of our population now
lives on less than 10 percent of the land
area of the country, and there is every
indication that by 1970 two-thirds of
our population at that time will live
in the same limited land area.
The anticipated growth and concen-
tration of our population and industry
in these land areas will inevitably result
in increasingly serious health and eco-
nomic consequences, unless appropriate
action is taken now.
Within recent years considerable prog-
ress has been made at the Federal, State,
and community levels, but the problem
will continue to demand an expansion
of research and control efforts for many
years in the future.
The need for such an expanded effort
-------
308
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
has become apparent to me after careful
study of the problem in my capacity as
chairman of the Subcommittee on Pub-
lic Health and Safety of the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
The problem of air pollution has been
under consideration by the committee
for many years. In 1955 the committee
reported favorably on the basic legisla-
tion establishing the present Federal air
pollution research and technical assist-
ance program.
In 1956 the Special Subcommittee on
Traffic Safety of the committee made a
study of noxious, toxic, and harmful mo-
tor vehicle exhaust fumes in connection
with a comprehensive investigation of
highway traffic safety. Testimony was
taken and research activities of the in-
dustry were studied on visits to manu-
facturing plants.
Hearings have been held by the Health
and Safety Subcommittee in 1958, 1959,
1960, and 1962 on various bills concerned
with extension of the Federal air pollu-
tion program and on the progress being
made in air pollution control, particu-
larly with regard to motor vehicle ex-
hausts.
In 1959 the committee reported fa-
vorably on legislation to extend the Fed-
eral air pollution program—Public Law
86-365—and in 1960, a favorable com-
mittee report was made on a bill requir-
ing increased emphasis on research into
the motor vehicle exhaust problem and a
report to Congress on the results of such
investigations—Public Law 86-493.
Last year, the committee reported fa-
vorably on legislation to extend the Fed-
eral program for an additional period
of 2 years and to enact into permanent
law the substance of Public Law 86-493
requiring the Surgeon General specifically
to conduct studies on motor vehicle
exhaust as it affects human health
through the pollution of air—Public Law
87-761.
Thus, over the years the air pollution
problem has been carefully studied. Dur-
ing these years significant progress has
been made, through research, in under-
standing the nature of the problem and
the methods for its control. But, in com-
parison with the magnitude of the prob-
lem, far too little has been done at all
levels of government, to actually apply
the knowledge we now possess to con-
trol the existing problem and to prevent
its aggravation in the future.
Mr. Chairman, although organized
programs to deal with problems of air
pollution are of comparatively recent ori-
gin, I should like to summarize briefly
what has been done, or at least begun,
at the Federal, State, and local levels.
FEDERAL PROGRAM
Since its establishment in 1955, the
air pollution program of the Public
Health Service has conducted and sup-
ported research, provided training, ren-
dered technical assistance upon request,
and disseminated information on air pol-
lution to official and other organizations
and the general public. Main emphasis
has been placed on research, which has
developed vital information on the health
and economic effects of air pollution.
This information has been made widely
available for use by all levels of govern-
ment, industry, and the public. New and
valuable information on levels of air
pollution throughout the Nation has been
made available through the cooperative
local, State, and Federal national air
sampling network which now operates in
every State, in 213 urban and 37 non-
urban sampling sites. A continuous air
monitoring program now provides what
is virtually a minute-by-minute appraisal
of the levels of gaseous pollutants in
eight major cities.
A 2-year study on air exhaust and
health has been completed under the au-
thority of Public Law 86-493, enacted in
1960. The report to Congress, "Motor
Vehicles, Air Pollution, and Health,"
makes clear that automobile emissions
produce effects on human health and
other biological systems. It points out
that it is possible that none of our pres-
ent approaches will, in the long run, pro-
vide adequate solutions to the problem.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
309
Entirely different concepts may be need-
ed, such as the modification of basic
engine design or employment of types of
engines not now commonly in use.
Progress has also been made in assess-
ing the quantities of individual pollut-
ants present in the atmosphere. One
example is the studies published on com-
parative levels of benzpyrene in cities
throughout the country.
[p. 13274]
The Service has also accelerated its
work on the investigations of techniques
and basic design considerations, not only
as they relate to the pollutants produced
by automobiles, but for other pollutants,
such as the oxides of sulfur, for which
adequate means of control are not now
available.
Technical assistance activities have
been expanded. Thirteen cooperative
statewide surveys have been completed,
as well as 10 major local surveys and
dozens of investigations of special air
pollution problems.
Finally, the training programs of the
Service have made a major contribution
to the development of the technical man-
power required for Federal, State, and
local programs. Up to the present,
training at the sanitary engineering cen-
ter in Cincinnati and the field include
courses in 18 different subject areas.
Research and training grants to uni-
versities and other organizations have
increased from 31 in 1958 to 85 at the
present time.
STATE AND LOCAL PROGRAMS
Because of their many variations in
scope and emphasis, it is not possible to
generalize about State and local pro-
grams. They include research, equip-
ment development, surveys, and pollu-
tion abatement activities. The primary
emphasis is on control activities—the
application of present scientific knowl-
edge and techniques to reduce or control
the emission of pollutants into the at-
mosphere. However, the widespread
application of control techniques is de-
pendent in large measure on the avail-
ability of competently staffed and sup-
ported State and local air pollution
control agencies. Unfortunately, our
present structure of such agencies is far
from adequate for dealing with the needs
of the Nation for air-pollution control.
With respect to our urban population,
approximately 90 percent or 100 million
persons live in localities having air pol-
lution problems. It is estimated that all
232 communities in this country with a
population greater than 50,000 have air
pollution problems and approximately
40 percent of the communities in the
2,500 to 50,000 population range have
problems. In total, about 6,000 com-
munities in the United States have air
pollution problems of varying degrees
for which action programs should be
initiated or strengthened as soon as
practicable.
Today there are only 106 local control
programs on record which have full-
time staffs. These programs serve 342
local political jurisdictions, which com-
prise about 45 percent of the national
urban population. Only 28 of these con-
trol programs have 5 or more full-time
employees. There is an additional num-
ber of local programs with part-time
staffs. The median annual expenditure
is about 10 cents per capita, an amount
highly inadequate to do the job which is
necessary to attain effective control.
On the State level, during the past dec-
ade, there has been some improvement
in the status of State air pollution legis-
lation and the development of compre-
hensive programs dealing with problems
in this area. Thus, about 15 States now
have enactments which authorize the
conduct of specific programs, whereas no
State had such authorization as of 1950.
These relatively new State programs
are quite varied with respect to the types
of activities included. Of the 15 States
having specifically identifiable air pollu-
tion programs, 12 have regulatory con-
trol authority at the State level, but only
4 of these exercise this authority stater
wide. All 15 of these States provide some
-------
310
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
technical assistance to local jurisdic-
tions; 8 provide for encouragement of
interlocal programs, and 4 have set up
statewide air sampling and monitoring
networks; 5 of these 15 States have en-
gaged in varying degrees in training of
personnel, nuisance abatement, labora-
tory assistance research, pollutant emis-
sion studies, and dissemination of in-
formation. In general, those States with
specific air pollution programs carry on
activities in one or more of the following
categories: First, surveillance of prob-
lems; second, technical assistance to local
agencies; and, third, legal regulatory
control at the State level.
Because the air respects no arbitrary
boundaries and flows freely from com-
munity to community and State to State,
the problem of interstate air pollution
is a very real one. There are some 38
million Americans living in metropolitan
areas that reach across State boundaries,
and all these people live and work in
polluted air. Yet there is in this country
only one air pollution control agency
that is interstate in its activities, and it
has barely begun.
In recent years several committees
composed of highly qualified persons
have studied the problems of air pollu-
tion in the United States, at the request
of the President, the Congress, and the
Surgeon General. All of these groups
have emphasized the essentiality of pre-
serving the quality of our air resources
and the need for more research and tech-
nically trained manpower, and greater
application of our available technology
in preventing air pollution.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 6518 would re-
place the existing Air Pollution Control
Act, as amended, with a new version.
The legislation would strengthen and
make more explicit the authority of the
Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare with respect to its activities in
air pollution research, training of needed
manpower, and demonstrations. In ad-
dition, two new programs are author-
ized; namely, one, a 4-year program of
Federal grants to State, regional, and
local air pollution control agencies to as-
sist in the establishment and improve-
ment of air pollution prevention and
control programs in the States and local
communities; and two, a program of lim-
ited Federal assistance and participa-
tion, under certain circumstances, in
actions directed toward abatement of
particular air pollution problems.
ENFORCEMENT
The provisions of H.R. 6518 relating
to abatement of air pollution are an im-
portant adjunct to the expanded local
and State control activity which the bill
seeks to encourage.
This portion of the bill is again an ex-
pression and a logical outgrowth of the
concept that control is best secured
through the efforts of local and State
agencies. The plan for abatement ac-
tion is predicated on the belief that the
proper role of the Federal Government
in these matters is as collector and dis-
seminator of information, to assist the
States and local governments on re-
quest, and—when control efforts by the
States have not been successful in resolv-
ing an interstate problem, to exercise a
limited abatement authority.
Mr. Chairman, the abatement pro-
cedures outlined in the bill and discussed
in the accompanying Report No. 508
have been developed in considerable de-
tail. I would like to summarize them
briefly here.
The abatement procedures recognize
that States and communities are faced
with two classes of air pollution prob-
lems—first, those in which both the
sources of pollution and the persons
whose health or property are endangered
by it are found in one State—interstate
pollution; and, second, those in which
property or health damage result from
air pollution originating in another
State or States—interstate pollution.
In both such cases, the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare would
be authorized, when officially requested
to do so, to conduct conferences of the
interested parties and to make recom-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
311
mendations intended to secure abate-
ment of the pollution problem in ques-
tion. The Secretary would furthermore
be authorized to convene such confer-
ences on his own initiative when an air
pollution problem which he has reason
to believe that air pollution arising in one
State is endangering the health or wel-
fare of persons in another State.
Following the conference, the Secre-
tary must allow 6 months for any
remedial action which he recommends
to be taken. Thereafter, if appropriate
remedial action for abatement of the
problem has not been taken, he may call
a public hearing of the interested parties
and receive from the hearing board its
recommendations to secure abatement of
the pollution problem. The Secretary
may then convey the hearing board's
recommendations to the interested
parties, specifying a reasonable period
of time—not less than 6 months—for
them to be carried out.
If, at the end of the period specified
by the Secretary, measures to secure
abatement have not been carried out, he
may then transmit his recommendations
together with a transcript of the hear-
ing to appropriate governmental of-
ficals. At this point, again, the bill
makes a clear distinction between abate-
ment of interstate and intrastate air
pollution. In instances of intrastate air
pollution, the Secretary shall present his
findings to the Governor and the at-
torney general of the State, and may,
at their request, provide technical and
other assistance in judicial proceedings
to secure abatement. When the pollu-
tion problem in question is of an inter-
state nature, the Secretary may turn
over his recommendations and findings
to the Attorney General and request him
to bring suit to secure abatement on be-
half of the United States. He shall not,
however, make such a request until he
has received certification from the
[p. 13275]
Governor of each offended State that
each Governor has made a good faith
effort to enter into a compact or agree-
ment with the State in which the pollu-
tion originates, and has met with no
success.
Mr. Chairman, this plan for abate-
ment of air pollution places the primary
responsibility for control at the State and
local levels of government and invokes
the power of the Federal courts only
when every reasonable effort to control
an interstate problem at the State level
has been shown to be unproductive and
the health or welfare of American
citizens is being needlessly jeopardized.
I believe we can all agree that the
principal effect of this provision of H.R.
6518 will be to encourage communities
and States to accept fully their responsi-
bility for the control of air pollution,
which, as I have said, is consistent with
the broad objectives of the bill and with
the intent of the Congress.
Interstate air pollution is a uniquely
complex and demanding problem. With
the growth of urban population, more
and more metropolitan areas are reach-
ing across State boundaries. So indeed
are the air pollution problems that urban
life creates, for as we have learned in
committee hearings, the air pollution by-
products of our technological society are
carried on the wind across the hundreds
of miles, heedless of the political bound-
aries that crisscross the land.
Yet despite this growing problem, the
resources of the States and their com-
munities can be made equal to it, if the
Federal Government helps to provide the
climate for constructive and meaningful
growth of the air pollution control effort
throughout the Nation.
Today, Mr. Chairman, there is only
one interstate air pollution agency in the
United States, and it is without adequate
authority to effectively abate air pollu-
tion. Yet, in 1960 some 38 million peo-
ple lived in 24 metropolitan areas that
extend into two or more States. The
Nation has every right to look to the Fed-
eral Government for aid and guidance
in finding a remedy to this situation.
H.R. 6518 though it can offer no panacea,
526-701 O - 73 - 22
-------
312
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
would, if enacted, be the first real step
toward a solution.
GRANTS FOE SUPPORT OF AIR POLLU-
TION CONTROL PROGRAMS
The legislation before the House ex-
plicitly states that primary responsibility
for the prevention and control of air pol-
lution at its source rests with State and
local governments, a reaffirmation of a
policy which the Congress has consist-
ently set for the Federal air pollution
program. Mr. Chairman, the provision
of H.R. 6518 authorizing the use of Fed-
eral funds to partially support State and
local air pollution control programs is
not only consistent with the expressed
intent of Congress, it is essential if that
intent is to be fully realized.
If the Nation were effectively control-
ling its growing air pollution problem,
H.R. 6518 would be superfluous. The
facts, unfortunately, point to the con-
trary. Mr. Chairman, only 24 of our
50 States spend more than $5,000 a year
to control air pollution. In all, the
States are spending less than $4 million
a year to meet the rising threat of air
pollution, and more than half of that
sum is being spent in California alone.
Local control agencies are spending con-
siderably more, about $8.5 million an-
nually; but half of the Nation's metro-
politan centers and some 6,000 smaller
communities are inadequately served by
control programs, despite the fact that
they all suffer moderate or serious air
pollution problems.
The bill would authorize the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare to
expend not more than $5 million an-
nually, plus any unexpended portion of
the funds for this purpose appropriated
for the previous fiscal year, in the form
of grants to State and local air pollution
control agencies to assist them in estab-
lishing and maintaining control pro-
grams. The objective of these grants is
to provide impetus to the establishment
and improvement of regulatory air pol-
lution programs in the States and local
communities. Members of the House
will agree, I feel sure, that this is indeed
a modest sum when compared with the
billions of dollars worth of damage to
goods, property, and agriculture inflicted
each year by polluted air. Yet these
funds, allocated as the bill prescribes on
the basis of a formula which takes into
account population, per capita income,
and the extent of the air pollution prob-
lem within each State, would enable and
encourage many communities to under-
take effective control programs where
they are now either inadequate or total-
ly lacking.
There are, of course, serious-minded
persons who deplore, as I do, the thought
that the Federal Government might as-
sume the full burden and cost of air
pollution control throughout the coun-
try. This is neither the responsibility of
National Government, nor is it the intent
of the legislation before the House. The
bill, in its entirety, would rather assist
the several States in meeting their re-
sponsibility for the prevention and con-
trol of air pollution. It would mark the
beginning, Mr. Chairman, of a concerted
effort to deal wisely and effectively with
a problem, which, though it is primarily
local in nature, is nonetheless a national
disgrace and a serious economic and
health problem.
The time for prudent Federal leader-
ship and support is upon us. The Con-
gress should delay no longer in helping
initiate and strengthen effective air pol-
lution control programs where they are
most sorely needed—in the cities and
States of the Nation troubled by polluted
air.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Chairman, I
yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, every individual person
in the Nation must breathe in order to
remain alive, and there is no choice but
to breathe the air with which we are
surrounded. Therefore, this bill H.R.
6518 is vitally important to every person
in this Nation in a very personal way.
Our colleague, the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS], chairman of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
313
our subcommittee, is to be most sincerely
commended for all the work he has done
in this field of air pollution and better
health.
The United States enjoys, more than
any other nation on earth, a level of
prosperity and a standard of health that
are a monumental tribute to our indus-
trial and technological progress and to
our representative form of government.
It is incongruous, in the face of these
accomplishments, that we are failing to
adequately meet the problem of air
pollution, one of the challenges thrust
upon us by modern civilization. A
nation that can provide employment for
70 million people, that can achieve mir-
acles of lengthened lifespan and reduced
infant mortality, that can provide its
citizens more educational opportunities,
more of the trappings of personal com-
fort, indeed more of the tangible and
intangible elements of a prosperous life—
such a nation must certainly find ways
to correct the steadily worsening environ-
mental insults of air pollution to which
its people, its proud cities, even its agri-
cultural areas are subjected.
From the economic viewpoint alone,
it is reliably estimated that the loss per
capita in damage to crops and vegeta-
tion, paint, chrome plate, rubber, and
other material goods is costing $65 per
capita per year and this does not take
into account the damage to the health of
our people and animals which cannot
be measured in dollars alone. This per
capita economic loss will continue and
even at an increased cost unless prompt
and effective steps are taken to meet
these problems. Yet we are currently
spending only about 10 cents per capita
to meet these problems and thus the
wisest thing to do is to step up our efforts
to reduce the rate of economic loss and
protect the good health of everyone. No
area in our Nation is free from these
dangers and losses. Appropriate and
proper efforts now will produce lasting
benefits to every area of the Nation and
each of our citizens.
It has been my great privilege to have
had a direct part in activities relating
to the problem of air pollution for sev-
eral years and in so doing I believe I
have come to really appreciate the ur-
gent seriousness of this property loss
and the bad effects on human life. A
good step in the right direction is em-
bodied in H.R. 6518, introduced by my
able colleague, the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS], which I urge
the House to approve overwhelmingly.
This bill will make it possible for the
cities and States of the country to fully
assume their own proper responsibility
for the control of air pollution, by in-
telligent and limited use of the instru-
mentality of the Federal Government to
aid them in this endeavor. Herein lies
the key to an expanded national pro-
gram to deal with a proliferating, na-
tional problem: cooperation among gov-
ernment at all levels, with the primary
responsibility as it should for direct con-
trol authority left to the States and
local governments.
Mr. Chairman, I had the pleasure of
participating last December in the Na-
tional Conference on Air Pollution,
called by Surg. Gen. Luther L. Terry.
Many differing views were expressed at
that meeting on specific details of the
air pollution problem, but I cannot em-
phasize too much the really remarkable
unanimity of opinion that much more
needs to be done nationally to bring the
[p. 13276]
problem of air pollution under control.
Spokesmen from industry, from science,
from public health, from air pollution
control activities and from all levels of
government were virtually of one voice
in calling for a sustantial increase in
the national effort to bring about better
control of this problem. And the pub-
lic response to the conference, mani-
fested only in part by the impressive
coverage given it by the press, radio,
and television, provides yet another in-
dex of the growing public acknowledg-
ment that much more needs to be done
now to halt the contamination of our
-------
314
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
air resources. Thus, I think we here
in the Congress have a unique oppor-
tunity on the one hand to truly repre-
sent the will of the American people
and on the other to provide the leader-
ship that is a traditionally essential ele-
ment of the legislative process.
The bill now before the House, H.R.
6518, may be looked upon as having
three major elements. First, it reiterates
the well established sentiment of the
Congress that air pollution, a byproduct
of industrial, technological, and popula-
tion growth and concentration, demands
abatement action, which is primarily
the responsibility of the communities
and States. In a second element, the
bill authorizes a substantial expansion
of existing Federal activities in the
field of air pollution; namely, research,
technical assistance, training, and dis-
semination of information. Finally
the bill gives the Federal Government,
for the first time, the authority to
assist States and communities directly
in the establishment and maintenance
of control programs by providing lim-
ited financial assistance, if the need is
shown, and by participating under cer-
tain circumstances in activities directed
toward abatement of particular air pol-
lution problems.
In its totality, the bill introduced by
the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ROB-
ERTS] is focused on the one great stum-
bling block that has thus far frustrated
efforts to deal conclusively with the
problem of air pollution—the inability
or unwillingness of many States and an
alarming number of cities and towns to
conduct the kind of air pollution control
programs they so urgently need. Virtu-
ally every provision of the bill is clearly
aimed at aiding, primarily through mak-
ing technical information available, the
establishment and improvement of local
and State control programs, and hence,
at removing the serious obstacle of in-
adequate action. There is no intention,
as far as I am concerned, to relieve local
communities and States of their own re-
sponsibilities to provide for and admin-
ister a clean-air program.
The bill does this, I think, in two
closely related ways. The Federal Gov-
ernment through the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, can pro-
vide very limited initial financial im-
petus when proven necessary to initiate,
or where needed, strengthen control pro-
grams in the States and cities of the
Nation. As the bill provides, the Fed-
eral Government can serve only in the
capacity, as a starter, to help the local
programs get their feet on the ground
through modest financial help and tech-
nical information. I am sure that once
effective programs are undertaken and
their worth and benefit to the commu-
nity or State is demonstrated, as it will
be, the citizen-taxpayers served by such
programs will be glad to assume the full
responsibility for their continuing sup-
port, and the modest investment made
by the Federal Government will be far
outstripped by appropriated local funds.
Once the people realize the gains in per-
sonal health and comfort and in eco-
nomic returns that will accompany effec-
tive air pollution control, I submit they
will never again allow the needless and
careless destruction of their air resource
that we are witnessing today.
The bill will authorize what we must
certainly call a modest investment in
Federal grant support of local and State
control programs—a total expenditure in
any fiscal year not to exceed $5 million.
These funds would be allocated to the
States on an equitable formula basis of
established need, designed to take into
account the State's own financial ca-
pacity and its air pollution problem.
Obviously, this sum could never serve to
underwrite the entire national cost of air
pollution control, and the bill envisions
nothing of this kind. This money would
serve only as a stimulus, and as tangible
evidence of the willingness of the Fed-
eral Government to aid the States in
launching and maintaining their own
effective control programs.
Another major feature of the bill, one
which is intimately tied to the grants
program, is the authorized Federal par-
ticipation in abatement activities. On
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
315
this point, too, the bill places full respon-
sibility for control with State and local
governments, but it does more than that.
It attempts to create a climate, now
sorely absent, in which States can pur-
sue abatement measures with the assist-
ance of the Federal Government as a
repository of authoritative technical in-
formation and counsel. In only one type
of air pollution situation would the Fed-
eral Government be authorized to inter-
vene directly to secure air pollution
abatement through the Federal courts.
This would only occur when all efforts at
the State level have failed to resolve an
air pollution problem involving two or
more States. We have every reason to
believe that application of this authority
would truly be the exception to the rule.
This leads to a point which I believe
needs to be emphasized. In attempting
as it does to encourage and foster in-
creased local and State air pollution con-
trol activity, the bill recognizes the need
for the creation of both interstate and
intrastate agreements to deal with air
pollution problems, as they so often
occur, on a multijurisdictional basis.
Experience has demonstrated that single
political entities, whether they be cities,
counties, or entire States, often cannot
adequately deal with the air pollution
problems confronting them because an-
other political jurisdiction, entirely in-
dependent of the first in many cases, is
directly involved. Where these prob-
lems are confined within one State, the
course of action is clear—a statewide or
regional control agency must be estab-
lished and empowered by the States to
deal with the problem. But when two or
more States are involved, the situation
becomes administratively more complex
and demands the adoption of agree-
ments or compacts among the States.
The bill, H.R. 6518, would give the con-
sent of the Congress to the creation of
such compacts or agreements so that
interstate problems could be resolved at
the State level. Only when no such
compact or agreement exists and when
efforts to secure one prove fruitless
would the Federal courts be asked to in-
tervene on behalf of the people of the
United States.
Mr. Chairman, my experience in the
field of air pollution, particularly in the
perplexing area of automotive exhaust
gas air pollution, has firmly persuaded
me that every segment of our society,
governmental and nongovernmental, has
an important role to play in the struggle
to preserve our diminishing supply of
fresh, healthful, clean air. Last year,
the Surgeon General, in response to
legislation which I was privileged to in-
troduce 2 years earlier, submitted a
lengthy report to the Congress on the
biological and health effects of motor
vehicle air pollutants. The report con-
cluded in essence that this specific air
pollution problem is beyond question a
potentially critical health threat and
that it will surely worsen unless effective
measures are taken to correct it. As we
all know, the automotive industry has
continued to spend huge sums in re-
search on the matter of the harmful
effects of automotive exhaust gases and
has taken an important step by equipping
all new cars beginning with the 1964
models with a crankcase "blowby" device
that will reduce by about one-third the
amount of harmful unburned hydro-
carbons released into the air by each car.
I understand that the industry is and
has been working, furthermore, on the
development of other devices and tech-
niques that will help to correct the far
more serious problem of pollutants re-
leased through the exhaust system itself.
But this effort alone will not solve the
automotive pollution problem unless and
until the cities and States of the Nation
are equipped to administer and insist
upon a program of strict control to as-
sure that motor vehicle pollution control
devices and procedures are uniformly
adopted and enforced. To my knowl-
edge, only one State, California, has seen
and acted upon the wisdom of this
course, despite the fact that every city
in the land with more than 50,000 resi-
dents either has now or soon will have
a motor vehicle pollution problem to be
dealt with.
-------
316
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
In other areas, what I have just said is
even more true, because the problem of
control need not wait for the develop-
ment of reliable and economical equip-
ment and techniques. Air pollution au-
thorities agree that many means are al-
ready at hand to bring under effective
control many of the major sources of
air pollution, such as fuel use, indus-
trial operations, refuse disposal, and
others. This information all too often is
lying unused because the cities and States
of the country, or certainly most of them,
are either not equipped or are not yet
willing to assume responsibility to bring
[p. 13277]
it into application in the interests of their
citizens.
I will conclude, Mr. Chairman, by re-
spectfully asking that the House take
this opportunity to strike a blow at the
national disgrace of air pollution. The
people of the United States are ready
and able to meet the threat of air pol-
lution. Our responsibility is to help
them in every way appropriate to the
Federal system of government. I urge
my colleagues here in the House to over-
whelmingly approve the clean air bill,
H.R. 6518, and thus make an important
start in providing all our people with
urgently needed clean air in which to live.
Mr. TEAGUE of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SCHENCK. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. TEAGUE of California. Mr.
Chairman, I seek the advice of the gen-
tleman. I am very well aware of the
seriousness of the problem of air pollu-
tion as well as the problem of water pol-
lution. I would like to get the opinion of
the gentleman as what a Member such
as myself can do or should do if that
Member has taken the position, as I have
in the past, that water pollution prob-
lems, serious as they are, are primarily a
matter to be handled at the local level.
How is this air pollution proposal to be
distinguished in principle from that re-
lating to water?
Mr. SCHENCK. If I may reply to my
good colleague from California, I will say
that this legislation attempts to put un-
der one umbrella all the various types of
air pollution programs, participation, the
matter of research, and the matter of
grant in aid where a proven need exists,
but those grants are not in excess of $5
million a year. It also makes it possible
for the local communities to receive
technological information and know-how
from the research department of the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, which is extremely important.
It provides, also, that there can be or-
ganized State compacts if the Congress
will approve State compacts the same
as they do with respect to water pollu-
tion. It also provides that we encour-
age and urge the local communities and
States to do the job for themselves, ap-
plying only to the Federal Government
when there is no other resource avail-
able.
Mr. TEAGUE of California. I thank
the gentleman.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Chairman, I re-
serve the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has
consumed 4 minutes.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from
New York [Mr. HALPERN].
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in support of this bill and I wish to
heartily commend the distinguished
chairman of the subcommittee, the able
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ROB-
ERTS], for his hard work and dedication
to this legislation. He has shown a con-
tinued determination to protect the lives
and welfare of millions of Americans.
I believe H.R. 6518 will do just that.
And I am privileged to have worked
closely with the gentleman in this, and
in the previous Congress on legislation
in this field, my companion bill in this
session being H.R. 4750.
Although I am not a member of the
subcommittee, I have had continued in-
terest in this problem and have found
the chairman extremely helpful and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
317
fully cooperative in seeking the answers
to the ever-growing chaotic air pollution
situation. I also want to express my
appreciation to the officials of the De-
partment of Health, Education, and
Welfare who have been so cooperative
with me and my staff in this matter.
Mr. Chairman, this is a most important
problem and tragically, for too long a
time, it has lacked the necessary tools to
be effectively attacked. We can no
longer be apathetic about this dangerous
scourge which has caused such immeas-
urable damage to the health, property,
and welfare of countless Americans.
We certainly do not shrug off as in-
significant the pollution of air with ra-
dioactive materials from nuclear explo-
sions. We may question contentions
about the kind and extent of damage
such pollution causes, but this uncertain-
ty whets our determination to probe the
dangers in order to decide more intelli-
gently what do about them. In contrast,
our response to air pollution which is a
byproduct of urban, industrial living, has
been somewhat lethargic. For this rea-
son, passage of H.R. 6518 will be both a
sign and means of our overcoming
apathy.
Perhaps our slowness to act in this
area stems from the rarity of spectacular
damage caused by nonradioactive pol-
lutants. The Donora disaster of 1948,
when 20 persons died because of a con-
centrated, 3-day smog, is an exception.
If the effects of nonradioactive pollutants
are less dramatic than those caused by
radioactive substances, nevertheless they
are equally invidious. For nonradioac-
tive pollutants—nitrogen and sulfur ox-
ides, hydrocarbons, and solid particles—
threaten our pocketbooks, our aesthetic
satisfaction, and, above all, our health.
The estimates of the economic cost of
air pollution are staggering. They range
from $7.5 to $11 billion annually. Just
imagine that, Mr. Chairman. This fig-
ure takes into account the damage to
crops as well as the increased work ab-
senteeism in areas where air pollution
reaches high levels. Compare the billion
dollar annual figure with the $90 million
appropriations for a 5-year period en-
visioned by the clean air bill under con-
sideration. Who can label this expendi-
ture wasteful spending?
The aesthetic debits of air pollution
are obvious to anyone familiar with the
grayness of city buildings, the haze that
greets the traveler flying to a large me-
tropolis and, to single out a trivial but
telling example, the sooty pall typical of
snow in an urban environment.
It is possible that some persons might
acquiesce in the economic and aesthetic
costs of polluted air, an attitude I find
hard to comprehend. But, how many of
us can accept calmly danger to our
health? Recent studies conducted by
the U.S. Public Health Service postulate
a close connection between the lung ail-
ments, particularly chronic bronchitis,
emphysema and lung- cancer, and the
prevalence of polluted air. Laboratory
experiments with animals and humans
tend to support the conclusions drawn
from statistical surveys.
By the experts' own admission, evi-
dence on the relation between air pollu-
tion and disease is far from conclusive.
This incompleteness alone is a powerful
argument for supporting H.R. 6518
which makes possible increased research
into all aspects of air pollution, the
dangers it poses as well as the remedies
for them. However inadequate, the data
already gathered persuades me that
action to reduce and, if possible, to elimi-
nate air pollution, is also imperative.
To argue that it is necessary to wait until
we have more information before acting
often masks a determination to do noth-
ing at all. In most instances, we act on
probabilities and, as I interpret the facts
the probability is for additional eco-
nomic, esthetic, and health losses as
long as the projected increase in urban-
ization, automobile travel, and in-
dustrialization goes on unaccompanied
by anti-air-pollution programs. H.R.
6518 takes into account the need for
applying what we know about air pollu-
tion and its remedies by empowering the
-------
318
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Federal Government to take legal action
against those responsible for polluting
the air.
Admitting the need for more extensive
and intensive air pollution programs,
why should the Federal Government get
into the picture? Why not leave the re-
sponsibility to the States and local com-
munities?
In the first place, air circulates freely,
observing no State or municipal bound-
aries. The citizens of one State affected
by pollutants discharged into the air in
another State need some means to pro-
tect their interest in clean air. This bill
makes the Federal Government their
protector by allowing the U.S. Attorney
General to bring suit against air pollu-
tion violators in the offending State after
less compulsory paths to compliance
have failed.
Second, local and State governments
in general have failed to do adequate
jobs in the past. Substantial progress
has, of course, been made in some
communities in the last few years. I
can point to New York and the superb
job being done by Commissioner Arthur
J. Benline of the New York City Depart-
ment of Air Pollution Control. But there
is just so much States and cities can do
on their own. According to the U.S.
Public Health Service, only 342 local
political units including about 45 percent
of the population in areas which have
problems, have air pollution control
programs with full-time staffs. A scat-
tering of other communities have pro-
grams with part-time staffs.
Finally, the coordinating role of the
Federal Government under this bill in-
evitably reduces wasteful duplication,
especially in research. Many communi-
ties, geographically widely separated,
have similar problems. With the Fed-
eral Government acting as liaison, they
could more easily arrange a division in-
stead of a duplication of labor. This
would save considerable sums of money
as well as make possible maximum use
of available resources. H.R. 6518 further
[p. 13278]
aids local and State cooperation by au-
thorizing the Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare to channel reports to
local agencies about developments in the
air pollution field.
Mr. Chairman, as a Representative
from New York City, whose industry,
automobile traffic and population den-
sity create an ever-growing air pollu-
tion problem, I naturally have an im-
mediate and personal interest in seeing
H.R. 6518 passed. But, I do not speak
only on behalf of either the urban
dweller nor the 50-odd small farmowners
and numerous home gardeners within
New York City's limits. I know that I
speak too, for countless others wherever
they live, who have an interest in maxi-
mizing the economic, esthetic and phys-
ical well-being of all citizens. I trust
this view is shared by the overwhelm-
ing majority in the House and that it is
reflected in a resounding vote in favor
of this bill.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Chairman, I thank the gentleman for
his support of this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to
the gentleman from California [Mr.
BURKHALTER].
Mr. BURKHALTER. Mr. Chairman,
In America today we are faced with
many problems; however, I feel that air
pollution or, as some call it, smog, will
be our No. 1 problem in the very near
future if we do not do something to al-
leviate its spread now at the Federal level
with proper legislation during this ses-
sion. Regardless of what this contami-
nator of our life giving air is called it is
a daily detriment, a serious daily detri-
ment, to the health and welfare of each
and every community in our Nation.
Initially certain scientists and air pol-
lution experts and some health authori-
ties tried to say that this problem was
confined to parts of California and a few
other large metropolitan areas; however,
it is now more or less a generally ac-
cepted fact that the problem has become
a national one, especially in any locality
of over 50,000 inhabitants.
Physicians and leading health authori-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
319
ties have long held that air pollution is
certainly a contributing factor, and per-
haps one of the major causes, of lung
cancer, heart ailments, asthma, tuber-
culosis, and other respiratory ailments.
Only this week were members of this
House and the Senate asked to partici-
pate in a mass survey technique to de-
tect a common chronic disease of the
lungs, emphysema. Smoking and air
pollution are the chief contributing fac-
tors of emphysema, yet no one knows
how to prevent this disease, although it
may be slowed down by modern medicine
if the condition is detected in its early
stages. Each and every year new types
of respiratory diseases are finding their
ways into our daily existence because of
the pollutants thrown into the air by our
industrial economy.
The general public is still skeptical
about what is really causing smog, or
air pollution. Most experts still insist
that motor vehicles contribute in ex-
cess of 60 percent of all the pollutants
and irritants which are discharged into
the atmosphere. The other factors
which constitute the remaining 40 per-
cent are spread out in much smaller
percentages. In California the follow-
ing were found to be sources of air pol-
lution: Petroleum refineries, steel mills,
chemical plants, rubber processing and
finishing establishments, foundries, elec-
troplating plants, steam plants, open
dumps, the private back yard incinera-
tor and even the municipally owned in-
cinerators and a host of unlisted and
unnamed industrial processing plants.
Air pollution is also contributed to by
each little community restaurant, each
open burning of leaves—in Los Angeles
one of the first bans carried out was
against the back yard incinerator be-
cause of the solid pollutants which were
carried into the air each day; afterwards,
the public incinerators were banned for
the same reason, contamination of the
air with solid pollutants.
Unfortunately the first conclusion a
person was apt to reach was—if you do
not see smoke or dust, no air pollution
was occurring. However, due to the in-
tensive research and public educational
programs presented today concerning
the many reasons for the pollution of
the air the public has become well aware
that it is for the most part the unseen
vapors and chemicals which react one
with the other to cause one's eyes to
water and burn and to cause terrific
pains and discomfort in breathing to
some individuals.
It has been pointed out that local,
city, county, and even State laws are not
the answer. For example, in California
some of the industries that contribute
a great deal to the Los Angeles basin
smog are located in neighboring coun-
ties. Also, local laws are not effective
in combating smog created by motor ve-
hicle exhaust because today there are
thousands of individuals who commute
to and from their daily occupations or
businesses who may travel well over 50
miles a day, and these people may cross
and recross many local, county, and even
State boundaries during the day. This
movement naturally applies to the tour-
ist as well as the commuter. With this
kind of boundary criss-crossing it is easy
to see that local ordinances which at-
tempt to control air pollution are mean-
ingless. Why? Because the moving,
fleeting pollutants are transported by
moving vehicles across local and State
lines, as well as being carried by the
changing wind and weather patterns out
and beyond the local boundaries of their
origin.
In face of ordinary facts such as these
it is imperative for any control which
is to be really effective to originate at
the Federal level. Before ordinances or
laws were passed at the local level, noth-
ing was being done to curtail the daily
scourge of the problem. In Los An-
geles County, notwithstanding our phe-
nomenal growth from 3,900,000 people
and 9,800 industries in 1948 to 6,500,000
people and 16,000 industries as of 1960,
because of the smog research and ordi-
nances passed since 1947 the volume of
contamination entering the air from sta-
tionary sources is less than half what it
was 15 years ago, and about 6,000 tons
-------
320
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
a day less than it would have been had
not our local control measures been tak-
en in the interval. Even in London,
England, which passed its "clean air act
of 1956," the average concentration of
smoke over the city has been reduced
by roughly 40 percent.
It is estimated that air pollution is
costing our Nation $11 billion a year.
Dollars represent only replaceable goods,
but what of the loss of a single life to
this manmade air poisoner? This is
not just a scare threat, unfortunately;
the record shows that smog can kill and
has. How many remember the headlines
of 1952 that let the world know that over
4,000 deaths occurred in London from
a killer—smog—and as late as 1962, 400
Londoners lost their lives to another
killing smog blanket. The residents of
Donora, Pa., were lucky and escaped
with their lives, but 5,900 inhabit-
ants out of 13,900 were made deathly
sick by polluted air. These are all
facts, not fantasies. It would indeed
be a grave mistake to infer that all the
damage that smog creates is to the physi-
cal body of man. It is estimated that
in California damage to crops from smog
alone is approximately $8 million to field
and vegetable crops, according to Dr.
John Middelton, chairman, department
of plant pathology, citrus experimental
station, University of California, River-
side. It is obvious Federal legislation
is long past due in combating the foul
mixtures that are polluting our lifegiv-
ing air hourly.
The automobile exhaust is one of the
worst offenders. I have introduced leg-
islation, H.R. 3765, which will set up
certain standards that must be main-
tained for the elimination of this source
of contamination. However, the other
40 percent creating air pollution are
from a variety of sources, and each, no
matter how small, must be treated and
acted upon accordingly. The control of
the pollutants from small and large in-
dustrial establishments is a factor which
can be a financial drain on companies
which are paying interest and principal
on original loans, and will be for the
next 15 to 20 years. A large portion of
these new industrial plants have been
started in the last 15 to 18 years, and a
high percentage of the owners are
veterans who received their initial loan
from the Small Business Administration.
In talking with many of these indi-
vidual owners, I have found that al-
though they are encumbered with pres-
ent financial obligations they would be
more than willing to seek further loans
which would enable them to install air-
pollution control devices on any and all
processes they employ which are at pres-
ent contaminating the atmosphere, if
such loans could be made available from
Government agencies at a low interest
rate.
I do not believe it is the desire of any
of us advocating the rigid enforcement
of controls of air pollution to harass or
close down any of our industrial, com-
mercial, or any firms which are contrib-
uting to the economic well-being of our
country. However, this is a two-way
street and the public health is of the
first importance. Due to this dual in-
volvement, and to the ready cooperation
of many of the firms to install devices
to control the emission of pollutants
[p. 13279]
from their establishments, I believe that
each of us in the legislative branch of
the Federal Government are obligated to
make low interest loans available to this
group because of the very vital contri-
bution to the welfare and health of the
Nation this control of air pollution would
be. Quoting from S. Smith Griswold,
air pollution control officer for the Los
Angeles air pollution control district, in
this regard he has said:
Three separate factors suggest this need for a
Federal program:
1. Los Angeles County and other urban areas
cannot cope independently with the many technical
and scientific factors associated with effective
control efforts. To secure answers to the many
questions confronting State and local agencies,
there must be an effective division of effort between
the several levels of government. Without that
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
321
kind of cooperative approach, the solution to the
air pollution problem will be dangerously slow.
2. Much positive and constructive data and
information regarding air pollution and its control
already has been developed by local agencies,
particularly in Los Angeles County where a very
comprehensive program is being administered.
This existing information should be correlated and
made available to all control agencies through
central coordination at the Federal level. There is
little need to duplicate research or engineering
development projects already completed or well on
their way to completion if the information can be
retrieved readily through a central agency. Avail-
able time and money should be used to expand the
knowledge of air pollution and its effect on environ-
mental health wherever necessary.
3. Federal financial assistance through grants-
in-aid or contract research projects should be made
available to local agencies conducting work of
national interest. Most local governmental budgets
are already strained to the breaking point and they
should not now be required to spend local tax
funds on projects that are of benefit to the entire
Nation.
The aggressive program at the Federal level
which could result from the enactment of H.R
6518 would provide sorely needed support to State
and local air pollution control programs. It would
concentrate the great mass of technical data and
information and provide for the uniform national
effort which the Surgeon General of the United
States has said is vitally necessary for the protection
of the health and welfare of the citizens of this
Nation.
Many, many reasons and facts have
been stated from both sides of the House
that point out the increasing dangers
from continued inactivity of Congress to
act in controlling air pollution. I, there-
fore, urge that all of my colleagues
weigh the responsibilities involved in the
interest of public health and urge that
Mr. ROBERTS' bill, H.R. 6518, be sup-
ported and passed by this august body
unanimously.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Chairman, I thank the gentleman from
California for his interest and his con-
tribution and support of this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to
the gentleman from Florida [Mr
ROGERS].
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, I rise in strong support of this leg-
islation and also to commend the chair-
man of this subcommittee and the other
members of the committee, including the
ranking minority member, for the fine
work they have done over the years on
this program.
Actually this problem of air pollution
is increasing daily. We are seeing it
right here in the Nation's Capital. In
fact, it is to be found in all cities with a
population of 50,000 or more. From a
survey that has been made it is stated
that 40 percent of all communities of
2,500 to 50,000 have air pollution prob-
lems. Of course, this is going to increase
as our population increases, as the use
of automobiles increases, as we indus-
trialize, as we urbanize.
This legislation is simply founded
upon the idea that some research done
now will pay off not only in lessening
the damage of some $11 billion that
comes about yearly, but also in the sav-
ing of lives.
Mr. Chairman, this legislation is of-
fered in an effort to combat a national
problem which threatens to become
worse in very short order unless correc-
tive action is taken. Polluted air, a by-
product of industrialization and urban
growth, threatens the health of every
American, as well as the food he eats
and the materials he uses.
Air pollution is a health hazard. To
consider one aspect, it can turn mass
murderer. In 1952, the city of London,
England, suffered under heavy fog laden
with a thick variety of polluted material.
In those two weeks, more Londoners
were killed than had died in the cholera
epidemics of the 19th century. That
infamous fog took from 3,000 to 4,000
lives.
In 1948 a deadly fog in Donora, Pa.,
resulted in 20 deaths and many, many
illnesses.
But these incidents happened some
years ago. Yes, but the average Amer-
ican recognizes the problem we have
under discussion here today when you
mention to him the irritation which ac-
companies a warm, still day in any urban
or semi-urban area where automobile ex-
haust fumes, chemical waste, industrial
vapors lay in the atmosphere to hinder
-------
322
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
sight and breathing. And any farmer
can recognize the damage which can
occur to crops planted near heavily
traveled highways.
The problem of contaminated atmos-
phere has become common knowledge
for every American, and concern for this
problem is seen in local, State, and Fed-
eral activities.
The problem is getting worse despite
corrective action even now underway
to control it. The U.S. Public Health
Service estimates that by 1970, two-
thirds of the American people will be
breathing the air which covers less than
10 percent of this Nation's total land
area—strong testimony to illustrate our
trend toward even greater population
density. As a corollary, let us compare
the amount of toxic substances in cir-
culation. In 1947 U.S. production of
synthetic organic chemicals was about
18 billion pounds. In 1958 we were pro-
ducing more than 40 billion pounds. The
waste products of this production are
still being thrown into the air we
breathe.
We have ample evidence to link pol-
luted air to all sorts of diseases. Respi-
ratorv diseases naturally fall to mind
first—emphysema, asthma, lung cancer,
tuberculosis, and many other maladies
with cardiorespiratory effects are ac-
celerated if not caused directly by dirt
in the air.
Laboratory tests show that polluted
air becomes more a threat when exposed
to sunlight. In some cases, chemicals
which pose no danger can suddenly be-
come dangerous when irradiated by the
sun's rays, and many chemicals once
irradiated become even more potent than
when originally emitted. For example,
exhaust fumes have been found to be
highly toxic; $11 billion damage yearly
is reported from air pollution and vege-
tation damage alone from polluted air
is estimated to run as high as $500 mil-
lion annually, indirectly affecting dam-
age to our health as well as our economy.
Thus we can see the very great need
for extending our efforts in the field of
air pollution.
The committee emphasizes that the
primary responsibilities and rights are
the States and local governments in con-
trolling air pollution.
H.R. 6518 does extend our efforts in
this field, and does so in a way which
gives closer congressional scrutiny, spells
out the legislative authority much more
clearly than has ever been done in any
Federal air pollution program before,
and will result in greater efficiency and
returns per dollar spent as well.
At present, the U.S. Public Health
Service has been conducting air pollution
studies and work under broad, general
authority as contained in sections 301,
311, and 314(c) of the Public Health
Service Act. This legislative authority
allowed great leeway for PHS activities,
and the only real control which Congress
had over these activities lay in the ap-
propriations which were allowed to the
Public Health Service.
The Committee on Interstate and For-
eign Commerce has agreed with the
findings of the Health and Safety Sub-
committee that any future air pollution
efforts must be scaled down to a compact
package which allows close congression-
al supervision, specific authority, a
definite set of goals to be accomplished,
and a time limit on this new authority.
For these reasons, the committee has
redefined the law with specific recom-
mendations, required that any departure
from this authority be checked by coming
before the Congress for authorizations
as well as appropriations, and cut the
entire program to basically a 3-year pro-
gram instead of the 5-year program
originally proposed.
One of the main amendments which
the committee adopted reduced the pro-
gram to 3 years, and reduced the amount
of the authorization as well. The House
has this year already approved some $13
million for Public Health Service activity
to be carried out under existing law.
Because H.R. 6518 would enhance air
pollution programs to include, for the
first time, abatement of the problem as
well as reasearch into its causes, an au-
thorization for $5 million is contained in
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
323
this legislation to carry out this new
authority for fiscal year 1964. However,
Public Health Service suggested $154,937
for fiscal years 1965 through 1968 to
[p. 13280]
implement this authority. However, the
committee, by imposing ceilings of $20
million for fiscal year 1965, $30 million
for fiscal year 1966, and $35 million for
fiscal year 1967, has reduced the program
to a 3-year authorization, and cut some
$70 million as well.
There are other amendments which the
committee has adopted in an effort to
better regulate this program. Adoption
of these amendments by the Congress is
needed in order that air pollution pro-
grams, existing as well as the one pro-
posed, can be better administered and
made more effective.
The first such amendment places a re-
striction on the funds to be made avail-
able for grants for air pollution control
programs. The amendment specifies a
ceiling of $5 million for these grants, and
states that such funds must come from
the general appropriations for operation
of the entire air pollution effort.
The second amendment is designed to
discourage excessive spending in these
grants made to States for air pollution
control. The bill prior to this amend-
ment would have directed that grants
for this purpose be made in the amount
of two-thirds of the cost of these pro-
grams. This amendment removes this
fixed formula, and allows grants of
smaller amounts to be made, with the
effect being greater flexibility of admin-
istration, wider distribution of funds, and
a reduction in the overall cost of the
program as well.
The next two amendments follow
through to conform with the grant for-
mula alteration just described. These
amendments allow regional air pollution
agencies to receive grants in the same
manner for which grants to the States
are proposed, and provides that regional
grants be figured pro rata as part of the
share allotted to each State. The same
effects of flexibility, wider distribution of
funds, and reduction in cost are desired
with regard to these amendments.
At the request of the Department of
the Interior, the committee amended this
legislation to allow the Department of
the Interior to sit on the hearing board
proposed. The Department of the In-
terior, with its concern in the field of
coal mining, one cause of polluted air,
was felt to be of value in such cases.
Mr. Chairman, as you can see, this
legislation would provide action needed
in the recognized problem of air pollu-
tion, and does so by providing efficient
methods for that action through better
regulation and control by the Congress.
For these reasons I urge the enactment
of H.R. 6518 as unanimously reported
by the Committee on Interstate and For-
eign Commerce.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I wish to
commend the gentleman from Florida
for his able and strenuous efforts in get-
ting this legislation to the floor.
Mr. Chairman, I have no further re-
quests for time.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 5 minutes to my colleague, a mem-
ber of the committee, the gentleman
from Minnesota [Mr. NELSEN].
Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Chairman, I take
this time to make some comments rela-
tive to this legislation, also to ask some
questions of the chairman of the sub-
committee in order to make a complete
clarification for the record as to what
this bill does.
Originally when this bill came before
our subcommittee I think some of us en-
visioned the possibility that this might
be a very far-reaching measure moving
much along the lines of the Water Pol-
lution Act. Some of the original enforce-
ment provisions in the bill, in my judg-
ment, were ill-advised, and I think the
committee did a very thorough job in
modifying the bill in all respects. I per-
sonally do not want the Federal Govern-
ment to move in and start paying for air
pollution control in every little town in
the country. I think there is an area of
research and technical assistance that
should be available to communities. I
-------
324
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
think there is an interstate problem,
where there may be problems among
several States, where there may be justi-
fication for the Federal Government's
taking a hand in the problem.
May I ask this question: It is my un-
derstanding that many of the things
that are being done under this bill in
the way of research, technical assist-
ance, and grants have previously been
done under acts that presently are on the
books. Is that not rgiht?
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. That is
true; under the Public Health Service Act
and the existing Air Pollution Control
Act. The gentleman was in attendance
at all the hearings. He helped write the
legislation. At all times we were aware
of his concern that we not replace local
or State effort. We figure about $5
million a year for the new grant pro-
gram. We do not want this to go into
every little town. I do not think the wide
open spaces and the little towns are
bothered with this problem. It is pri-
marily a problem of the cities with 50,000
population and above.
Mr. NELSEN. I certainly want tech-
nical assistance, advice, and planning
made available, but to go in there to in-
stall physical facilities is another thing.
I think the bill as written now will pre-
vent that.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I think
the gentleman knows from reading the
bill that this is under the control of
the local authorities. The Federal Gov-
ernment cannot go in without the con-
currence of the Governors of the States
and at the request of the Governors of
the States.
Mr. NELSEN. That is right.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I think
we tried very hard to avoid some mis-
takes that have been made in other Fed-
eral programs. The general purpose of
the bill is to encourage cooperative effort
on the part of the local jurisdictions, the
States, and the Federal Government.
Mr. NELSEN. In other words, any re-
quest to the Federal Government does
come through the Governor of the State,
and the municipalities of the State must
bring their requests to the Governor,
who in turn brings the matter to the
Federal agency.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. That is
true.
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I yield
to the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. CURTIS. As I read the bill, you
do provide under (A) on page 10, under
(B) on page 11, that requests originate
from State or local authority, but under
(C) on page 12, that the Secretary can
move on his own volition without any re-
quest from any State or municipality.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. That is
merely for the purpose of holding a
conference.
Mr. CURTIS. No; I beg to differ.
This is the provision for bringing about
the enforcement. You can start in any
one of three ways.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Would
the gentleman read the language to
which he refers?
Mr. McCLORY. If the gentleman will
yield, I think I can point out the lan-
guage.
Mr. CURTIS. The language I am re-
ferring to, if the gentleman will yield, is
on line 9. It reads:
The Secretary shall also call such a conference
whenever, on the basis of reports, surveys, or
studies, he has reason to believe that any pollu-
tion—
He starts on his own initiative and this
just as section A and section B can cul-
minate in the action taken against the
State. It goes through quite a long bit
of procedure, but it does result in that
action.
Mr. NELSEN. Does the chairman
wish to respond to the observation just
made by the gentleman from Missouri
[Mr. CURTIS]?
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. This is
with reference to an interstate situation.
However, before the machinery of abate-
ment begins to operate, the Governor
of the affected State must certify that
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
325
he has made a bona fide effort to enter
into an agreement to secure abatement
but has been unable to obtain such an
agreement. So there again you go right
back to the Governor who finally has to
open the door to any Federal enforce-
ment in the interstate situation.
Mr. LAIRD. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. NELSEN. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. LAIRD. I note on page 4 of the
committee report you outlined the appro-
priations authorized under this particular
legislation and it sets forth the maximum
authorization out of the Appropriations
Committee. I would like to find out
whether any additional personnel will be
required in order to carry out the pro-
visions of this proposed legislation.
*****
[p. 132811
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I want to
say to the gentleman, and I realize his
concern, that many questions he has
asked, the committee has asked. We
[p. 13283]
have tried in this bill to bring these pro-
grams under an umbrella and bring some
control to them because the subcommit-
tee shared some of the feeling of the gen-
tleman. Of course, under the present
law the Department can come to the
Congress under the general provisions of
law with no ceilings. We are now com-
ing in and trying to tighten up this
program.
I might also say to the gentleman from
the requests we have seen that the De-
partment was going to make, we have
cut them about in half.
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I will be
glad to yield.
Mr. CURTIS. I, too, want to com-
mend the gentleman for the position he
has taken. There are some limitations
in this bill and I am aware of that.
What I was trying to find out, I might
say from our side, was how much have
you been able to gather together the
various programs and put them under
one umbrella? I think you are on the
right track. I am really worried about
this because I have the situation in my
own committee where we have a similar
problem that we have not been able to
grapple with, and that is one reason why
I expressed this concern.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I appreci-
ate the concern of the gentleman be-
cause I share it and I offer this amend-
ment to provide, when we pass this
legislation, that no similar programs can
be carried on anywhere in the Govern-
ment under similar legislation. So we tie
it all in and we can go to this one law and
know that all of our air pollution con-
trol programs are right here.
Mr. CURTIS. I am frank to say to
the gentleman I am about to embark on
a little study of my own to see what can
be done in respect to all of these re-
search grants so that what I regard as
an abuse, as I tried to describe it, cannot
go on. It is not peculiar to what we have
here in this bill but it is something gen-
eral and applies to all of this Federal
research.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. May I say
I commend the gentleman for his
interest in this. This subcommittee and
our committee have already embarked
on this program and would welcome the
support of the gentleman in all its
recommendations.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I will be glad
to yield.
Mr. McCLORY. Is there any reason
why Dr. Wiesner, who is in charge of the
Office of Science and Technology and in
charge of the scientific group at the
White House, endeavoring to coordinate
research activities, was not invited to
appear and testify before the committee?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. They did
not testify on this as I recall it.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
-------
326
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I yield to
the gentleman.
Mr. SCHENCK. May I suggest to my
friend from Illinois that Dr. Wiesner,
who heads up the Office of Science and
Technology and the White House scien-
tific group, is an electrical engineer. He
did appear before our committee on an-
other subject.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I might say'
that that organization spends no funds
in this field. We have other agencies
which have the responsibility for carry-
ing on the program. This is not a new
program. I am sure the gentleman
knows that, because the Congress has
already appropriated this year—that is,
it has already passed through this House
a bill for almost $13 million for this pro-
gram. I am sure the gentleman knows
that.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, I
would like to add with regard to the sub-
ject of water pollution that Dr. Wiesner
did appear before our Committee on
Government Operations.
Dr. Wiesner testified in part, with re-
gard to the duplication of research and
the effort that is being made, quite un-
successfully so far, I might say, to coor-
dinate the numerous multimillion-dol-
lar research programs being carried on
by various Federal departments and
agencies. It would seem important that
before we authorize additional expensive
research programs we should make sure
that we are getting the maximum re-
sults, or at least some substantial re-
sults from all of this diversified research
effort.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. The com-
mittee has gone into this. This is the
purpose of the legislation, to tie this all
in and to give Congress greater control
over these programs.
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. McCLORY].
Mr. McCLORY. Mr Chairman, as I
envision this program it is one which
converts an existing research program
of limited Federal authority and func-
tion to a greatly expanded program of
control and abatement on the part of the
Federal Government. It follows the pat-
tern of the Water Pollution Control Act
which is referred to several times in the
report and will give greatly expanded au-
thority to the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare in this area. We
talk about the conference which is to be
called in connection with abatement
procedures. Any members who have
had experience with conferences called
by the Public Health Service with regard
to water pollution know that it results
in a very unsatisfactory situation so far
as the States and local municipalities
are concerned. We have had numerous
complaints before our committee investi-
gating water pollution about the confer-
ences that have been called by the Public
Health Service. These are provided for
in this act and also, although they look
like innocent things, just little meetings,
and although provision is made for giv-
ing notice, the result is that the Public
Health Service moves in with a confer-
ence which is the first step in an abate-
ment proceeding.
Mr. Chairman, as I interpret this bill,
it not only authorizes the Governor to
initiate these proceedings, but it au-
thorizes a municipality within a State
to initiate these proceedings if the air
pollution originates in another State.
That is the way I interpret the bill, as I
read it on page 10, where it says:
Whenever requested by the Governor * * * or
* * * the governing body of any municipality,
the Secretary shall—
That is mandatory.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Chairman, if the gentleman will yield,
evidently he did not read lines 18 and
19, in parenthesis, which says:
(with the concurrence of the Governor and the
State air pollution control agency for the State in
which the municipality is situated)—
Mr. McCLORY. If I understand it,
this requires the Governor to concur
where the alleged pollution originates
in another State. That is correct. It
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
327
will provide in these instances for the
Public Health Service to move in and
initiate these proceedings under those
circumstances. And I can tell you from
the experience that we have had before
our committee that these may result in
very disagreeable situations in your area.
Now, with regard to the greatly in-
creased Federal expenditures which this
bill authorizes, I call your attention to
page 4 of this report. As pointed out
there, this bill provides for two new pro-
grams. These two new authorizations
will cost the taxpayers $90 million of
money which we know we do not have.
These are programs which can be bet-
ter conducted and financed locally by
the States and municipalities which have
better understanding of the problems
and more resources to conduct these
programs. They know what the prob-
lems are and how to solve them.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I wish
to concur emphatically with the state-
ment of my colleague, the distinguished
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS],
in support of this very important legis-
lation. The need for the additional
authority contained in this bill is, in my
opinion, not open to question.
For many years the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce has
carefully studied the air pollution prob-
lem and the committee can take real
pride in its legislative record which I am
happy to say has received strong biparti-
san support over the years.
In 1955 the committee reported favor-
ably on the bill which formed the basis
for the Federal air pollution research
and technical assistance programs. In
the ensuing years the committee has fol-
lowed the progress made in this area
very carefully.
My colleagues, the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS], the gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK], have, as most
of us know, made very significant contri-
butions. Therefore, it seems only fitting
that I take this opportunity to compli-
ment these gentlemen and the other
members of the Subcommittee on Public
Health and Safety on doing such a fine
job with respect to this legislation.
The committee is aware of the criti-
cism that there has been duplication and
overlapping of programs administered
by the Public Health Service, particu-
larly with respect to appropriations
authorizations which support these pro-
grams.
[p. 13284]
The committee has specifically pro-
vided that no appropriations or author-
izations shall be made under certain
sections of the Public Health Service Act
for any fiscal year for any purpose for
which appropriations may be made under
authority of this legislation.
The committee report discusses this
question in detail.
The purpose of this provision is to in-
sure that this legislation will become the
basic authority for appropriations by the
Federal Government for all air pollution
programs, in order that the legislative
committees of Congress may have, to an
extent which they presently do not have,
a fuller understanding and control of the
true costs to the Federal Government of
these air pollution programs.
Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Chair-
man, I rise in support of H.R. 6518,
known as the Clean Air Act. This legis-
lation is designed to improve, strengthen,
and accelerate programs for the preven-
tion and abatement of air pollution.
In 1955 the 84th Congress recognized
the need for a program of research and
technical assistance to obtain and to de-
vise and develop methods for control and
abatement of air pollution, for it had be-
come a serious national problem. Our
progress in developing material benefits
for our people also developed certain
gaseous fumes which was contaminating
the air we breathe. This contamina-
tion not only became an irritant to the
membranes of our breathing faculties
but it proved to be a health hazard to
many with allergic conditions.
Congress made a study of the problem
that existed and then enacted Public
526-701 O - 73 - 23
-------
328
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Law 159, 84th Congress, which provided
the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Labor the necessary authority and funds
to carry a program of research in order
to develop methods for control and
abatement of air pollution.
Since being alerted to the dangers that
did exist, Congress has continued to
further its investigation of this problem
and Public Law 86-493, approved June 8,
1960, directed the Surgeon General of
the Public Health Service to conduct a
thorough study of motor vehicle exhaust
as it affects human health through the
pollution of air.
This year the Subcommittee on Public
Health and Study conducted further
studies into this problem. The results of
the hearings are now before us as H.R.
6518. Through the enactment of this
legislation we replace Public Law 159 of
the 84th Congress with a new act that
strengthens and broadens the Air Pollu-
tion Control Act. We also provide Fed-
eral grants to State, regional, and local
air pollution control agencies and estab-
lish a program of limited Federal assist-
ance and participation, under certain
circumstances, in actions directed toward
abatement of particular air pollution
problems.
Our Nation is growing at a rapid pace,
both in population and technological ad-
vancements. There is a need for more
homes, offices, and public buildings,
which will need furnaces to heat them.
The burning of fuel in these furnaces
will add certain gases to the air. Cou-
pled with the exhaust fumes generated
from the ever-growing number of motor
vehicles, vapors from chemicals used in
industry, and from combustion of fuels to
generate power we increase the danger
of pollution of our air.
If we are to be assured that we will
breathe clean air and not a silent lethal
weapon which could destroy our health,
then we must continue to research and
develop controls to insure the public
health.
The legislation before us is a step fur-
ther in the progress we are making to
resolve this health problem. It deserves
the support of this body and I whole-
heartedly endorse its passage.
[p. 13285]
l.le(4)(b) Nov. 19: Considered and passed Senate, amended, pp. 22321-
22326; 22329-22331; 22334
FEDERAL AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL PROGRAM
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unaminous consent that the unfin-
ished business be temporarily laid aside
and that the Senate proceed to the con-
sideration of Calendar No. 615.
[p. 22315]
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the committee
amendments be agreed to en bloc, and
that the bill, as so amended, be consid-
ered as original text for the purpose of
amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request by the Senator
from Maine? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, Senate
bill 432, the Clean Air Act, introduced by
the distinguished Senator from Connect-
icut [Mr. RIBICOFF] and 24 cosponsors,
would replace the Air Pollution Control
Act of 1955 with a new and more com-
prehensive program for the improvement
of air quality.
Briefly, S. 432, as reported by the Com-
mittee on Public Works, provides the
following:
First. Encouragement of cooperative
activities between State and local gov-
ernments for air pollution control.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
329
Second. Expanded research and devel-
opment in air pollution control programs.
Third. Grants for the support of State
and local efforts to initiate and improve
air pollution control programs.
Fourth. Enforcement authority for the
Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare in interstate air pollution cases.
Fifth. Increased control of air pollu-
tion by Federal installations.
These expanded areas of Federal ac-
tivity are essential to a meaningful na-
tional air pollution control program.
Federal, State, and local cooperation can
meet the growing crisis in air pollution.
But we cannot allow ourselves to be dis-
suaded from a forceful and determined
effort to meet this problem by those who
want to wait until we know more; by
those who are more interested in avoid-
ing the cost of cleaning up than in clean-
ing up the cost of doing nothing.
The proposals in S. 432, as amended,
are based on hearings by the special
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollu-
tion on the following bills:
S. 432, sponsored by Senator RIBICOFF
and others; S. 444, sponsored by Senator
ENGLE and others; S. 1009, sponsored by
Senator NEUBERGER; S. 1040, sponsored
by Senator CASE of New Jersey; S. 1124,
sponsored by Senator WILLIAMS of Del-
aware; and H.R. 6518, as enacted by the
House of Representatives.
Each of these proposals has contrib-
uted to the development of the bill as
reported by the Senate Public Works
Committee. From the provisions of the
several bills and from the constructive
suggestions made by the Senators and
other witnesses who appeared before the
subcommittee or submitted statements,
we have been able to develop a legisla-
tive proposal which should advance the
cause of air pollution control in all parts
of the Nation.
I want to take this opportunity to ex-
press my appreciation to the chairman
of the Senate Public Works Committee
[Mr. McNAMARA] for his leadership and
cooperation in our efforts to develop
sound air pollution legislation. I am
grateful to the distinguished Senator
from West Virginia [Mr. RANDOLPH] and
my other majority colleagues on the Sub-
committee on Air and Water Pollution
for their constructive assistance on S.
482, and to the minority members of the
subcommittee, led by the able Senator
from Delaware [Mr. BOGGS] for their
cooperative spirit and help. Because of
the joint effort we were able to muster,
and the contribution of our able staffs,
the legislation we have presented today
has the unanimous approval of the Sen-
ate Committee on Public Works and sub-
stantial support from various segments
of our society.
Mr. President, there is today a national
recognition of the air pollution problem.
For years men have been aware of the
sooty deposits which accompany indus-
trialization and we have been aware of
the nuisance of unpleasant odors from
manufacturing processes in certain in-
dustries. But so long as these side effects
of industry and modern technology
seemed to be nuisances and no more, we
accepted them as one of the necessary
drawbacks in our modern civilization.
With the outbreak of sickness and
death associated with air pollution, our
scientists became concerned that air con-
taminants could cause harm to man.
Now, the Nation is aroused.
In the recent hearings of the special
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollu-
tion of the Senate Committee on Public
Works, civic leaders, industrialists, medi-
cal doctors, and technicians all agreed
that air pollution is a growing menace
and that it must be controlled.
Air is life. We all know that we need
fresh air every few seconds if we are
to live. What we are not always aware
of is that air is needed to sustain the
kind of world in which we live. But the
use of air in heating our homes, running
our factories, driving our cars, and burn-
ing our wastes discharges pollutants into
the air and results in physical and eco-
nomic damage to the Nation.
Air pollution is injurious to health.
We know, for example, that air pollution
-------
330
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
cost 4,000 lives in London in December
1952, 340 deaths in the same city 10 years
later, 17 lives in Donora, Pa., in October
1948, and 200 lives in New York in No-
vember 1953. Untold thousands of
Americans have suffered and died as a
result of the long-term injurious effects
of air pollution.
As the staff report on air pollution,
prepared for the special Subcommittee
on Air and Water Pollution, has pointed
out:
Of much greater overall significance than acute
1 episodes (of air pollution) is a growing body of
evidence that long-term, low-level air pollution can
contribute to and aggravate certain diseases.
We do not know all we want to know
about the relationship between certain
harmful agents in the air and disease,
but we do know enough to establish a
connection between various substances
in the air and numerous respiratory ail-
ments. These include: First, the com-
mon cold and other upper respiratory
tract infections; second, chronic bron-
chitis; third, chronic constrictive venti-
latory disease; fourth, pulmonary em-
physema; fifth, bronchial asthma; and
sixth, lung cancer. Close correlations
have been shown between all of these
diseases and the level of air pollution.
In addition, there is a close correlation
between the size of cities, the amount of
air pollution, and the incidents of re-
spiratory disease as a result of air pollu-
tion.
There are those who say that not
enough is known to justify cleaning up
air pollution now. They say we must
wait until we have more specific evidence
on the connection between air pollution
and disease before we insist on cleanup
in the air. I say there is no time to
wait. We are not experimenting with
the mortality of fungus, or of plants, or
of mice. We are faced with the problems
of injury and death to human beings—
to ourselves, to our neighbors, and to
our children. This is a national prob-
lem, requiring the closest cooperation
between the Federal Government, State,
interstate, and local agencies. If we
place any value on human life, we will
act now.
Air pollution is not only a menace
to health, it is a source of economic loss
in agriculture, in the conservation of fish
and wildlife, and in the upkeep of homes
and the maintenance of personal prop-
erty.
Air pollution injures plants and causes
hundreds of millions of dollars of losses
to our agricultural economy every year.
Recent research in plant pathology has
demonstrated that the kinds of plants
affected and the nature of injury pro-
duced vary with the agent. This has
made it possible to identify some of the
specific pollutants which injure plants
and to prove, in some cases, that they
have caused damage as far away as 100
miles or more from the point where they
originate. Eastern white pine, grape-
vines, tobacco, spinach, grains, fresh
vegetables, and flowers have suffered
from air pollution. Livestock have suf-
fered serious adverse effects from air-
borne fluorides. Corn and peaches are
susceptible to hydrogen fluorides.
The annual cost of air pollution dam-
age to property has been estimated at
[p. 22322]
$11 billion for the Nation. Air pollution
accelerates deterioration of metals,
fabrics, leather, rubber, paint, concrete
and building stone, glass and paper.
For the homeowner air pollution adds
to the cost of painting, cleaning of cloth-
ing and furniture, and the replacement
of many items. For industry, the cost
of air pollution is measured in the re-
placement and protection of precision
instruments and other complex control
systems which are so important to mod-
ern technology.
Travel is affected by air pollution. In
at least two recent instances—one in
Pennsylvania and another in Louisiana—
major turnpike crashes were attributed
to poor visibility caused by air pollution.
Air pollution, aggravated by atmospheric
conditions, has increased transportation
costs for air carriers. It has been esti-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
331
mated that 15 to 20 air crashes in the
United States in 1962 could be attributed
to air pollution.
To these health and economic hazards
we may add the nuisances of irritated
eyes, unsightly haze, soiled clothing and
buildings, and unpleasant smells. Air
pollution makes life difficult, costly and
unpleasant.
Air pollution is no respecter of per-
sons, property lines, community bound-
aries or State lines. Subject only to the
laws of nature, it moves across the face
of the earth in the envelope of air which
surrounds and sustains us. Air pollution
is local in origin, but its effects are wide-
spread. Only a forceful and coordinated
attack on the problem will bring us to a
meaningful solution.
Our supply of air is limited. It cannot
be increased. The supply of air is fixed
as are our supplies of other natural re-
sources such as coal, petroleum, iron ore,
uranium, and water. We realize that
these are not limitless and must be con-
served. We must take the same view of
our air resources.
Our population is increasing and our
standard of living is going up. Our in-
dustries, homes, and office buildings and
motor vehicles take the air, combine it
with fuels and return the air-polluting
compounds to the air. The more we
prosper, the more we foul the air we
breathe.
Approximately a ton of air is required
for every tankful of gasoline used by a
motor vehicle. The billion gallons of
fuel consumed annually by motor ve-
hicles in the United States used 94 tril-
lion cubic feet—640 cubic miles—of air.
Other fuels need comparable quanti-
ties of air. Burning a ton of coal con-
sumes about 27,000 pounds of air, and a
gallon of fuel oil about 90 pounds of air,
while approximately 18 pounds of air are
used in burning a pound of natural gas.
About 3,000 cubic miles of air must be
provided annually to satisfy the oxygen
requirements of the fossil fuels presently
used in the United States alone.
If we do not halt the present rate of
pollution from all major sources we will
be heading down a one-way road to
physical and economic disaster.
We are doing something about air pol-
lution. But our efforts have been late
in coming and they have been very
limited. We need to do much more.
Our Federal air pollution program really
got underway, in a very limited fashion,
in 1955. Our present Air Pollution Con-
trol Act has a threefold program of re-
search, technical assistance, and public
education. It recognizes the primary
place of local and State programs to con-
trol air pollution. At the same time, the
act is based on the realization that air
pollution is not confined to a single juris-
diction. It is a national problem, re-
quiring a national program of research,
technical assistance, and support.
One-third of the States have estab-
lished programs to deal with air pollu-
tion. Most of these, however, are quite
limited in scope. Local government pro-
grams, where they exist, are generally
understaffed and without sufficient fi-
nancial and trained manpower resources
to meet their needs. Only 34 local pro-
grams have annual budgets exceeding
$25,000. Seven of these are in Cali-
fornia. Of the other 51 local air pollu-
tion control agencies, 21 tried to function
on less than $10,000 per year. In the
past decade, despite a 30-percent in-
crease in urban population, there has
been, outside of California, no overall
increase in manpower to combat air
pollution at the local level.
Mr. President, S. 432 represents a ma-
jor step forward in our effort to combat
the insidious threat of air pollution. It is
similar to H.R. 6518, passed by the House.
It is my belief that we will be able to
reach an agreement with the House in
the near future on a clean air act.
At this point I would like to summa-
rize the provisions of S. 432. The pur-
pose of S. 432, as amended, is to:
First. Replace the Air Pollution Con-
trol Act of 1955 in its entirety with a new
version, a Clean Air Act.
Second. Express the findings of the
-------
332
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Congress that the increase in air pollu-
tion and the complexity of the problem
of air pollution has been brought about
by urbanization, industrial development,
and the increasing use of motor vehicles.
The act further recognizes the damage
to the public health and welfare and
the economic losses resulting from air
pollution. It indicates also that the pri-
mary responsibility for the prevention
and control of air pollution rests with
State and local governments and that
Federal financial assistance and leader-
ship is essential.
Third. Express the purposes of the act
to protect the Nation's air resources, to
continue and extend the national re-
search and development program, to
provide technical and financial assist-
ance, and to encourage and assist the de-
velopment and operation of air pollution
control programs.
Fourth. Encourage cooperative activi-
ties by State and local governments for
control of air pollution and uniform
State and local laws. Authorize the Fed-
eral Government to participate in such
measures.
Fifth. Grant the consent of Congress
to two or more States to negotiate and
enter into agreements or compacts—re-
quiring ultimate approval by Congress—
for the prevention of air pollution, and
the establishment of such agencies as
may be necessary to make effective such
agreements or compacts.
Sixth. Authorize a broad program of
research, investigations, training, and
other activities relating to air pollution
control.
Seventh. Authorize the compilation
and publication of criteria reflecting ac-
curately the latest scientific knowledge
indicating the type and extent of effects
which may be expected from the presence
of air pollutants, such criteria to be re-
vised in accordance with latest develop-
ments in scientific knowledge.
Eighth. Authorize grants to air pollu-
tion control agencies to develop, estab-
lish, and improve programs for the
prevention and control of air pollution,
specifying that grants to air pollution
agencies shall not exceed 20 percent of
total funds authorized.
Ninth. Authorize grants up to two-
thirds of the cost of developing, estab-
lishing, and improving air pollution con-
trol programs to air pollution control
agencies, and up to three-fourths of such
costs to intermunicipal or interstate air
pollution control agencies.
Tenth. Authorize a procedure to carry
out abatement actions whenever the
health and welfare of persons is being
endangered by air pollution.
Eleventh. Direct the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare to en-
courage continued efforts on the part of
the automotive and fuel industries to
prevent pollutants from being discharged
from the exhaust of automotive vehicles.
Twelfth. Authorize the establishment
of a technical committee to evaluate
progress in the development of automo-
tive pollution control devices and fuels,
and to develop and recommend research
programs which would lead to the de-
velopment of such devices and fuels;
also to make the necessary reports on
the findings with respect to results ob-
tained and steps necessary to alleviate
or reduce pollution from these sources.
Thirteenth. Recognize the need for
cooperation by Federal departments in
controlling air pollution from installa-
tions under their jurisdiction and au-
thorizing a procedure whereby the Sec-
retary of Health, Education, and Welfare
may establish pollutant sources for
which a permit must be obtained in eases
where any matter is being discharged
into the air which may add to the overall
air pollution problem.
Fourteenth. Authorize establishment
of such regulations as are necessary for
the effective administration of the bill
and provide for accountability of finan-
cial assistance furnished under the act.
Fifteenth. Authorize fiscal year funds
for 1964 to be used for the purposes of
this bill, and authorize funds as follows:
Fiscal year 1965, $25 million; fiscal year
1966, $30 million; fiscal year 1967, $35
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
333
million; fiscal year 1968, $42 million; and
fiscal year 1969, $50 million. The total
authorization for the 5-year program
would be $182 million.
[p. 22323]
Mr. President, S. 432 is a sound piece
of legislation. It is a meaningful step
in the right direction on the road to more
effective air pollution control, and a
healthful environment for all of us.
I urge its passage by the Senate.
Mr. BOGGS. Mr. President, I am
very happy that the Senate is consider-
ing S. 432 as amended, known as the
clean air bill. It was my privilege to be
a cosponsor of this legislation.
The increase in air pollution and the
complexity of the problem of air pollu-
tion has been developing to the extent
that it has become a serious public haz-
ard, a damage to the public health and
welfare and to the economy. It has be-
come necessary that every reasonable
and practical step be taken at every
level of Government to help meet the
air pollution problem.
It is well to keep in mind that much
is being done already by industry and
local governments, but the problems of
air pollution have been developing in
scope, number and complexity much
faster than have our efforts to deal with
them. Therefore, this legislation is
timely and provides for a more realistic
and effective clean air program.
This legislation recognizes that the
primary responsibility for the preven-
tion and control of air pollution rests
with State and local governments while
at the same time providing Federal fi-
nancial assistance and leadership.
It is my belief that this legislation
will help provide the coordination, stim-
ulus, research and technical assistance
essential to a successful clean air pro-
gram.
It is a privilege to serve on the sub-
committee under the chairmanship of
the distinguished junior Senator from
Maine [Mr. MUSKIE]. The subcommit-
tee of the Committee on Public Works
under his leadership, along with the
other members of the committee and
the staff, worked most effectively, objec-
tively, and diligently on this legislation.
Air is probably the most important of
all our natural resources. Everyone is
aware that we need fresh air in order
to live. This legislation will go far in
overcoming air pollution and assuring
safe and clean air for our citizens.
Mrs. NEUBERGER. Mr. President,
for myself and the junior Senator from
Louisiana [Mr. LONG], I offer a patent
amendment to insure that the fruits of
the research to be funded by this legis-
lation will be freely available to Federal
and State governments and to the gen-
eral public, and I ask that the amend-
ment be stated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated for the infor-
mation of the Senate.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. On page 7,
between lines 23 and 24, it is proposed to
insert the following new subsection:
(d) All scientific and technological research or
development activity contracted for, sponsored,
cosponsored, or authorized under authority of this
Act which involves the expenditures of Government
funds shall be provided for in such manner that all
information, uses, processes, patents, and other
developments resulting from such activity will
(with such exceptions and limitations, if any, as the
Secretary may find to be necessary in the interest
of national defense) be available to the general
public. This subsection shall not be so construed as
to deprive the owner of any background patent
relating thereto of any right which he may have
under that patent.
Mrs. NEUBERGER. Mr. President,
this amendment has been discussed with
the Senator in charge of the bill. I be-
lieve he is agreeable to accepting it at
this time.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, there
were some reservations in the commit-
tee about such a provision in the bill.
The provision was included in the bill
introduced by the distinguished Sen-
ator from Oregon. The reservations re-
sulted because we had not taken much
testimony on this subject.
Since the hearings we have explored
the record with reference to the prob-
-------
334
LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
lem. I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RECORD a statement I have
had prepared on other pieces of legisla-
tion to which similar amendments have
been attached.
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
The Senate of the United States has on many
occasions expressed its view that the results of
publicly financed research should be freely available
to the general public.
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 contained such
provisions, which were reaffirmed in 1958.
So did the coal research and development bill
enacted by Congress in I960, the helium gas bill
enacted in 1960, the oceanography bill passed by
the Senate in 1961, the saline water and the dis-
armament bills passed by the Congress in 1961.
In this session of Congress the Senate unani-
mously legislated in the public interest by making
sure that research authorized by the mass transit
bill (S. 6) and the water resources bill (S. 2) would
be used for the benefit of all the American people.
Mr. MUSKIE. I also ask unanimous
consent to have printed in the RECORD a
statement of the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare policy in this
field, which is consistent with the
amendment of the Senator from Oregon.
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
STATEMENT OF THE PATENT POLICIES OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND
WELFARE SUBMITTED TO THE HOUSE GOVERN-
MENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE BY MANUAL B.
HILLER, DEPARTMENT PATENTS OFFICER, MAY
24, 1963
Consistent with the Department's statutory
responsibility for the advancement of science and
knowledge and the dissemination to the public of
the results of research, it is the general policy of the
Department that the results of Department-
financed research should be made widely, promptly,
and freely available to other research workers and
the public. This availability can generally be
provided by dedication of a Government-owned
invention to the public. Consequently, our regula-
tions, in which our patent policies are expressed,
uniformly provide as to employee inventions,
inventions resulting from Government grant sup-
port or from contract, that the ownership and
manner of disposition of all rights to such inventions
shall be subject to determination by the head of
the constituent unit responsible. Copies of the
pertinent regulations are attached hereto.
Part 6 of the regulations establishes the general
policy of the Department; viz, to provide by
publication or other means for free access to the
results of Department research. It also provides the
criteria for issuance of licenses under patents for
administration of which the Department has
responsibility (45 C.F.R. 6.3),
Part 7, covering employee inventions, insures
that such inventions when directly related to the
employee's official functions or to which the Federal
Government has made a substantial contribution
shall be owned and controlled by the Government
for the public benefit. The criteria for determining
domestic rights to employee inventions, which are
set forth in section 7.3 and are identical to those
provided in Executive Order 10096, provide for
flexibility in making determinations respecting
title to employee inventions.
Part 8 of the regulations governs inventions
resulting from research grants, fellowship awards,
and contracts for research. As to research grants,
the regulations provide—
"That the ownership and manner of disposition
of all rights in and to such invention shall be subject
to determination by the head of the constituent unit
responsible for the grant" (45 CFR 8.1(a)).
The criteria upon which that determination is to
be made, set forth in section 8.2, are similarly
calculated to secure wide availability of the in-
vention.
However, where a grantee institution has an
established patent policy and its objectives are
consonant with the policy objective of the Depart-
ment, disposition of invention rights may be left
with the grantee by the head of the operating
agency making the grant provided a formal agree-
ment can be reached between the Department and
the grantee which then governs invention rights
arising under all grants to that institution by that
operating agency of the Department. Such agree-
ments are executed only where there is assurance
that any invention resulting from the project will be
made available to the public without unreasonable
restriction or excessive royalties (sec. 8.1(b)).
Section 8.6 provides for similar disposition of
invention rights arising out of the performance of
work under research contracts. The same alternative
provided to nonprofit grantee institutions is carried
forward in the contract area by a provision in the
regulation that contracts for research with non-
profit institutions may leave the invention rights
for disposition by the institution if its policies and
procedures are acceptable as meeting the require-
ments applicable in the grant situation.
There is one exception to the Department's
policy against relinquishment of invention rights
to a private contractor, viz, where contracts with
industrial profit-making organizations in the cancer
chemotherapy program are involved. That program
represents an intensified effort of the Public Health
Service, with special appropriations made available
under a congressional directive, to explore exhaus-
tively and rapidly the potentialities of chemical
compounds in the control of cancer. Because of the
peculiar exigencies of this program and in order that
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
335
the resources of pharmaceutical and chemical
firms may be brought to bear with a minimum of
delay, an exception to general Department policy
has been authorized in the negotiation of industrial
contracts for this program. (Sec. 8.7; and see
patent policy statement of the Secretary applicable
to cancer chemotherapy industrial research con-
tracts, July 31, 1958, set forth in section 6-10-20 of
the materials attached hereto.) In essence, that
exception provides that in
[p. 22324]
industrial research contracts in the cancer chemo-
therapy program, the contractor may adopt either
the standard patent clause which implements the
general policy of the Department reserving the
right of disposition of inventions to the Surgeon
General, or a standard alternative clause leaving the
right to patentable inventions with the contractor
subject to certain limitations deemed necessary to
protect the public's interest in the results of con-
tracted research. The crucial provision therein
(sec. B.4 of the policy statement) reserves to the
Surgeon General the right to either dedicate the
invention to the public or to issue royalty-free,
nonexclusive licenses notwithstanding and in
derogation of any patent which the contractor had
theretofore obtained. The exercise of that right is
conditioned upon a finding that either the supply
of the invention is inadequate to meet the public
need, the price is unreasonable or its quality is
insufficient. Moreover, the right is subject to certain
procedural safeguards which are specifically spelled
out in paragraph B.4 of the Secretary's statement
of policy.
There is thus provided a mechanism by which the
public interest in any invention resulting from
Government-financed cancer research is protected
against insufficient supply to meet the public need,
unreasonable price or inadequacy of quality. At the
same time, the Department's policy and the con-
tracts executed pursuant thereto provide reciprocal
protection against precipitate governmental action
which might destroy rights to which a contractor
might reasonably be entitled.
Summarizing, the criteria employed by the
Department for the disposition of invention rights
in the field of employee inventions, research grants,
fellowships, and research contracts are designed to
foster the discrimination of the scientific and
technical information gained thereby and to insure
that the benefits of such work will be available to
the public.
Mr. MUSKIE. With this background,
I am perfectly willing to accept the
amendment and take it to conference.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from Ore-
gon for herself and the Senator from
Louisiana [Mr. LONG].
The amendment was agreed to.
CLEAN AIR ACT
Mrs. NEUBERGER. Mr. President,
we are about to come of age in our rela-
tionship with our environment. The bill
now before the Senate, S. 432, the Clean
Air Act, represents the product of joint
effort by the distinguished chairman of
the Special Subcommittee on Air and
Water Pollution [Mr. MUSKIE], the jun-
ior Senator from Connecticut [Mr. RIBI-
COFF], who has given us the benefit of
his broad experience as Secretary of
HEW, and others among us who have
long sought appropriate action to pre-
serve the purity of our skies,
For myself, this legislation represents
the culmination of an effort begun near-
ly 3 years ago. The bill which I intro-
duced at that time and the bill which
we are called upon to debate today were
in measured response to the indelible
portrait of death and destruction by air
pollution, drawn for us in deep strokes
by President Kennedy in his health mes-
sage to the Nation:
Economic damage from air pollution amounts to
as much as $11 billion every year in the United
States. Agricultural losses alone total $500 million a
year. Crops are stunted or destroyed, livestock
become ill, meat and milk production are reduced.
In some 6,000 communities various amounts of
smoke, smog, grime, or fumes reduce property
values and—as dramatically shown in England
last year—endanger life itself. Hospitals, depart-
ment stores, office buildings, and hotels are all
affected. Some cities suffer damages of up to $100
million a year. One of our larger cities has a daily
average of 25,000 tons of airborne pollutants. My
own home city of Boston experienced in 1960 a
"black rain" of smoke, soot, oil, or a mixture of
all three.
Last week's New York Times carried
a report from the annual meeting of the
American Public Health Association of
the first conclusive finding that normal
city air pollution affects death rates.
The report, the joint report of the Di-
vision of Air Pollution of the U.S. Public
Health Service and the Vanderbilt Uni-
versity School of Medicine, found that
residents of polluted areas suffered in-
creased death rate from respiratory in-
fections.
-------
336
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
This report follows close upon several
recent investigations which have re-
vealed the peculiarly lethal role played
by sulfur compounds. Those studies
have demonstrated the existence of a
dramatic relationship between the levels
of sulfur dioxide and sulfur trioxide in
the air and the frequency and duration
of chronic respiratory diseases includ-
ing asthma, emphysema, bronchitis, and
even the common cold which each year
costs this Nation tens of millions of lost
workdays. There is also evidence that
sulfur dioxide and sulfate levels have
been extremely high during the several
acute episodes of air pollution in this
country and abroad which took the lives
of many victims.
Sulfurous compounds in the air are
produced primarily by the combustion of
sulfur-containing fuels such as coal or
oil. It is abundantly clear that if we
were able to remove the sulfur from
fuels before they were burned, economi-
cally and efficiently, we would have taken
a great stride toward curing the air pol-
lution problem. As of yet, however, such
methods have not been perfected.
It was for this reason that I proposed
that the subcommittee adopt a provision
directing the Secretary of HEW to con-
duct extensive research toward the de-
velopment of improved low-cost tech-
niques for extracting sulfur from fuels.
Happily the committee bill incorporates
this measure.
As a cosponsor of S. 432, I commend
the committee for its creative work in
bringing before the Senate legislation
truly deserving of the title "Clean Air
Act."
I ask unanimous consent that the ar-
ticle entitled "Polluted Air Said to Raise
Death Rate" be printed at the close of
my remarks.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
POLLUTED Are SAID To RAISE DEATH RATH
(By Walter Sullivan)
KANSAS CITY, Mo., November 12.—What is
said to be the first clear evidence that normal city
air pollution affects death rates was presented here
today.
The report dealt with a survey of deaths in and
around Nashville, Tenn., in the 12 years that ended
in 1960. It found that two factors strongly affected
death rates from diseases of the respiratory system:
the extent of air pollution and economic status.
Those who did the study believe it demonstrates
that the levels of pollution characteristic of city air
have important long-term effects on health. They
were surprised, however, to find no correlation
between air pollution and the incidence of lung and
bronchial cancer.
The report was presented to the annual meeting
of the American Public Health Association being
held here this week. Some 4,000 specialists from this
country and abroad are in attendance.
The weakness of present administrative machin-
ery for combating air pollution and other health
problems was also discussed at today's sessions. A
series of reports was presented on the nationwide
survey of this machinery, initiated last year by the
National Commission on Community Health
Services.
The target date for reports by the seven task
forces delving into various aspects of this problem is
next November. In the spring of 1963 there is then
to be a National Conference on Community Health
Services. The project is being sponsored by a
number of national health agencies.
The Nashville study was developed jointly by
the Division of Air Pollution of the U.S. Public
Health Service and the Vanderbilt University
School of Medicine. The Tennessee health depart-
ment furnished business machine cards giving data
on the death of 38,207 people in and near Nashville.
Those of the deceased for whom addresses were
available were classified both according to the
economic level of the section in which they lived
and the air pollution characteristics of that section.
To this end 123 air-sampling stations were operated
for a year. Data were drawn from 67 census districts
in the city area. It was then possible to study the
air pollution effect, free from influence by economic
considerations. Similarly the effect of economic
status could be separated from that of pollution.
For example, the socioeconomic factor was
presented only for those exposed to moderate levels
of pollution. This, presumably, eliminated the
pollution effects on the relative statistics. Likewise,
air pollution factors were presented only in terms of
those tabulated as middle class.
Residents were divided economically into three
classes. Those of the lowest class had a death rate
from respiratory disease of more than 60 per
100,000 compared to only 25 per 100,000 for those
of the upper class. The effects of air pollution were
broken down according to various indexes of pollu-
tion, such as dust fall and the content of sulfur
oxides. The latter are byproducts of the burning of
coal and other fuels.
In all cases, the sections of the city subjected to
heaviest pollution were areas of maximum deaths
from respiratory diseases. Past surveys of this sort
have been criticized on the ground that the effects
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
337
of poverty were intertwined with pollution effects.
If a person is poor he is likely to live in a smoky
section of town,
Mrs. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that a statement
on this subject prepared by the junior
Senator from Louisiana [Mr. LONG], who
is perhaps the Senate's most determined
and articulate champion of a sound pub-
lic patent policy, may be printed in the
RECORD at this point.
[p. 22325]
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
STATEMENT BY SENATOR RUSSELL B. LONG,
DEMOCRAT, OF LOUISIANA
Polluted air is injurious to the health and welfare
of our people. The Secretary of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare is authorized by
S. 432 to conduct research; promote the coordina-
tion and acceleration of research investigations,
experiments, and studies; and to engage in other
designated activities that would assist in protecting
the public health and welfare and the productive
capacity of the population.
The growth of urbanization, industrial develop-
ment, and increasing use of motor vehicles have
resulted in polluting the air, with serious danger to
the health and well-being of the public. Air pollution
prevention and abatement is essential if growth and
progress is to continue.
The research to be financed by these funds is
intended to benefit the public. Its purpose is the
increase in knowledge and the development of
devices that will enable us to lessen the dangers
resulting from air pollution. It may even become a
"must" for the public to use specific inventions
designed to reduce air pollution. Such inventions
could well include devices to curtail poisonous
gases coming from automobile exhausts and indus-
trial plants, devices for burning all kinds of wastes
and for many other purposes. It is natural, there-
fore, that the results of the research should be
available to those whom the research is intended to
benefit: The United States, the individual States,
the general public, and the populations of many
areas which suffer from problems of polluted air.
The effects of air pollution in my State of
Louisiana, in New Orleans, for example, are all too
evident. The incidence of lung cancer is considerably
higher there than the national average. In addition,
in the New Orleans area there are periodic epidemics
of asthmatic attacks. At that city's Charity
Hospital, for example, the normal load of asthmatics
appearing for emergency treatment increases from
an average of 25 to 30 per day up to 200 or more at
certain times. This condition can be benefited
potentially by better control of atmospheric
conditions.
The amendment proposed by myself and the
junior Senator from Oregon will assure that the
intent and purpose of this legislation will be carried
out for the benefit of all our people. This amend-
ment is substantially the same as the corresponding
provisions of S. 1009, the air pollution control bill
introduced by Senator NEUBERGER, and H.R. 4415,
introduced by Congressman ROBERTS. A reading
of the hearings on this bill, at least on the House
side, indicates that the Public Health Service
approved the patent section.
This item is one of the two stressed by Senator
NEUBERGER before the Special Subcommittee on
Air and Water Pollution as being required to
maximize the public benefits of this legislation.
The subcommittee chairman recognized the
necessity of the amendment, and stated during
Senator NEUBERGER'S testimony that the "pro-
vision in your bill is a sensible one and that is as we
achieve breakthroughs in the state of art in dealing
with the problem, unless those are made available
on a wide scale, we are going to substantially
inhibit progress in the field." 1
On October 10 of this year the President of the
United States issued a memorandum on Govern-
ment patent policy to the heads of the executive
departments and agencies. Under that document
the results of Government-funded research in
fields which directly concern the public health or
public welfare would be made freely available to
the general public. Obviously, the research au-
thorized by S. 432 would fall under this category.
We must remember, however, that the President's
memorandum does not have the force of law and is
only a policy recommendation. My proposed
amendment is consistent with that policy recom-
mendation.
The Senate of the United States has on many
occasions expressed its view that the results of
publicly financed research should be freely available
to the general public.
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 contained such
provisions, which were reaffirmed in 1958.
So did the coal research and development bill
enacted by Congress in 1960, the helium gas bill
enacted in 1960, the oceanography bill passed by
the Senate in 1961, the saline water, and the
disarmament bills passed by Congress in 1961.
In this session of Congress the Senate unani-
mously legislated in the public interest by making
sure that research authorized by the mass transit
bill (S. 6) and the water resources bill (S. 2) would
be used for the benefit of all the American people.
The only difference between those bills I just
mentioned and this air pollution control bill is that
this one directly concerns the health and welfare of
our people. It does not seem reasonable to me that
we try to protect the public interest in disarmament
1 "Air Pollution Control," hearings before Special
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of
Committee on Public Works, U.S. Senate, Sept.
9, 10, and 11, 1963, p. 200.
-------
338
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
or helium gas bills and then fail to do so in legisla-
tion, the primary purpose of which is to guard the
health of the public.
To carry out the provisions and the objectives of
this act, it is imperative that inventions, know-how,
and technical data resulting from air pollution
prevention and control should be freely available
to everyone. To permit private interests to acquire
proprietary rights to withhold from the public or to
delay the benefits of such research would be to
defeat the worthy purpose of the measure.
I believe that the amendment we have offered
is the absolute minimum that is necessary.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I am
aware of the fact that the bill was re-
ported by the committee virtually unani-
mously.
Mr. MUSKIE. It was.
Mr. DIRKSEN. I know that all mi-
nority members of the committee sup-
port the bill.
Some opposition has been registered
with me on the ground that industry has
done such an excellent job in researching
this whole problem and is a little
alarmed about the intrusion of the Fed-
eral enforcement power. I understand
that intrusion could not occur unless it
came on the request of a Governor in a
given State or when the pollution started
in one State and carried over into an-
other, therefore making it an interstate
matter.
*****
[p. 22326]
Mr. RIBICOFF. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, after listening to the
Senator from Illinois, I should like to
point out to him and to other Senators
that within the next few days I will
introduce an amendment to the tax bill,
which recognizes the role industry must
play if we are to accomplish the objec-
tives of the bill. I believe the enact-
ment of a tax program to encourage pri-
vate industry and the bill which will pass
today will be a two-pronged attack on
the problems of air pollution.
Mr. President, this bill is a good re-
minder that dirty air is not a partisan
matter and partisanship went out the
window in order to work out an accept-
able and at the same time effective bill.
Actually, Mr. President, when it comes
to the problem of dirty air there is
neither room nor time for partisanship.
The original air pollution control bill es-
tablishing the present Federal clean air
program was introduced by the Senator
from California [Mr. KUCHEL], who was
also an early cosponsor of S. 432, and
effective air pollution control has long
been sought by the junior Senator from
California [Mr. ENGLE]. Adequate leg-
islation in this field has consistently been
advocated by the Senator from Oregon
[Mrs. NEUBERGER], another cosponsor of
S. 432, whose special concern about the
health effects of air pollution have been
incorporated in the bill.
We must face up to the fact that the
land on which we live and work, the
air we breathe, the water we drink and
use in industry, agriculture, and recrea-
tion have been altered over the past half
century by a manmade fallout far more
abundant and potentially more danger-
ous than the contamination of nuclear
weapons testing. The nuclear test ban
treaty we begin debate on today will be
a great step toward ending one source of
air pollution—radioactive fallout. We
must not miss the opportunity to prevent
and bring under control all the other
poisons in our atmosphere.
Since there is such a vast amount of
air above us, many people ask how is it
possible that pollution can be a serious
problem. The answer is that only a
small part of the toal air supply is avail-
able for our use in any single location.
Over one-half of our population now
lives on less than 10 percent of the land
area of the country. For the most part,
sources of air pollution are concentrated
where people are concentrated. Fur-
thermore, there is every indication that,
by 1970, two-thirds of our population at
that time will live in this same limited
land area.
We are already overburdening those
portions of the air resource available to
many of our cities. Few people realize
the enormous amount of pollutants be-
ing discharged into the atmosphere.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
339
One of our larger cities has a daily aver-
age of 25,000 tons of air-borne pollu-
tants. More than 180 million Americans
live on the bottom of an ocean of air
contaminated by an ever-growing volume
and variety of pollutants.
How did all this happen? The answer
is found, oddly enough, in the very hall-
marks of contemporary society—our
technological capacity, industrial output
and rising standard of living. Man-
made forests of advanced technology
sprout up across our land, creating an
abundance of services and consumer
goods, and creating vast amounts of
waste materials.
As our Nation has grown—as more
people crowd together in bigger cities and
drive more millions of automobiles and
trucks—contamination of our air be-
comes more serious—sometimes critical.
The essential elements of the prob-
lem are simple. We burn fuels in thou-
sands of ways to produce the power and
products necessary to our high standard
of living. Often we burn them poorly—
hardly ever completely. Our factories
and automobiles throw chemical com-
pounds into the air. Acted upon by sun-
light, they produce new compounds more
damaging and toxic than the original
wastes.
So we turn our precious air supply into
a vast dump for gases, fumes and many
many different dusts. We have created
sewers in the sky.
The damage caused by this dirty air
is appalling. It hurts our lands, stunts
or destroys our crops, makes our live-
stock ill, reduces our meat and milk pro-
duction. It soils and corrodes buildings,
bridges, monuments, and physical struc-
tures of all kinds. It causes extensive
plant damage of many types. It irritates
the eyes. By reducing visibility it cre-
ates traffic hazards. It causes unpleas-
ant odors. It endangers our very health
and lives. Expert estimates of the high
price we are paying for filth in the air
today run as high as $11 billion a year,
and this figure does not include the most
important cost—the cost to our health.
We do not have any realistic figures for
the medical and hospital care of people
made sick by breathing—day in and day
out, year in and year out—air that is
simply not fit to breathe. Neither do
we know exactly how many people each
year die of air pollution. But some
things we do know.
We all know the story of Donora, Pa.
There, during 3 days of dense, choking
smog, in October 1948, 20 people died
and more than 4,000 suffered acute ill-
ness because their part of the ocean of
air was too polluted for safe breathing.
In 1952 between 4,000 and 5,000 Lon-
doners died in a single week. The cause?
Polluted air.
In December 1953 New York City was
pinned under an inversion that trapped
filthy waste between layers of air, mak-
ing the air unfit—even letha'—for hu-
man lungs. When the weeklong smog
was over, 200 people were dead. These
200 deaths were not even noted until
9 years later when a statistical study
brought this quiet tragedy to light.
Just last December, London was hit
again. The death toll was 300 to 400
at the latest count, and British health
officials think the real number killed will
prove much higher after hospital records
and death certificates have been thor-
oughly examined.
This episode occurred 3,000 miles from
our shores. At almost exactly the same
time, a stagnant air mass over the
northeastern United States caused a
steady, alarming increase in pollution
levels from Richmond to Boston. In our
Northern Hemisphere, weather systems
move from west to east. The set of
meteorological circumstances which
caused the London smog, developed in
the eastern United States several days
earlier, with the result that sulphur
dioxide levels in Philadelphia and New
York, between November 30 and Decem-
ber 4 of last year, averaged three and a
half times normal, and were, for several
days, over five times normal.
During this same period, levels of solid
matter in the air rose correspondingly.
-------
340
LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
In my own State of Connecticut, the 5-
day average in Hartford and Middletown
was over three times normal with indi-
vidual days of from four to five times
normal.
If we had not been lucky—if this mass
of contaminated air had not been blown
out over the ocean—the United States
might have suffered the worst air pollu-
tion calamity in history.
I think in this mid-20th century, as
we contemplate putting a man on the
moon, we would be negligent if we con-
tinued to rely on the wind to save us
from air pollution disasters.
These episodes of acute illness and
death are serious but of even greater
concern is the problem of the long-term
effects of air pollution. Constant ex-
posure of urban populations to low con-
centrations of air poisons which could
result in gradual deterioration of health,
chronic disease, and premature death is
a modern day fact of urban life. Lead-
ing scientists feel air pollution may have
a good deal to do with aggravating heart
conditions and increasing susceptibility
to respiratory disease—asthma, bron-
chitis, emphysema, and lung cancer—
particularly among older people and the
ever-growing urban population.
Studies will show that death rates for
cardio-respiratory diseases in the United
[p. 22329]
States are greater in urban than in rural
areas, and, in general, increase with
city size. Within the last few years, this
urban-rural difference has also shown up
in mortality of infants less than 1 year
of age and is accounted for by respiratory
illness.
A recent study in a southern city shows
that acute asthmatic attacks among sus-
ceptible patients were directly correlated
with variations in total sulfate air pollu-
tion from time to time.
Finally, although I am not a scientist,
I think only commonsense is needed to
tell us that the rising incidence of lung
cancer in this country, particularly in
cities, emphasizes the need for a careful
look at the health importance of air
polluted with potentially carcinogenic
substances.
Analyses of air samples from over 100
cities by the Public Health Service have
shown that 3-4 benzpyrene, a potent car-
cinogen, is present in concentrations
which could result in human dosages ap-
proximating or exceeding that from
cigarette smoking.
A recent report entitled "Atmospheric
Factors on Pathogenesis of Lung Cancer"
by Kotin and Falk, states:
The moat satisfactory explanation for the con-
sistent observation of an increased incidence of
lung cancer in urban populations is exposure to
polluted air.
According to the recent report of the
Committee on Environmental Health
Problems:
Because a number of statistical studies have
indicated a higher incidence of lung cancer in urban
than in rural areas and because such well-known
experimental carcinogens as benzpyrene have been
found in community air, the finger of suspicion has
been pointing for some time to atmospheric benzpy-
rene and related aromatic polycyclic hydrocarbons
as at least contributory etiologic agents in lung
cancer. Certainly it does not seem possible to
attribute the alarming increase in lung cancer
incidence to smoking alone. A growing body of
experimental evidence incriminates atmospheric
hydrocarbons.
Mr. President, the problem of air pol-
lution has obviously gone beyond the
simple eye irritation nuisance stage.
These are deadly poisons being poured
into our atmosphere. It is time we do
something more than talk about them.
We need a national clean air program
as envisioned in S. 432.
The role of the Federal Government
to date in this field has been limited to
a supporting one of research, technical
assistance to public and private orga-
nizations, and training of technical per-
sonnel. We urgently need significant
expansion in the scope of the Federal
air pollution control program.
The Federal Government must provide
leadership, encouragement, technical
know-how, and financial assistance to lo-
cal and State governments in the devel-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
341
opment of a national program of research
and development for the prevention and
control of air pollution. This is its prop-
er job. This national problem requires
national effort. State and local agencies
cannot deal with the situation alone.
Current city, county, and regional air
pollution control activities need expan-
sion, also. Data submitted at the Na-
tional Conference on Air Pollution show
that only 34 local governmental air pol-
lution control agencies have annual
budgets of $25,000 or more; fewer than
1,000 people are employed by all local
governments to control their air pollu-
tion problems; and only 13 air pollution
control agencies employ more than 10
people. About 200 cities with popula-
tions over 50,000 are considered to have
air pollution problems, but only approxi-
mately half of them have an air pollu-
tion control program—and many of
these programs are seriously under-
staffed.
In addition, State air pollution con-
trol programs must be strengthened. Of
the more than $2 million all 50 States
spent for air pollution control in 1961,
more than half was spent by California
alone. Although today most States have
air pollution control legislation of some
kind, only 17 States spend more than
$5,000 annually for their programs; only
9 States spend $25,000 or more. And
only approximately 150 people are em-
ployed by all State Governments to com-
bat their air pollution problems. State
activities must be greatly accelerated if
all citizens are to enjoy clean air.
We must obviously elevate the Federal
role in air pollution control to a proper
status of responsibility and leadership
while recognizing the basic responsi-
bilities of State and local governments
and helping them fulfill those responsi-
bilities. This is the purpose of S. 432.
Adoption of this legislation will give us
an action program with two basic ele-
ments—first, stepped-up research on
some still unanswered questions regard-
ing the sources, the nature, and the ef-
fects of air pollution and on better meth-
ods and instruments for abating it; and
second, more effective control through
application of our present knowledge.
I am convinced the American people
are now ready to support such a program
and to accept the regulation and costs
that are necessary to carry it out. They
realize that the days of letting poisonous
wastes billow into the air are over—that
air pollution is a threat to our economy,
to our health, and to our lives.
The air we breathe is free, but when
it is filled with filth, it is no bargain.
I urge the enactment of S. 432.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I join
my colleagues in the Senate in express-
ing appreciation to the Senator from
Connecticut [Mr. RIBICOFF] for spon-
soring the basic bill and for campaign-
ing for its enactment. I shall be glad
to join in sponsoring the tax amend-
ment, as will other Senators also. This
is extremely constructive proposed legis-
lation.
I have had occasion to work closely
with the Senator from Maine. Some-
times he has been with me, and some-
times he has been against me, but al-
ways he has worked most creditably and
always has made a very fine contribution
to this body.
My old friend, CALEB BOGGS, is a con-
stant source of joy and pleasure and has
always been, as I have seen him come
along through the House of Representa-
tives, as Governor of his State, and now
in this present august position. He has
always given to the people of our Nation
a luminous mind and understanding.
I shall conclude my remarks in a mo-
ment. I call attention to subsection
4(b) of the bill, and the fact that it pro-
vides three criteria upon which grants
under the bill shall be made. First,
there is population; second, the extent of
the actual or potential air pollution
problem; and, third, the financial need
of the respective agencies.
Rather than trying to do anything
further with the bill by way of amend-
ment, as this is essentially a matter of
administration, I should like to ask the
-------
342
LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
Senator in charge of the bill on the floor
this question, so that the legislative his-
tory may be clear.
With respect to subsection 4(b) of S.
432, is it not the committee's intention,
in considering the three factors to which
due consideration shall be given in
establishing regulations for the granting
of funds, that the Secretary shall place
primary emphasis on "the extent of the
actual or potential air pollution prob-
lem"?
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the
committee intends that in evaluating the
three factors the Secretary give primary
consideration to the extent of the actual
or potential air pollution problem. The
House version of the Clean Air Act con-
tained a general formula for the alloca-
tion of grants to the several States to
"assist them in meeting the costs of
establishing and maintaining programs
for the prevention and control of air pol-
lution." The Senate committee modified
the language to insure that the Secretary
gives sufficient weight to the areas of
serious air pollution as he administers
the grant program. We want to meet
the problem where it exists.
It is clearly the intent of the commit-
tee that primary emphasis be given to
the extent of the actual or potential air
pollution problem in the community or
area for which an application for funds
is made. The committee recognizes that
air pollution is most severe in the areas
of concentrated population, where there
are large numbers of motor vehicles, and
where there is a substantial volume of
pollution from industrial buildings, re-
fineries, and other chemical plants, and
homes, apartments, and public buildings.
I assure the Senator from New York
that it has been the understanding of
the committee that this is the area of
primary emphasis.
Mr. JAVITS. I am grateful to the
Senator from Maine. I believe his state-
ment clarifies the legislative history.
I close my remarks by calling atten-
tion to another provision in the bill,
which I believe is a very important one
for Senators to bear in mind as we move
into this new concept in our country. I
refer to the provision giving an incen-
[p. 22330]
tive for interstate cooperation through
interstate compacts.
We talk about decentralization. This
is the way to do it. I had the honor to
sponsor, in connection with the mass
transportation bill, a provision enabling
States operating under interstate com-
pacts to pool their participation.
The committee has made a valuable
contribution by endorsing the use of in-
centive premiums, increasing the amount
of the Federal participation where such
pooling under interstate compacts takes
place.
I call the attention of Senators to an
excellent precedent in terms of the Gov-
ernment techniques which are involved.
I congratulate the committee, and I
thank the chairman for his cooperation.
Mr. KEATING. Mr. President, I do
not want to delay the passage of the bill.
I merely wish to express my congratula-
tions and gratitude to the distinguished
Senator from Maine for assisting in this
matter and accepting these amendments
to this very helpful and constructive bill.
Mr. JAVITS. My colleague from New
York may not have been in the Chamber
at the time, but I made it clear that both
of us sponsored these critically im-
portant amendments.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank my friends
from New York.
Mr. CASE. Mr. President, without de-
laying the Senate, I also wish to add my
voice to the expressions of my colleagues
in the Senate in appreciation for the
work that has been done by the Senator
from Maine. I am in favor of the whole
bill. In particular, I am glad that there
was included in it a provision I sug-
gested during the consideration of the
bill by the subcommittee and the full
committee. It deals with the mandatory
application of the criteria with respect
to various agencies. This provision will
be most helpful. I support the whole
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTOKY
343
bill, and I am grateful to the Senator
from Maine.
Mr. MUSKIE. The committee drew
very heavily on the Senator's own bill
in shaping that provision in the bill now
before the Senate.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, this
body is once again charged with the re-
sponsibility of enacting legislation for
the improvement of our physical envi-
ronment in the enhancement of public
health and the general welfare.
Recently, under the exceptionally able
leadership and floor management of the
junior Senator from Maine [Mr.
MUSKIE], the Senate passed by an over-
whelming majority the Water Pollution
Control Act of 1963. The same philos-
ophy of Federal responsibility within a
framework of Federal, State, and local
partnership is implicit in the pending
Clean Air Act. I have cosponsored both
of these vital bills.
We have long recognized the right of
the people of our communities to have
pure foods, pure milk, and pure water.
And we have increasingly come to recog-
nize the regulative powers of Govern-
ment to assure those rights. It is now
evident that additional governmental
action and authority is necessary to
assure the right to breathe clean air—
the most ubiquitous of the elements of
our natural environment.
During our hearings of the Special
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollu-
tion, conducted under the chairmanship
of Senator MUSKIE, it was amply demon-
strated that local and State efforts to
control air pollution are not keeping
pace with the rapid process of industrial-
ization, the increase in our national fuel
and energy requirements, and the grow-
ing concentration of our population in
great metropolitan centers, many of
which cross State boundaries. It is in
answer to the problems generated by
these conditions that the pending meas-
ure calls for increased research and
training activities, grants for local air
pollution control programs and limited
Federal authority in the field of abate-
ment. West Virginia has established a
State air pollution unit, and we would
hope to fit it within the framework of
cooperative assistance of this act.
Findings presented to our subcommit-
tee by the Public Health Service indi-
cate that all communities in the United
States with populations of more than
50,000 have air pollution problems, as do
about 40 percent of the communities in
the 2,500 to 50,000 population range.
Yet, only 17 States maintain air pollu-
tion programs which require expendi-
tures of more than $5,000 annually, and
local agencies in 1961 spent approxi-
mately $8.2 million. This is a grossly
inadequate effort when compared to the
estimated $10 billion in annual property
damage wrought by air pollution on farm
and flower crops, livestock, soiling and
corrosion of buildings and materials, and
in the hazards to surface and air trans-
portation.
One cannot, of course, measure in dol-
lar terms the cumulative effect of air
pollution in the creation and aggravation
of respiratory and bronchial ailments.
It has been frequently demonstrated by
investigators in the United States and
abroad that the frequency of occurrence
of such illnesses is higher in areas which
have higher air pollution levels.
Mr. President, all the evidence testifies
that the pending measure is a necessary
and desirable advance in the exercise of
Federal responsibility for enhancing the
public health and general welfare. I am
confident that the Senate will act with
dispatch in approving S. 432.
PROGRESS IN AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
Mr. WILLIAMS of New Jersey. Mr.
President, there is no doubt that a great
deal more research needs to be done in
the field of air pollution. I am for re-
search; I think it has been valuable, and
I hope it is continued.
But I also think there is a great need
for action—a need to put into practice
the air pollution control methods and de-
vices which research has already pro-
526-701 O - 73 - 24
-------
344
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
vided. The existing air pollution pro-
gram is fundamentally inadequate,
because it provides funds solely for re-
search, and research alone will never
clear away the smog.
The Clean Air Act of 1963, which I was
pleased to join Senator RIBICOFF in spon-
soring, would provide funds to State and
local agencies for air pollution control
programs, and it seems to me that this
is the approach we need if we are going
to do the job of eliminating air pollution.
I think that the House vote of 272 to 102
in favor of a similar proposal is evidence
of concern over the damage to health
and property caused by air pollution, and
I hope that the Senate will show the
same concern by passing S. 432 over-
whelmingly.
[p. 22331]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill
is open to further amendment. If there
be no further amendments to be offered,
the Chair places before the Senate the
House bill, which will be stated by title.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (H.R.
6518) to improve, strengthen, and accel-
erate programs for the prevention and
abatement of air pollution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the consideration of the
House bill?
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I move
to strike out all after the enacting clause
in the House bill, and insert in lieu
thereof the text of S.432, as amended.
The motion was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on the engrossment of the
amendment and the third reading of the
bill.
The amendment was ordered to be en-
grossed and the bill to be read a third
time.
The bill (H.R. 6518) was read the third
time and passed.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the bill
was passed.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I move
to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the Senate bill, S. 432, is
indefinitely postponed.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I move
that the Senate insist on its amendment
and request a conference with the House
of Representatives thereon, and that the
Chair appoint the conferees on the part
of the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion of
the Senator from Maine.
The motion was agreed to; and the
Chair appointed Mr. MUSKIE, Mr. RAN-
DOLPH, Mr. Moss, Mr. METCALF, Mr.
BOGGS, and Mr. PEARSON conferees on
the part of the Senate.
[p. 22334]
l.le(4)(c) Dec. 10: House and Senate agree to conference report, pp.
23954; 23959-23966; 21083-21085
CLEAN AIR ACT
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I call up
the conference report on the bill (H.R.
6518) to improve, strengthen, and ac-
celerate programs for the prevention and
abatement of air pollution, and ask
unanimous consent that the statement
of the managers on the part of the
House be read in lieu of the report.
[p. 23954]
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Speaker and Members of the House, first
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
345
of all I would like to thank the members
of the subcommittee who participated in
the conference and who have been very
active in bringing about this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, the legislation that is
contained in the conference report rep-
resents, in my opinion, a vindication or
approval of the position of the House in
most respects. This legislation is not
new to the Congress of the United States.
We have been in the air pollution con-
trol field now for several years. The
first permanent-type legislation was
adopted in 1955. Last year we adopted
a sort of stopgap program to keep the
legislation in effect. The legislation now
before you in this conference report rep-
resents about the fourth or fifth time
that legislation of this kind has been
before this body.
The House passed the original bill, my
bill, H.R. 6518, in July. The bill then
went to the Senate where it passed with
overwhelming support. We met in con-
ference with them last week and worked
out what I think is a bill that should
have wide bipartisan support as this leg-
islation has had down through the years.
During the Eisenhower administration
legislation was recommended to the
House. Legislation was recommended
under the Kennedy administration, al-
though they did not send up an admin-
istration bill. Our bill was pretty much
worked out by the subcommittee on
which I have the honor to serve as chair-
man. Some changes were made in the
House bill which I will briefly call to
your attention, but most of the program
as envisioned by the House committee,
both the Subcommittee on Health and
Safety and the full Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce is pretty
well carried out in the Senate bill. They
have tightened up one or two important
aspects of the bill. The conferees on the
House side went along with these pro-
cedures. We have found that in air pol-
lution we have a considerably different
problem from that of water pollution and
it must be approached in a different way.
We have recognized that there are
about 100 million of our people, or about
90 percent of our population now living
on about 10 percent of the land space.
Unfortunately no new air is pumped into
these spaces. This is getting to be a con-
siderable problem in cities of 50,000
[p. 23959]
population or more. It is a problem
which has seen legislation adopted in
some 30-odd States.
We know that perhaps 10 million of
our people suffer from the dread disease
known as emphysema. We are spend-
ing about $65 million a year in social
security payments to people who are af-
fected by this disease. We know that it
affects and is associated, I might say, as
a factor, with some cases of lung can-
cer. It is an aggravating cause in cases
of any type of lung disease, particularly
in cases of tuberculosis. We know that
a growing number of trucks and vehicles
on our highways, particularly in our
cities, aggravate this problem. It has
been estimated to cost some $10 billion a
year. It is a grave problem in the field
of agriculture.
In the food and drug field we have had
legislation for 50 years. We are a little
bit late in attacking this problem but I
think that the attack we make in this
legislation is going to bear results. It is
a cooperative type of attack. We have
specifically, I think, allowed this to be
seed money and to serve as a catalyst and
not to discourage the actions of the
States and municipalities and some
county organizations in this field.
I might say that the Senate wanted a
5-year program costing some $182 mil-
lion. The House conferees stood firmly
and we came up with a $95 million pro-
gram. We had originally passed a pro-
gram of $92 million, which means we did
not give in to the Senate. We have
what is substantially a 3-year program.
We are almost through 1964, with 7
months of it to go. We retained the $5
million for fiscal 1964 and put in $25
million for 1965, $30 million for 1966,
-------
346
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
and $35 million for 1967 at which time we
cut off the program.
We set up in the automotive and fuel
producing fields a technical committee
which will follow this problem of photo-
chemical smog and other types of smog
that emanate from unburned hydro-
carbons. We have already had some
great effect on the automotive industry
which is equipping most of its new
models with smog devices. This was an
outgrowth of the intense effort and inter-
est of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
SCHENCK].
We passed the Schenck Act 3 years ago
which provided for some intensive re-
search in this field.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I am de-
lighted to yield to the distinguished gen-
tleman from Arkansas, the chairman of
our committee.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I have
been wanting to say this to the House for
some time; it is long overdue. I think
the membership of the House should re-
alize fully that the gentleman's subcom-
mittee, and particularly the gentleman
from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS], and the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SCHENCK],
have done more for the health and wel-
fare of the people of the United States
than any other two individuals, in the
field of safety, in the operation of auto-
mobiles, and in the field of air pollution.
I think I can say without fear of suc-
cessful contradiction that the unflagging
determination on the part of these two
gentlemen was the principal reason for
bringing seat belts or attachments to the
automobiles of this country. A good
many years ago the gentleman headed a
subcommittee in this field. There were
a lot of people in this country opposed to
seat belts; the automobile industry op-
posed it as an industry. But the gentle-
man and his committee kept working in
cooperation with them and through pa-
tience and determination over the years
the automobile industry came to see the
advisability of providing seat belts as a
piece of standard equipment.
So it was in the field of air pollution.
The gentleman and his committee were
determined to do something about air
pollution. I want to compliment the
gentleman and his committee and the
members of the conference committee on
the part of the House for the outstanding
work they have done in bringing this
conference report back to the House. It
is in keeping with what the gentleman's
committee did as well as with what the
Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce did, which was approved by
the House. This conference report de-
serves the approval of the House and I
urge the House to approve it by way of
showing our appreciation to the gentle-
man and his committee for the splendid
job that they have done.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Speaker, I thank the distinguished gen-
tleman for his fine compliments. I think
his fine leadership and help have been a
source of inspiration to us.
Mr. Speaker, in the conference the
other body brought in the idea of initi-
ating a continuing program of research
directed toward development of im-
proved low-cost techniques for extract-
ing sulfur from fuels which the House
was agreeable to.
There has been some testimony in our
hearings to the effect that the burning
of sulfur in some types of fuels has some
aggravating effects and is, perhaps, a
cause of the common cold.
Mr. Speaker, on page 7 of the confer-
ence committee print we included lan-
guage which would allow the Secretary
to compile and to publish criteria which
reflect the latest scientific knowledge
useful in indicating the kind and extent
of the effects which may be expected
from the presence of such air pollution
agents or combination of agents in the
air, in varying quantities. This criteria
may be made available to the municipal,
State and interstate Air Pollution Con-
trol Agencies.
Also, Mr. Speaker, we kept the House
language which allows the Secretary to
make recommendations to these control
agencies, in the light of this criteria.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
347
Over in section 4(a), page 11, the Sen-
ate held to the idea which we had of
providing Federal grants to the local and
State agencies in an amount up to two-
thirds of the cost of establishing, devel-
oping or improving air pollution preven-
tion and control programs. One-third
of the cost would be paid by the States.
In the case of the regional agencies,
the Federal Government would pay up
to three-fourths of the amount; this,
in view of the fact that it becomes an
interstate matter, and we felt that that
distinction should be made. The House
conferees did provide, however, and go
along with the language which provides
that the agency which applies for these
funds would assure that it would not
reduce its non-Federal funds from the
preceding fiscal year, which would mean
that this would keep the States and
local agencies from diminishing their
support.
Now, Mr. Speaker, in the abatement
features of the bill, when it is an intra-
state matter, the action must be entirely
triggered by the chief magistrate of that
State, the Governor.
We recognize that in the local situa-
tion he may call upon the Secretary for
the use of technical data to be used in
an abatement suit. But the Governor
is in control of the local situation.
Now, in the interstate situations we
provide, first of all, for a conference to
which the municipal, State, or interstate
Air Pollution Control Agencies must be
invited. Following the conference—and
that conference is not to be called until
after consultation with the State
groups—after the conference is held, a
summary of the conference is to be made.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from Alabama has
again expired.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
the gentleman 3 additional minutes.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Recom-
mendations are also to be made and a
period of 6 months allowed for the rec-
ommendations to be placed in effect.
If, at the conclusion of that period—and
this language was also in the House
bill—no remedial measures have been
taken, a public hearing must be called.
The Governor of the aggrieved State,
the Governor of the polluting State, or
whomever the Governor of each of those
particular States may designate as his
representative must be given the oppor-
tunity to serve on the hearing board
and, also, each Federal agency which
has a substantial interest in the subject
matter must be invited. However, a
majority of the people serving on this
hearing board must be other than em-
ployees of the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare. They, then,
have 6 more months in which to take
some action toward abatement. If no
action is taken at that time, then the
Secretary may proceed to ask the Attor-
ney General to bring a suit on behalf of
the United States to secure abatement of
the pollution.
This about concludes the discussion
other than the section on the automotive
and fuel industry section. We took the
Senate language on that section which
sets up a technical committee which must
have an equal number of representatives
of the Department and of the automo-
tive and fuel manufacturing industries.
They can meet from time to time to
evaluate progress in the development
of devices and fuels which would be in
keeping with improving the situation as
far as air pollution control is concerned.
I repeat again, I think the House con-
ferees stayed with the position of the
House. We have the program down to
[p. 23960]
what we think is the minimum amount
of money that should be spent in this
important field. This is coming to be
more and more of a problem in some 261
cities of the country and we feel that
this is the minimum that the Federal
Government ought to do in this field.
I hope the House will unanimously
adopt the conference report.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
10 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. SCHENCK].
-------
348
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Mr. SCHENCK. Mr. Speaker, first I
would like to express my sincere appre-
ciation to our distingished chairman,
the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. HAR-
RIS] of the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce for his very fine and
complimentary words of commendation
of the work of our committee, myself,
and our colleagues. It has been a very
real privilege to serve on the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce
with our distinguished chairman, the
gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. HARRIS]
and on our Subcommittee of Health and
Safety all these years with my distin-
guished colleague from Alabama [Mr.
ROBERTS]. It has been a deeply reward-
ing experience the memory of which I
shall cherish so long as I shall live.
It was also a very real privilege to
serve on the conference committee which
report we are considering here today. We
had two meetings and there was an un-
usually fine spirit of give and take dur-
ing the friendly yet completely thorough
discussion on this important bill. We
are understandably proud of the fact
that we maintained the position of the
House and we are pleased with changes
in the language that was developed in
the other body. We think this confer-
ence report is real good, and the result-
ing changes, I feel personally make it
even better, stronger and more workable
than the original House measure which I
fully supported, and I now express the
completely sincere hope this conference
report will be overwhelmingly approved.
We have heard it stated authentically
many times that air pollution costs each
and every person in the United States $65
a year. So it is tremendously important
from the economic point of view. We
must continue to research and examine
the source and causes of air pollution
so that it can be better controlled even
though it is now being controlled to a
remarkable degree. A very good pro-
gram in research as to the effects of au-
tomotive exhaust gases on human health
has been conducted by the Air Pollution
Division of the Public Health Service.
An excellent report was issued on this
by the Surgeon General on this question
in June of last year. More research and
work is being done constantly by all seg-
ments of the automotive manufacturers,
the fuel manufacturers, and the exhaust
gas device manufacturers. The industry
has spent large and substantial sums of
money on this program each year.
Just recently the General Motors
Corp. announced that it was contribut-
ing another $100,000 to the Sloan-
Kettering Institute for Cancer Research
to study further the effects of automotive
gases in the atmosphere. Economical
and workable devices will be developed
to improve the abatement of the pollu-
tion of the air we breathe from auto-
mobile exhaust gases and to encourage
the proper maintenance of the vehicle;
but much also depends on the driver and
the manner in which he drives the
vehicle.
The entire problem is one of personal
concern to everyone in order to assure
that each of us has the kind of clean air
to breathe that promotes good health.
So it will require continuous research
and effort on the part of everyone.
There is no person or area in the Na-
tion that can escape the dangers of air
pollution.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I would like to
recommend and urge overwhelming ap-
proval of this conference report by all
of our colleagues. I think it is extremely
well done. I would like to express my
personal appreciation to my colleagues
on both sides of the aisle for the fine
cooperation they have given on this legis-
lation and on all other questions con-
sidered by our committee on this and all
related fields since I have been serving
on this committee.
Mr. Speaker, I include as part of my
remarks a release by General Motors
Corp. as follows:
DETROIT.—General Motors Corp. recently
announced a research grant of $100,000 to the
Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research,
New York, for continued study of effects of auto-
motive exhaust gases in the atmosphere.
The grant will support research over a 2-year
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
349
period, and will double the amount of GM's support
of the program in the 6th and 7th years of the
corporation's contributions to it.
The Sloan-Kettering Institute's continuing
research program includes analyses of samples of
tars collected from automotive exhaust gases under
a variety of operating conditions and from repre-
sentative city atmospheres, in an effort to identify
the effect of automotive exhaust gases in relation
to other sources of air pollution.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. BEERMANN. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARRIS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Nebraska.
Mr. BEERMANN. I notice in the re-
port on page 10, regarding appropria-
tions, section 13, that there is an author-
ization of $5 million for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1964, and then for the
year ending June 30, 1965, $25 million,
$30 million for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1966, and $35 million for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1967. Would
it not be just as well to save this $95
million in the light of the Federal Budg-
et? Why is this expanded amount
asked for at this time?
Mr. HARRIS. The gentleman does
propound a most appropriate question
insofar as our desire to do something
about budgetary matters is concerned.
On the other hand, the House has
already passed on the $90 million and
here we are dealing only with an addi-
tional sum of $5 million in the 4-year
period. So at this time we do not have
before us the question of whether the
program should be adopted. Of course,
the conference report could be refused
and the House could refuse to do any-
thing, but in dealing with the conference
report our problem is the differences be-
tween the House and the Senate, and
that is what we have under discussion
here today.
Mr. BEERMANN. It seems to me
that there are private agencies in opera-
tion that could take care of this.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
such time as he may desire to the gen-
tleman from Ohio [Mr. VANIK].
Mr. VANIK. Mr. Speaker, I want
to take this opportunity to commend the
conferees and the subcommittee on the
conference report which is now before
the House. Although the House ver-
sion of the bill was better legislation, I
recognize the practical alternatives
which were crystallized in conference.
In my Cleveland community, the air
pollution problem seems to be getting
progressively worse. There are certain
days when atmospheric conditions cast
a complete cloud blanket over the en-
tire metropolitan area, sealing in the
effluent of all of the industrial plants of
the industrial valley. In this atmos-
phere of contamination, which periodi-
cally occurs, respiratory ailments and
deaths are multiplied.
Over 25 years ago, when I was a mem-
ber of the Cleveland City Council, we
organized a community committee to
protest the air pollution problem. At
that time, we retained the services of a
doctor with the school of experimental
medicine of the University of Cincinnati
who made a very comprehensive study
of death records which showed that in
the so-called dirtier areas of the city
there were 240 more deaths annually
resulting from lung cancer than there
were in the cleaner sections of the com-
munity.
It seems to me that a similar study
conducted today of the death records of
a community could be made to de-
termine the relationship between air
pollution and the respiratory illnesses
which result in death. Such a study
would be very helpful in determining
the urgency for constructive steps to
meet this tremendous problem.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida
[Mr. ROGERS].
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speak-
er, I rise in support of the conference
report on H.R. 6518, the clean-air bill.
The case for the enactment of legisla-
tion for the prevention and abatement
of air pollution has been made very clear
by the statements of the managers on
the part of the House.
-------
350
LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
I have indicated to the House before
that air pollution costs some $11 billion
a year in damages, which include dam-
ages to crops, animals, and human be-
ings as well, and it is estimated by the
U.S. Public Health Service that by 1970,
two-thirds of our population will be
breathing only the air over 10 percent
of our land mass due to our population
density. Certainly if we do not take
steps to purify the air, then the incidence
of disease and damage caused by air pol-
lution will rapidly become a grave na-
tional health problem.
The clean-air bill before us today is
a carefully thought out and researched
program to combat the problem of air
[p. 23961]
pollution. The conference committee
was able to agree for all practical pur-
poses to a 3-year $95 million program
that is 2 years shorter and $87 million
less than the original Senate proposal.
We members of the conference commit-
tee feel that we can make an effective
beginning with a shorter and less expen-
sive program, and still obtain the needed
result of restraining air pollution and
eventually eliminating a major portion
of this problem.
We must act now. With the contin-
uous reports of the probability of lung
cancer being caused by the toxic matter
in the atmosphere we breathe, we cannot
afford to wait any longer to combat this
problem of air pollution. We often look
back when we are confronted by the
effects of inaction and say that we should
have acted sooner, but hindsight is more
often than not, a poor excuse for fore-
sight. We must attack the problem of
air pollution immediately—today.
Now, Mr. Speaker, in answer to the
question that has been brought up about
the money, the appropriations author-
ized by this bill, I think it is well to point
out a number of facts. First of all, the
air pollution program was authorized be-
fore the passage of this law by general
provisions of law. In fact, there was no
limit as to the amount of money that
could be appropriated for air pollution
programs under the law heretofore
passed. This is the first effort by this
committee and this Congress to begin to
set some limitations on this program. If
the gentleman, and I can furnish these
facts to him, will go into it, he will find
that we have just about cut in half the
proposed carrying out of this program
over the years for what many feel needs
to be done. Presently the House has al-
ready appropriated $13 million. This
action was taken not in this legislation
but in an actual appropriation bill. This
additional $5 million is authorized for
this one phase of the program, that is
a new program. We simply placed the
$5 million in this legislation to cover the
appropriation for fiscal 1964, so that we
could begin to tie in all of these programs
under one bill. So as to what I think
the gentleman is concerned about, where
it perhaps looks as if the program is
jumping from $5 million up to $25 mil-
lion, that actually is not the case, be-
cause you actually have $13 million ap-
propriated and this $5 million takes it
up to $18 million. We cut down from
the amount the Department wanted.
When the House went to conference, we
had passed a bill of $90 million. Do you
know what the Senate had passed?
They had passed a bill of $182 million
for a 5-year program. If you go over
this report, I think you will be proud
of the action of the House conferees be-
cause we held the program for $95 mil-
lion for 3 years.
Mr. BEERMANN. Who in the world
authorized or passed a law that said they
could dip into the Federal Treasury and
spend as much money as they want to?
Who authorized a law with no
restriction?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. This Con-
gress passed a law, the Public Health
Service Act,sections 304,311 and 314,the
general law states the responsibility for
carrying on this program is in the De-
partment of Health, Education, and
Welfare.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
351
Mr. BEERMANN. With unlimited
funds?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. With no
limitation on the amount that they may
request. Then they go to the Commit-
tee on Appropriations and whatever they
can justify before the Committee on Ap-
propriations, the Congress can appropri-
ate. But here we are changing that.
Therefore, the gentleman should be
strongly in favor of this because we are
cutting down on what they can come to
the Committee on Appropriations and
ask for.
Mr. BEERMANN. Will the gentleman
answer me this question?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I will be
glad to try to answer the gentleman's
question.
Mr. BEERMANN. Is there any
chance that a law like this was passed
under unanimous consent and nobody
knew what was happening some several
years ago?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. No, no. I
would think not and I am sure that is
not the case.
Mr. BEERMANN. I would like to
know when it was passed.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. If the
gentleman will check, he will find that
there are many laws such as this. There
is provided a general authorization and
they simply go to the Committee on Ap-
propriations. Here we are changing this
position because, fortunately, I feel the
House is beginning to want to take more
control. Here we are beginning to tie
it down more and more. In fact, the
research program that we are investigat-
ing now, the whole program of research,
is in line with this trend, I think in the
hope of trying to tie down authorizations
more tightly. That is exactly what this
does. I am sure when the gentleman
goes over this report, he will strongly
support the committee's action.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. TAFT].
Mr. TAFT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the
gentleman for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, the reason I have taken
this time today is to comment upon one
change, certainly, which has been made
in the bill as it has come from the con-
ference committee. This change relates
to an amendment which I advocated and
succeeded in having passed in the House
on the floor. My amendment had the
effect of changing the general rule and
limiting the powers which had been given
to the Secretary under the provisions of
the bill by inserting the word "proce-
dural" before the type of regulations
which the Secretary could promulgate.
At that time the gentleman from Ala-
bama [Mr. ROBERTS] and I had a col-
loquy reported in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD which read in part as follows. I
stated at that time:
If we are referring only to procedural regulations
within his own department, this (this provision,
that is) would be proper. But I see no reason why
he should have general regulatory powers under
the provisions of this bill.
Mr. ROBERTS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TAFT. I would be glad to yield.
Mr. ROBERTS. I think the gentleman has stated
what was in the minds of the members of the
committee in writing this bill.
Now, apparently, when the House con-
ferees, however, got to the conference
committee they were prevailed upon and
we find in the report of the conference
committee the statement that the Sec-
retary himself apparently had indicated
to some members of the conference com-
mittee that he did not feel this limita-
tion would be proper and that he felt
any such limitation would cut into his
authority and his ability to administer
the act.
If that was true, I do not know why
it was true. There had been no testi-
mony before, so far as I can find out,
indicating why he needed general rule-
making power. I think this general rule-
making power, as all of us know, in many
programs has been abused. I think there
is a chance it will be abused again here.
I think, if we are to take out the word
"procedural" as a limitation on the pow-
ers, the very least we can do is to pre-
scribe some standards.
-------
352
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
I would call to your attention that
there are nowhere so far as I can see any
standards prescribed for regulations.
While we are talking about that, I
think we ought to understand what I
would call a procedural monstrosity
which really does exist in this bill and
which I think goes to show the broad
powers the Secretary has, not only under
the rulemaking power but even further
than that. I would call to your atten-
tion section 5(i) of the bill, subsection
(2). This is a provision under which a
person who is asked to file a report as to
the cause of any pollution which he may
be involved in, must report on the de-
tails of it, a provision which I believe
violates the constitutional privilege
against self-incrimination. This has
been in the bill all the time. We also
find here that if this happens the Secre-
tary can mitigate the fines and penalties,
if he wishes to, for failing to file these
reports, but in doing so the Secretary
determines what the facts are and his
determination shall be final. There is
no court of appeal and no review of any
kind. It is an absolute discretion given
to an administrative authority.
I think excessive power is given in this
bill, regardless whether it may be a good
or a poor bill. We all recognize the need
for some action. Hopefully it can be
State and local action that will be ef-
fective in this field, but there is no ex-
cuse for passing a bill of this type at
this time.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speak-
er, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. TAFT. I am glad to yield to the
gentleman from Florida.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Is the gen-
tleman concerned about rulemaking,
perhaps to do with abatement?
Mr. TAFT. The gentleman is con-
cerned with rulemaking in any way. I
do not think there is any limitation
other than the general scope of this leg-
islation that could be invoked here.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Certainly
the gentleman would expect to set cer-
tain rules as to the agencies, as to what
[p. 23962]
agencies can qualify, and the time ele-
ments, and that sort of thing, would he
not?
Mr. TAFT. The gentleman certainly
would, and the gentleman's amendment,
as offered and passed by the House be-
fore, permitting procedural regulations
would, I think, have covered that point.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. May I say
this: As far as abatement is concerned,
I am sure the gentleman knows that be-
fore any regulations are put into effect
on abatement the court is the one that
will decide that.
Mr. TAFT. I hope that is true.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. It is writ-
ten in the bill. I wanted to assure the
gentleman of that.
Mr. TAFT. I will say this: It has been
written into many other bills, but at the
same time if the rulemaking power is
there and the rules are prescribed by the
Secretary and established under the Ad-
ministrative Procedures Act, the court
has no alternative but to accept that as
law.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Ala-
bama [Mr. ROBERTS] to reply to some
of the questions raised by the gentleman
from Ohio.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speak-
er, will the gentleman yield to me for
1 second?
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I yield
to the gentleman.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I want to
say there that, of course, there is no way
for the Secretary to enforce it except
through the courts. So the fears the
gentleman raised are groundless.
Mr. TAFT. The court would have no
alternative but to take the law as pre-
scribed under the rulemaking power.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. There is no
rulemaking power for abatement, if the
gentleman will read the law.
Mr. TAFT. I do not agree with the
gentleman in this respect. There are
certain limitations, it is true, in the gen-
eral scope of the act, but only in the gen-
eral scope of the act.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
353
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. Mr.
Speaker, I have shared the gentleman's
concern as to this matter and we dis-
cussed it, we thought, quite thoroughly
in the conference. There were some peo-
ple in the conference who felt the mean-
ing of the word "procedural" is very
vague as far as the law is concerned.
When we try to ascribe meaning to words
such as "substantive" and "procedural,"
it can be vague. The fear was expressed
if we went along with the change which
the gentleman put into the bill on the
floor of the House that it would probably
run us into the Administrative Procedure
Act and in the end would not accomplish
what we thought the gentleman wanted.
It was with great reluctance that we
could not prevail on the Senate conferees
on this particular point. I do think,
however, that the power of the Secretary
is very adequately tied down in this bill
as to what he can do and as to what kind
of information he must act upon, and the
extent of the data upon which he may
proceed. I think it has taken care of the
gentleman's objections.
Mr. TAFT. I wonder if the gentleman
is saying in effect that in his opinion
under the act the only type of regula-
tions the Secretary may prescribe are, in
effect, procedural, whether we so define
them or not.
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I would
say this: I think there are enough re-
strictions written into this act to assure
local protection and protection of indus-
try. I think that has been the intent of
this committee throughout this entire
act.
I think we came out of conference with
a bill which does that.
Mr. TAFT. Does the gentleman feel
that the Secretary would not have power
to issue substantive regulations?
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield to me?
Mr. ROBERTS of Alabama. I yield
to the gentleman.
Mr. HARRIS. The question that both-
ered the conferees, and rightfully so, is
what is procedural and what is substan-
tive. We have had that question, that
problem, in connection with regulatory
procedures over the years. As I see it,
the question is not whether it is proce-
dural or substantive with reference to
rulemaking. It is the authority that is
contained in the act itself and the re-
strictions which the act itself provides
or the limitations which the act itself
places on the administrator who is in
this case the Secretary. Those are the
guidelines, and I have thought it was
the duty of the Congress to set out the
standards in the language of the act it-
self and not get into this broad, general,
rulemaking procedure where the courts
will construe on the one hand and have
difficulty in construing the same ques-
tion on the other hand.
Mr. TAFT. Mr. Speaker, I agree with
the gentleman.
Mr. HARRIS. That is the problem
that the conferees had in the matter of
trying to accept the gentleman's amend-
ment.
Mr. TAFT. Subsection 5(i) violates
the privilege against self-incrimination
since the reports required to be filed un-
der penalty of fines will be included in
the transcript under subsection 5(g) and
must be received in evidence in any suit
brought under subsection 5(f).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from Arkansas
has again expired
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from Indiana
[Mr. MADDEN].
Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, I want
to commend the committee on bringing
this anti-air-pollution legislation to the
floor of the House and also the conferees
for their work in behalf of this legisla-
tion. I do not know of any piece of leg-
islation that we have had before the
House that is as necessary as some kind
of action by our Federal Government to
regulate the inexcusable, unregulated air
pollution, especially in the larger cities
and industrial areas throughout the
Nation.
In my home district, the industrial
Calumet region of Indiana needs relief
from smoke, smog, and polluted air. We
have three major steel mills: United
States Steel, Inland, Youngstown, and
-------
354
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
several smaller steel manufacturing
mills; most of the major oil companies
have refineries in my congressional dis-
trict. We have two or three hundred
other industries. Across the State line,
in Chicago, there are the South Chicago
Steel Works and dozens and dozens of
minor and major industries. Those are
across the State line, and if local regu-
lations were all that applied possibly we
might be able to do something on our side
of the State line but nothing would be
done on the other side, or vice versa.
I remember a few years ago when I
was in Los Angeles. The newspapers
had headlines condemning the mayor
and city officials about the epidemic of
smog which was especially thick for sev-
eral days. Our old friend and former
colleague, Norris Poulson, was mayor of
Los Angeles at that time. I called him
up to sympathize with him. I told him
about the troubles we were having in
my area. I said to him that the only
difference between our area and his area
was that they called it smog out there
while we just called it plain smoke in
the Chicago area. I said to him that you
can fly over New York, Pittsburgh, or
Buffalo, or any of our major cities and
most smaller towns, and if a strong wind
is not blowing, they all are victims of
devastating health hazards from smoke
or air pollution. There is no question
that air pollution is undermining the
health of millions of our people, not only
the people who live there in the commu-
nity but the people who are called upon
to go into these areas that have major
air pollution.
Mayor Poulson invited me to a meeting
they were having on air pollution the
next day. They had the Southern Cali-
fornia Anti-Air Pollution Department,
members of the council, business, and
labor represented at that luncheon. Of
course, they had no solution to it but
they did agree that no one city or local
community could solve it. The Federal
Government must undertake a program
to solve this health menace.
I thought that if we can solve the
problem of flying a man through space
23 times in a few hours, the Government
ought to have enough technique in re-
search to be able to solve the air pollu-
tion problem in this country.
This legislation will be a great step
forward because our industrial district
has been fighting the air pollution or
smoke problem for years. It is too com-
plex a problem for Chicago, Los Angeles,
Pittsburgh, the Calumet region, or any
other local area to free its citizens of the
health menace of air pollution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from Indiana has
expired.
Mr. HARRIS. I yield the gentleman
1 additional minute.
Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, I again
want to commend the committee for pre-
senting this legislation onto the floor of
the House. I hope this antiair pollution
bill passes unanimously. I do think that
this great health problem will be solved
eventually.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
3 minutes to the gentleman from Indi-
ana [Mr. HARVEY].
[p. 23963]
Mr. HARVEY of Indiana. Mr. Speak-
er, when this piece of legislation was be-
fore the House a few weeks ago, I took
exception to the principle upon which it
was being enacted, and still do.
At that time I offered a motion to
recommit, and I hope that we will have a
rollcall vote on this conference report.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I certainly do not
want to be in the position of one chal-
lenging the motives of the members of
this very fine committee. I think they
certainly operated in the best of good
faith.
I also would not like to be in the posi-
tion of being for pollution. I think just
about anyone would agree that this is a
problem and we hope ultimately to deal
with it.
Mr. Speaker, I am not going to address
myself here primarily to the basic phi-
losophy nor to the mechanics of it. My
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
355
colleague, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
TAFT], has already touched upon what, I
think, are some of the defects in the
structure of the bill. My colleague, the
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. McCLOKY],
will address himself to the basic philos-
ophy.
Mr. Speaker, the point I want to touch
upon here, and I hope I might have the
attention of the members of the commit-
tee particularly in this respect, because
I am going to humbly suggest that even
if this report is passed and becomes a
law, you will not have concluded dealing
with it. I think, as my good friend, the
gentleman from Indiana [Mr. MADDEN],
pointed out, you have a situation w.hich
does exist in his corner of our State
which is typical of the situation that
exists all over the country in which we
find large cities located near State lines.
Now, Mr. Speaker, it sounds like a
good idea on the surface if one State
"feels aggrieved to be able to haul the
other one into court, so to speak, and to
deal with them. But I think you are
going to find, before this is concluded,
that you have sort of opened up the bee-
hive and it is going to be pretty hard
to get the bees back into the hives
again.
Mr. Speaker, I honestly and sincerely
believe that this is not good legislation.
First of all I want to say that if we
had some actual, definite, concrete rem-
edy for smog and that this was the con-
ceded method of dealing with it, just as
you have a specific remedy for a given
disease, then I would be for it. But you
are simply legislating in this instance in
the unknown.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
time of the gentleman from Indiana has
expired.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to
the gentleman 1 additional minute.
Mr. HARVEY of Indiana. Mr. Speak-
er, I just want to say, in conclusion, that
we have gone in my opinion pretty far
afield a great many times in this House
in trying to remedy everything by legis-
lative action. I feel very definitely and
sincerely in this case that that is what we
are about to do. I feel we are making
a mistake in passing this specific legis-
lation.
Mr. Speaker, I sincerely trust and hope
that this conference report will not be
approved by the House.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield
2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York [Mr. O'BRIEN].
Mr. O'BRIEN of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I was not aware the merits of
this legislation were being discussed. As
I recall, the bill passed the House origi-
nally by a nearly 3-to-l vote. I feel
this conference report brings back a
bill which is even superior to the one
which obtained overwhelming support
in the House.
I have sat occasionally on conferences
and I can recall no instance where there
was more solid support on the part of
the conferees for the ultimate package
than there was in this instance and,
speaking of packages, if we had accepted
the Senate package with the 5 years we
would have here a bill $87 million more
expensive than the one we have now.
I feel that the House acted wisely in its
overwhelming support of the original bill
and I think it is wisdom that it should
approve the conference report.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from Illinois
[Mr. McCLORY].
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Speaker, I cer-
tainly want to commend the gentlemen
who worked on this bill (H.R. 6518) for
their efforts. I do not want to question
their interest in public health, nor do I
question the interest of the rest of the
Members of the House on the subject of
public health. I have had some interest
in this subject myself. As a matter of
fact, my standing here today emanates
from the privilege I have had on serving
on the Subcommittee on Natural Re-
sources and Power of the Government
Operations Committee of the House in-
vestigating into the subject of water pol-
lution. The subcommittee headed by the
gentleman from Alabama has come to be
-------
356
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
known as the Jones committee. It is
my strong feeling this was not good legis-
lation.
It is my firm belief that the bill re-
ported by the conference committee is
not good legislation. I might say that
when the bill went to the Senate there
were a great many changes made there.
When it is suggested that the House held
its own with regard to the conference
report I suggest a reading of the confer-
ence committee report. It is plain to see
that in most instances the House receded
and the Senate version of the bill was
recommended. I must say that the Sen-
ate amendments to the bill make it less
objectionable than it was originally.
It is suggested that perhaps we are
late in bringing forth this bill. There is
no question about that, because local
communities have all initiated programs
of air pollution abatement in their own
areas where they have their individual
local problems of polluted air.
The mayor of Chicago came down here
and testified that during the last 30
years that city had reduced the amount
of dust per square mile from 350 tons
to 43 tons, and he expects Chicago to
make further progress on its own. I
know that Pittsburgh and other cities
have also undertaken to tackle this
problem locally. It is reported that there
are only 17 States which have programs
for air pollution abatement. This is
understandable since the problem is not
a serious one in many States. We heard
yesterday from the gentleman from
California [Mr. BuRKHALTER] who stated
that California has done a great deal
to try to get rid of the smog. Whether
this smog results from the locating of
industries in the wrong place, or from
natural conditions of terrain and wind
currents there is no question but that
the Californians have put forth a great
deal of effort. However, neither this
local condition nor the various magazine
articles on air pollution should persuade
the Congress to initiate a vast new Fed-
eral program, as is done by this bill. If
we enact this legislation I think the
Congress is making a mistake.
In regard to grants-in-aid. These are
held out as bait so that local areas will
want this legislation. If there were no
Federal funds I am quite sure they
would not want it, but with Federal
funds they do.
What effect does this have on the local
areas? We had some testimony before
the Jones committee that it reduced the
local initiative with respect to water pol-
lution abatement. I am not surprised
that the conference committee report
recommends a provision that notwith-
standing the provisions of this legisla-
tion no grants-in-aid to local areas
should be made where local appropria-
tions have been reduced. This is almost
a telltale admission as to what this leg-
islation is going to do.
While the Senate version of this leg-
islation, which is adopted substantially in
this report, is an improvement over the
original House bill, I am sure that by
rejecting the conference committee re-
port a much better bill could be pro-
duced.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1
minute to the gentleman from New York
[Mr. HALPERN].
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise
in enthusiastic support of the conference
report on this legislation, H.R. 6518, and
recommend it wholeheartedly to my col-
leagues for approval.
I also wish to commend the conferees
on the part of the House. Their con-
ference report, in my opinion, repre-
sents a great deal of study and work, and
they have come up with an excellent bill.
In particular, I wish to compliment the
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ROBERTS]
for his excellent leadership in this effort.
I have long advocated an effective bill
to clean up air pollution, and have
deemed it a privilege to be identified with
those who recognize air pollution for the
dangerous problem it is, and who have
worked for a truly effective program to
eradicate this problem. I cosponsored
the original legislation at this session,
my bill being H.R. 4750, and was also a
cosponsor of last year's bill which was
enacted as Public Law 87-761. Great
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
357
strides have been taken since that legis-
lation was approved, culminating in this
superb conference report which offers a
broad and excellent program to attack
this scourge of our metropolitan areas.
The dangers facing us in this area are
clear, and the responsibility should not
be shirked. Unless action is taken to
eliminate the air pollution that is chok-
ing our cities we face not only monetary
[p. 23964]
losses, but serious threats to the health
and even the lives of our people.
This legislation strikes at the heart
of the problem by a comprehensive pro-
gram involving uniform laws, research,
investigation, and training, grants for
control programs, abatement of air pol-
lution by judicial proceedings and nu-
merous programs of Federal-State co-
operation. This is just what we need,
Mr. Speaker and that is just what this
bill offers.
Last July the Members of this body
approved H.R. 6518 by a substantial
vote. Now the conference report even
improves on that bill, good as it was.
Accordingly, I trust that today we will
give it an overwhelming vote of approval.
Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Speaker, I urge
adoption of the conference report on
H.R. 6518, the Clean Air Act, House
Report 1003.
I want to commend the managers
on the part of the House for their
efforts and particularly for seeing that
restrictive language with respect to pat-
ents and other proprietary rights was
eliminated from the bill.
This action is in keeping with the
decision of the Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce in rejecting pat-
ent language included in the draft leg-
islation received from the executive
branch. The committee apparently felt,
as do I, that legislation in the pat-
ents and proprietary rights area must
be subject to comprehensive hearings
and investigation and should be consid-
ered for its impact on overall Govern-
ment research contracting, rather than
as an amendment or provision of every
bill authorizing public expenditures for
research and development.
On October 10, our late President is-
sued a far-reaching and important
statement of Government patent policy
in the form of a memorandum of under-
standing to sundry Government depart-
ments and agencies. I commented on
President Kennedy's policy on the floor
of the House that same day—page 19281
of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—stating
that I was favorably impressed with the
overall tone and objectives of the Presi-
dent's statement.
My comments were based on the fact
that I understood that the President did
not intend his patent policy to be an
excuse for further restricting the rights
of parties to Government research con-
tracting. The President's policy was
designed to provide the flexibility nec-
essary to the successful completion of
Government research objectives, while,
at the same time, protecting the rights of
the public and the equities of the in-
dustrial community under Government
contracts.
Moreover, as I stated at the time, it
provides for a licensing policy with nec-
essary exceptions, which should be im-
plemented by executive agencies with-
out delay.
In direct contradiction to the philoso-
phy of President Kennedy's realistic
approach, we have a concerted effort
on the part of some to amend every
piece of legislation calling for Federal
research effort, so as to add provisions
which, in my opinion, not only drive the
most competent organizations away
from such vital research effort, but make
the job of responsible Federal agencies
doubly difficult.
It is the opinion of the Committee on
Science and Astronautics, which has
twice reported legislation to amend the
title provisions of the 1958 Space Act,
that such provisions as the one originally
added to the clear air bill on the Senate
floor, "damage small business, cost the
taxpayer money, dilute the national
research effort, and waste the products
of scientific research."
-------
358
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
I am pleased to see the clean air bill
emerged from conference without re-
strictive patent language. This is a
matter which should, and must, even-
tually be faced by committees of the
House and Senate, having jurisdiction
over patent matters. It is not one to
be taken lightly or to be included in
legislation without full and complete
hearings.
Other bills, calling for Federal re-
search effort, are still in committee. I
would commend the President's patent
policy to these groups, and ask that it
be considered as providing necessary
flexibility in Government research con-
tracting and as an extension of the
license policy not as justification for
more restrictive and unworkable provi-
sions.
Mr. BURKHALTER. Mr. Speaker,
air pollution is a development of our
modern civilization. Fumes from motor
vehicles are a large part of the problem.
Due to the splendid efforts of the auto
manufacturers, a solution or partial
solution has been developed.
Today in Los Angeles plans are being
perfected to equip every motor vehicle in
our city and county of nearly 6 million
people with a control device of some sort.
The fact that there is a control device—
that the problem has been analyzed and
a preventative in part developed is due
to the cooperation of the motor vehicle
manufacturers.
But there are new dangers as the num-
bers of automobiles increase. And I am
advised that the production of motor cars
now exceeds the growth of population.
There are more cars being produced in
this country than there are births every
day. If my information is correct, there
will be produced for the 1963 model year
approximately 7,343,000 cars. And there
will be, for the same time, approximately
4,167,000 human births.
Today I want to point out to the best
of my ability the very real danger to the
lives of millions of people living in our
metropolitan areas. That problem is still
air pollution, in spite of all that has been
done. It is insidious and invisible. It
deals death and disease to our people. It
destroys vegetation. It interferes seri-
ously with our economic life. Its preven-
tion or abatement is tremendously ex-
pensive. It can be combated only
through Government control, since smog
or smaze knows no political boundaries.
It has seriously interfered with the
growth of our metropolitan areas and I
have heard that some industrial plants,
namely the alfalfa compacting plants are
spreading smog over the prairies of
Nebraska.
Long plumes of smoke from industrial
installations, the oil refineries, the steel
mills, industrial plants of all kinds, power
stations, and others attracted attention
to what later became known as station-
ary offenders. These were offenders
that were stationary because of their
nature. Gasoline fumes, generated when
gasoline tanks were filled at filling sta-
tions, came under public survey and a
citywide campaign to keep oil and gaso-
line fumes out of the air was launched.
Fumes from the open ladles in steel mills
and brass foundries were brought under
control.
Real hysteria developed in 1952, when
a mystery fog in London killed 4,000 peo-
ple. The steady progress report of the
legislative committee was of little help
in the face of tragedies like this. One
reason for my great concern with this
problem at this time is the very real pos-
sibility that a repetition of the London
tragedy or the Donora, Pa., tragedy, or
the tragedy in Belgium may occur some
day soon in this country because of the
failure of our National Government to
give proper impetus to research and ap-
propriate coordination and dissemina-
tion of the scientific knowledge already
gained of this great evil.
Crop damage from the polluted air be-
came evident in the lush gardens and
fields of Los Angeles County in 1950.
The first damage was found on a deposit
on the leaves of certain garden plants,
another source of damage was pollutants
such as sulfur dioxide which caused
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
359
vegetation to wither and die; and a third
source was a dehydration of vegetation
from within caused by unknown gas re-
spired by the leaves. As a result of these
discoveries the APCD entered into a re-
search contract with our old friends at
the California Institute of Technology.
In this same year, Dr. McCabe, who had
returned to the Department of the In-
terior, set up a U.S. Technical Confer-
ence on Smog which was to have far-
reaching effects.
In September 1953, County Counsel
Kennedy issued an opinion that the
California State law on air pollution was
flexible enough to forbid the burning of
rubbish if it was found by the APCD that
such burning caused discomfort or
property damage to a substantial num-
ber of inhabitants and that the prohibi-
tion would reduce the amount of air pol-
lution.
The full importance of the opinion was
not realized until 4 years later when on
October 1,1957, some 1,500,000 domestic
incinerators were banned from further
use.
In some instances equipment installa-
tions to eliminate pollutants cost as much
as $1 million for an installation. It
should be stated here that while indus-
try as a whole was reluctant to accept
the permit system of control, when it
was demonstrated that enforcement was
to be fair but strict, that industrial lead-
ers throughout the area gave their ut-
most cooperation. The enforcement
task would have been impossible without
this cooperation.
When it is remembered that nearly
30 percent of the entire population of this
Nation live in cities of more than 50,000
[p. 23965]
population and that there are 323 cities
in this Nation in that class, the problem
can be seen in true perspective as of
national importance and responsibility.
Great strides have been made in re-
search in the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare. However, the
Federal part of the program is not what
it should be in light of the scope of the
problem. It should be remembered that
the city and county of Los Angeles alone
has spent more than $34 million on this
problem. It should be remembered that
this much more has been spent by pri-
vate industry to meet the rigid require-
ments of this control district.
With these figures in mind, the need
for new energy at the Federal level, and
for coordination and cooperation be-
tween Federal, State, and community
government is brought into proper focus.
Under these circumstances a brief look
at the 11-year history of the air pollu-
tion program in the Los Angeles area
is in order. Since I lived with this prob-
lem, first in the State assembly and later
in the City Council of Los Angeles, I
think its recital here important.
Although some 60 persons died in the
Meuse Valley in Belgium in 1930 as vic-
tims of a mysterious "fog," polluted air
did not become a real problem until
about 1940. At that time, the city of
Los Angeles began a study of the prob-
lem and immediately ran into the fact
that smog knew no political boundaries
and that city control or attempts at city
control were futile.
The problem was passed over to the
Board of Supervisors of Los Angeles
County in 1942 and 3 years later after
considerable study, the first countywide
ordinance was passed in 1945.
A Citizens Committee of Smog Control
was formed of public-spirited citizens
and this committee immediately recog-
nized that the problem was bigger than
countrywide. They sponsored and se-
cured passage of assembly bill No. 1
through the California Legislature in
1947, and under its terms the first air
pollution control district was established
in Los Angeles County. A comprehensive
study program was launched in coopera-
tion with the California Institute of
Technology. We were fortunate to have
a number of internationally known ex-
perts in the field of air pollution in our
area. One who has done a great deal at
all levels of control was Dr. A. G.
526-701 O - 73 - 25
-------
360
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Haagen-Smith. Another man who made
a great contribution in the field about
this time was Dr. Louis McCabe of the
Bureau of Mines in the Department of
the Interior. He became the first Los
Angeles director in 1947.
It has been estimated that great quan-
tities of pollutants, 1,000 tons a day, were
caused by the 2 million motor vehicles
in Los Angeles County, but there was no
device available on the market which
could control or eliminate the pollutants
caused by gasoline combustion. In fact,
there was no general agreement as to
what type of control should be devel-
oped and while there were many "cure-
alls," none had been proved to be com-
pletely effective. The opinion of the
county counsel pointed up this need for a
device and stated that control of motor
vehicles could be exercised only when
"such a device is perfected, shown to be
effective, available on the market, and
the requirement of its use is found to be
reasonable." Industrial location is
greatly influenced by air pollution. Air
pollution today is the bogey man of city
planners and legislators at all political
levels.
New interest was generated in the
problem when 20 people died and some
estimated 6,000 become ill as the result
of a deadly "fog" in Donora, Pa. Med-
ical science is beginning to discover new
dangers from the invisible enemy. Res-
piratory diseases are definitely affected
by smog. How much, authorities are
reluctant to state at this time.
While 49 States are still without com-
prehensive smog or air pollution laws,
while our problem in Los Angeles is
partly solved—we have come as far as we
can at this time. We cannot wait for
the rest of the Nation to catch up—we
cannot wait—we must continue our fight
with renewed vigor—to slow up now will
be to betray those people who helped
us so valiantly in the early fight.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I repeat,
I am convinced that this is a very good
bill. I think the approach to it is to be
commended. I believe the conference
report should be overwhelmingly ap-
proved.
Mr. Speaker, I move the previous
question on the conference report.
*****
The question waz taken, and there
were—yeas 273, nays 109, not voting
53 * * *.
[p. 23966]
THE CLEAN AIR ACT-
CONFERENCE REPORT
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I sub-
mit a report of the committee of confer-
ence on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendment of the Senate
[p. 21083]
to the bill (H.R. 6518) to improve,
strengthen, and accelerate programs for
the prevention and abatement of air pol-
lution. I ask unanimous consent for the
present consideration of the report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The re-
port will be read for the information of
the Senate.
The legislative clerk read the report.
(For conference report, see House pro-
ceedings of today.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the present consideration of
the report?
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the report.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I urge
the adoption of the conference report,
and I wish to discuss it briefly. The re-
port is signed by all of the conferees on
the part of the House and the Senate,
and the report has been accepted by the
House of Representatives.
The House bill amended the entire act
of July 14, 1955, the existing statute on
air pollution. The Senate amendment
struck out all after the enactment clause
of the House bill and inserted a com-
plete revision of such act of July 14,
1955.
The proposed conference substitute is
also a complete revision of the act of
July 14, 1955, and reflects the agreement
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
361
which was reached between the con-
ferees.
The Senate conferees pressed strongly
for the provisions of subsection (d) of
section 3, which would provide that all
scientific or technological research or de-
velopment activity contracted for, spon-
sored, cosponsored, or authorized under
authority of the act which involves the
expenditure of Government funds shall
be provided for in such manner that all
information, uses, processes, patents, and
other developments resulting from such
activity, with certain exceptions, be
available to the general public.
The House conferees insisted that it be
deleted because of pending general leg-
islation dealing with this particular
subject, and the undesirability of dealing
with such matters on a partial basis.
The Senate conferees argued strongly
for its retention, but finally reluctantly
accepted the deletion.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE BILL AS
PASSED BY THE SENATE AND THE
PROPOSED CONFERENCE SUBSTITUTE
1. INVESTIGATIONS, RESEARCH AND
SURVEYS
The House in accepting subsection (c)
(1) of section 3, which relates to the
authority for the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare to conduct re-
search, compile and publish criteria re-
flecting the latest scientific knowledge
useful in indicating the kind and extent
of such effects which may be expected
from the presence of pollution agent or
agents in the air, suggested that the
language in the House-passed bill which
would authorize the Secretary to make
recommendations to appropriate agen-
cies, with respect to air quality criteria
be restored.
The Senate agreed to include the origi-
nal House language, in addition to the
Senate amendment, so that the Secre-
tary could not only be called upon to
conduct research and compile and pub-
lish criteria, but he would also be author-
ized to recommend such criteria of air
quality as in his judgment may be neces-
sary to protect the public health and
welfare. The Senate conferees agreed
to the deletion of the word "only" in sub-
section (c)(l) where it was provided
that "any such criteria shall be published
for informational purposes only." This
was done in order that information de-
veloped by departmental sponsored re-
search could be used by the Secretary
in making recommendations under sec-
tion 3(c)(l) as agreed to by the con-
ferees.
2. GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POL-
LUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
The House accepted the Senate ver-
sion of section 4 relating to grants for
air pollution programs substantially in
the form as passed by the Senate, except
for clarifying amendments designed to
insure, first, that not more than 20 per-
cent of the annual appropriations made
to carry out the act shall be available
for grants; and second, that no agency
whose expenditures of non-Federal
funds for air pollution programs during
a fiscal year are less than its expendi-
tures for such programs during the
preceding year shall be eligible to re-
ceive any grant during that fiscal year.
3. CONFERENCE ON ABATEMENT
OF AIR POLLUTION
The Senate-passed version provides
that the Secretary may, after consulta-
tion with State officials, also call a con-
ference whenever, on the basis of reports,
surveys, and studies, he has reason to
believe that air pollution is occurring in
any State or States which endangers the
health or welfare of any persons. The
conferees agreed that the language
should be clarified to provide that State
officials of all affected States shall be
consulted by the Secretary before he
calls a conference.
4. MEMBERSHIP OF HEARING BOARD
The conferees accepted the Senate
provisions with respect to Federal mem-
-------
362
LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
bership on the Hearing Board. They
adopted a technical amendment to make
it clear that each Federal department,
agency or instrumentality which has a
substantial interest in the subject mat-
ter as determined by the Secretary shall
be given an opportunity to select one
member of the Hearing Board.
The Senate amendment provided that
members of the Hearing Board who are
not regular, full-time officers or employ-
ees of the United States, be entitled to
receive compensation at not to exceed
$100 per diem. The Senate receded and
accepted the House language which pro-
vided $50 per diem.
5. ABATEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION
The proposed conference substitute is
the same as the Senate amendment, ex-
cept for certain technical amendments
to clarify congressional intent that the
request of the Governor of the State
must be obtained before the Secretary
can request the Attorney General to
bring suit to secure abatement of intra-
state pollution, and a technical amend-
ment to show that subsection (g) relat-
ing to evidence in court in a suit is re-
stricted to those suits brought in the U.S.
courts.
6. AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE EXHAUST
AND FUEL POLLUTION
The House accepted the provisions of
this section (section 6). The conferees
included certain modifying language so
that the Secretary would be required to
maintain and have liaison with and have
representatives on the technical com-
mittee from exhaust control device
manufacturers in addition to automo-
tive and fuel manufacturers. The Sen-
ate amendment had not included this
segment of the industry concerned with
the automotive exhaust problem.
7. APPROPRIATIONS
First. The Senate receded on section
13 (a) in order to permit a $5 million
grant program to be initiated during fis-
cal year 1964 if appropriations are made
for such purpose.
Second. Section 13 (b) of the Senate
bill provided for authorizations for ap-
propriations as follows: Fiscal year 1965,
$25 million; fiscal year 1966, $30 mil-
lion; fiscal year 1967, $35 million; fiscal
year 1968, $42 million; fiscal year 1969,
$50 million.
The conferees agreed to the appropri-
ations as contained in the Senate bill
for fiscal years 1965-67, and the Sen-
ate receded from its amendment which
provided authorizations for fiscal years
1968 and 1969 with the understanding
that the legislative committees in both
Houses of Congress will reexamine the
program to determine progress being
made and the need for authorizations in
those and subsequent years. The con-
ferees recognized that air pollution con-
stitutes one of our national problems and
that as our population grows and as
urbanization expands, increased fiscal
support of air pollution programs may be
required.
AREAS OF COMPLETE AGREEMENT
WITH SENATE AMENDMENTS
A. INVESTIGATIONS, RESEARCH, AND
SURVEYS
First. The Senate amendment author-
ized investigation, research, and surveys
to be made in cooperation with air pol-
lution control agencies. The conference
adopted the Senate language.
Second. Subsection (a)(4) of section
3 of the House bill would have required
the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare, as a part of a national research
and development program for the control
and prevention of air pollution, to con-
duct specific studies with respect to mo-
tor vehicle exhaust fumes. The Senate
deleted this provision and substituted
section 6 which dealt with the problem
more specifically. The House accepted
this approach.
Third. The House accepted the Sen-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
363
ate provisions with respect to the initi-
ation and conduct of a program of
research directed toward the develop-
ment of improved low cost techniques to
extract sulfur from fuel.
Fourth. The Senate amendment pro-
vided broader authority for the Secretary
to make grants than the House version.
The conferees accepted the Senate ver-
sion.
[p. 24084]
B. REQUIREMENTS OF REPORTS
The House conferees accepted the Sen-
ate amendment to this subsection.
C. COOPERATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES
TO CONTROL AIR POLLUTION FROM FED-
ERAL INSTALLATIONS
The House conferees accepted the Sen-
ate amendment which provides that the
Secretary may establish classes of poten-
tial pollution sources for which Federal
departments or agencies shall, before
discharging any matter into the air of
the United States, obtain a permit prior
to such discharging. These permits
would be subject to revocation if the
Secretary finds the pollution is endan-
gering the health and welfare of any per-
sons.
D. ADMINISTRATION
The Senate amendment deleted the
word "procedural" immediately preced-
ing the word "requirements." This was
accepted by the House conferees.
E. DEFINITIONS
Certain amendments were made in the
Senate amendment and were accepted
by the House conferees.
F. RECORDS AND AUDIT
The House conferees accepted this sec-
tion in its entirety.
Mr. President, I wish to take this op-
portunity to congratulate the House and
Senate conferees who worked with me on
H.R. 6518. We were able to transact our
business expeditiously and in a spirit of
cooperation. My special thanks go to
Representative ROBERTS, chairman of
the House conferees and to my col-
leagues Mr. RANDOLPH, Mr. METCALF,
Mr. BOGGS, and Mr. PEARSON.
I believe the product of our endeavors
represents a constructive contribution to
the solution of air pollution control
problems. This was a case where com-
promise moved us forward. The bill, as
now written, is an improvement over
both the House and Senate versions.
Mr. President, the report is signed by
every member of the conference on the
part of the Senate and of the House.
The conference report was accepted in
the House of Representatives today.
I move the adoption of the report.
The report was agreed to.
[p. 24085]
-------
364 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
l.lf MOTOR VEHICLE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ACT,
AND SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ACT
October 20, 1965, P.L. 89-272, 79 Stat. 992
AN ACT
To amend the Clean Air Act to require standards for controlling the emission of
pollutants from certain motor vehicles, to authorize a research and development
program with respect to solid-waste disposal, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled,
TITLE I—AMENDMENTS TO CLEAN AIR ACT
SEC. 101. The Clean Air Act is amended (1) by inserting immediately
above the heading of section 1: "TITLE I—AIR POLLUTION
PREVENTION AND CONTROL"; (2) by changing the words
"this Act" wherever they appear in sections 1 through 7 to "this
title"; (3) by redesignating sections 1 through 7 and references thereto
as sections 101 through 107; (4) by redesignating sections 8 through
14 and references thereto as sections 301 through 307; (5) by inserting
immediately above the heading of the so redesignated section 301:
"TITLE III—GENERAL"; (6) by striking out subsection (a) of
the so redesignated section 306 and striking out the letter (b) at the
beginning of subsection (b) in the so redesignated section 306; (7)
by striking out "this Act" in the so redesignated section 306 and
inserting in lieu thereof "title I"; and (8) by inserting after the so
redesignated section 107 and before the heading of such title III the
following new title:
"TITLE II—CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOTOR
VEHICLES
"SHORT TITLE
"SEC. 201. This title may be cited as the 'Motor Vehicle Air Pollu-
tion Control Act'.
"ESTABLISHMENT OF STANDARDS
"SEC. 202. (a) The Secretary shall by regulation, giving appro-
priate consideration to technological feasibility and economic costs,
prescribe as soon as practicable standards, applicable to the emission
of any kind of substance, from any class or classes of new motor
vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause or
contribute to, or are likely to cause or to contribute to, air pollution
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 365
which endangers the health or welfare of any persons, and such stand-
ards shall apply to such vehicles or engines whether they are designed
[p. 992]
as complete systems or incorporate other devices to prevent or control
such pollution.
"(b) Any regulations initially prescribed under this section, and
amendments thereto, with respect to any class of new motor vehicles
or new motor vehicle engines shall become effective on the effective
date specified in the order promulgating such regulations which date
shall be determined by the Secretary after consideration of the period
reasonably necessary for industry compliance.
"PROHIBITED ACTS
"SEC. 203. (a) The following acts and the causing thereof are
prohibited—
"(1) in the case of a manufacturer of new motor vehicles or
new motor vehicle engines for distribution in commerce, the
manufacture for sale, the sale, or the offering for sale, or the
introduction or delivery for introduction into commerce, or the
importation into the United States for sale or resale, of any new
motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, manufactured after
the effective date of regulations under this title which are appli-
cable to such vehicle or engine unless it is in conformity with
regulations prescribed under section 202 (except as provided in
subsection (b));
"(2) for any person to fail or refuse to permit access to or
copying of records or to fail to make reports or provide informa-
tion, required under section 207; or
"(3) for any person to remove or render inoperative any device
or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor
vehicle engine in compliance with regulations under this title
prior to its sale and delivery to the ultimate purchaser.
"(b) (1) The Secretary may exempt any new motor vehicle or new
motor vehicle engine, or class thereof, from subsection (a), upon such
terms and conditions as he may find necessary to protect the public
health or welfare, for the purpose of research, investigations, studies,
demonstrations, or training, or for reasons of national security.
"(2) A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine offered for
importation by a manufacturer in violation of subsection (a) shall
be refused admission into the United States, but the Secretary of
the Treasury and the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
may, by joint regulation, provide for deferring final determination
-------
366 LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
as to admission and authorizing the delivery of such a motor vehicle
or engine offered for import to the owner or consignee thereof upon
such terms and conditions (including the furnishing of a bond) as
may appear to them appropriate to insure that any such motor vehicle
or engine will be brought into conformity with the standards, require-
ments, and limitations applicable to it under this title. The Secretary
of the Treasury shall, if a motor vehicle or engine is finally refused
admission under this paragraph, cause disposition thereof in accord-
ance with the customs laws unless it is exported, under regulations
prescribed by such Secretary, within ninety days of the date of notice
of such refusal or such additional time as may be permitted pursuant
to such regulations, except that disposition in accordance with the
customs laws may not be made in such manner as may result, directly
or indirectly, in the sale, to the ultimate consumer, of a new motor
vehicle or new motor vehicle engine that fails to comply with ap-
plicable standards of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
under this title.
"(3) A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine intended
solely for export, and so labeled or tagged on the outside of the con-
tainer and on the vehicle or engine itself, shall not be subject to the
provisions of subsection (a).
[p. 993]
"INJUNCTION PROCEEDINGS
"SEC. 204. (a) The district courts of the United States shall have
jurisdiction to restrain violations of paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of
section 203(a).
"(b) Actions to restrain such violations shall be brought by and in
the name of the United States. In any such action, subpenas for
witnesses who are required to attend a district court in any district
may run into any other district.
"PENALTIES
"SEC. 205. Any person who violates paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of
section 203 (a) shall be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000. Such
violation with respect to section 203 (a) (1) and 203 (a) (3) shall con-
stitute a separate offense with respect to each new motor vehicle or
new motor vehicle engine.
"CERTIFICATION
"SEC. 206. (a) Upon application of the manufacturer, the Secretary
shall test, or require to be tested, in such manner as he deems appro-
priate, any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine submitted
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 367
by such manufacturer to determine whether such vehicle or engine
conforms with the regulations prescribed under section 202 of this
title. If such vehicle or engine conforms to such regulations the Secre-
tary shall issue a certificate of conformity; upon such terms, and for
such period not less than one year, as he may prescribe.
"(b) Any new motor vehicle or any motor vehicle engine sold by
such manufacturer which is in all material respects substantially the
same construction as the test vehicle or engine for which a certificate
has been issued under subsection (a), shall for the purposes of this
Act be deemed to be in conformity with the regulations issued under
section 202 of this title.
"RECORDS AND REPORTS
"SEC. 207. (a) Every manufacturer shall establish and maintain
such records, make such reports, and provide such information, as the
Secretary may reasonably require to enable him to determine whether
such manufacturer has acted or is acting in compliance with this
title and regulations thereunder and shall, upon request of an officer
or employee duly designated by the Secretary, permit such officer or
employee at reasonable times, to have access to and copy such records.
"(b) All information reported or otherwise obtained by the Secre-
tary or his representative pursuant to subsection (a), which informa-
tion contains or relates to a trade secret or other matter referred to in
section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code, shall be considered
confidential for the purpose of such section 1905, except that such
information may be disclosed to other officers or employees concerned
with carrying out this Act or when relevant in any proceeding under
this Act. Nothing in this section shall authorize the withholding of
information by the Secretary or any officer or employee under his
control, from the duly authorized committees of the Congress.
"DEFINITIONS FOR TITLE n
"SEC. 208. As used in this title—
"(1) The term 'manufacturer' means any person engaged in the
manufacturing or assembling of new motor vehicles or new motor
vehicle engines, or importing such vehicles or engines for resale, or
who acts for and is under the control of any such person in connection
with the distribution of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle
[p. 994]
engines, but shall not include any dealer with respect to new motor
vehicles or new motor vehicle engines received by him in commerce.
-------
368 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"(2) The term 'motor vehicle' means any self-propelled vehicle
designed for transporting persons or property on a street or highway.
"(3) The term 'new motor vehicle' means a motor vehicle the equi-
table or legal title to which has never been transferred to an ultimate
purchaser; and the term 'new motor vehicle engine' means an engine
in a new motor vehicle or a motor vehicle engine the equitable or legal
title to which has never been transferred to the ultimate purchaser.
"(4) The term 'dealer' means any person who is engaged in the sale
or the distribution of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines
to the ultimate purchaser.
"(5) The term 'ultimate purchaser' means, with respect to any
new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, the first person who
in good faith purchases such new motor vehicle or new engine for
purposes other than resale.
"(6) The term 'commerce' means (A) commerce between any place
in any State and any place outside thereof; and (B) commerce wholly
within the District of Columbia.
"APPROPRIATIONS
"SEC. 209. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to carry
out this title II, not to exceed $470,000 for the fiscal year ending June
30, 1966, not to exceed $845,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1967, not to exceed $1,195,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1968,
and not to exceed $1,470,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969."
SEC. 102. (a) Paragraph (1) of subsection (c) of the redesignated
section 105 of the Clean Air Act (which relates to abatement of air
pollution) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new
subparagraph:
"(D) Whenever the Secretary, upon receipt of reports, surveys, or
studies from any duly constituted international agency, has reason
to believe that any pollution referred to in subsection (a) which
endangers the health or welfare of persons in a foreign country is
occurring, or whenever the Secretary of State requests him to do so
with respect to such pollution which the Secretary of State alleges
is of such a nature, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
shall give formal notification thereof to the air pollution control agency
of the municipality where such discharge or discharges originate, to
the air pollution control agency of the State in which such municipality
is located, and to the interstate air pollution control agency, if any, in
the jurisdictional area of which such municipality is located, and shall
call promptly a conference of such agency or agencies. The Secretary
shall invite the foreign country which may be adversely affected by
the pollution to attend and participate in the conference, and the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 369
representative of such country shall, for the purpose of the conference
and any further proceeding resulting from such conference, have all
the rights of a State air pollution control agency. This subparagraph
shall apply only to a foreign country which the Secretary determines
has given the United States essentially the same rights with respect
to the prevention or control of air pollution occurring in that country
as is given that country by this subparagraph."
(b) So much of section (f) of such redesignated section 105 as
precedes clause (2) of such subsection is amended to read as follows:
"(f) If action reasonably calculated to secure abatement of the
pollution within the time specified in the notice following the public
hearing is not taken, the Secretary—
"(1) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons (A) in a State other than that in
which the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to
[p. 995]
such pollution) originate, or (B) in a foreign country which has
participated in a conference called under subparagraph (D) of
subsection (c) of this section and in all proceedings under this
section resulting from such conference, may request the Attorney
General to bring a suit on behalf of the United States to secure
abatement of the pollution, and".
SEC. 103. Redesignated section 103 of the Clean Air Act (which
relates to research, investigations, and training) is amended—
(1) by striking out the word "and" at the end of paragraphs
(1), (2), and (3) of subsection (a) thereof;
(2) by striking out the period at the end of paragraph (4) of
subsection (a) thereof and inserting in lieu thereof "; and";
(3) by adding after paragraph (4) of subsection (a) thereof the
following new paragraph (5):
"(5) conduct and accelerate research programs (A) relating
to the means of controlling hydrocarbon emissions resulting from
the evaporation of gasoline in carburetors and fuel tanks, and
the means of controlling emissions of oxides of nitrogen and
aldehydes from gasoline-powered or diesel-powered vehicles, and
to carry out such research the Secretary shall consult with the
technical committee established under section 106 of this Act,
and for research concerning diesel-powered vehicles he may add
to such committee such representatives from the diesel-powered
vehicle industry as he deems appropriate; and (B) directed
toward the development of improved low-cost techniques designed
to reduce emissions of oxides of sulfur produced by the combustion
of sulfur-containing fuels."; and
-------
370 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
(4) by adding at the end of such section the following new
subsections:
"(d) The Secretary is authorized to construct such facilities and
staff and equip them as he determines to be necessary to carry out his
functions under this Act.
"(e) If, in the judgment of the Secretary, an air pollution problem
of substantial significance may result from discharge or discharges
into the atmosphere, he may call a conference concerning this potential
air pollution problem to be held in or near one or more of the places
where such discharge or discharges are occurring or will occur. All
interested persons shall be given an opportunity to be heard at such
conference, either orally or in writing, and shall be permitted to
appear in person or by representative in accordance with procedures
prescribed by the Secretary. If the Secretary finds, on the basis of
the evidence presented at such conference, that the discharge or dis-
charges if permitted to take place or continue are likely to cause or
contribute to air pollution subject to abatement under section 105(a),
he shall send such findings, together with recommendations concern-
ing the measures which he finds reasonable and suitable to prevent
such pollution, to the person or persons whose actions will result in the
discharge or discharges involved; to air pollution agencies of the State
or States and of the municipality or municipalities where such dis-
charge or discharges will originate; and to the interstate air pollution
control agency, if any, in the jurisdictional area of which any such
municipality is located. Such findings and recommendations shall be
advisory only, but shall be admitted, together with the record of the
conference, as part of the record of proceedings under subsections (c),
(d), and (e) of section 105."
[p. 996]
TITLE II—SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
SHORT TITLE
SEC. 201. This title (hereinafter referred to as "this Act") may be
cited as the "Solid Waste Disposal Act".
FINDINGS AND PURPOSES
SEC. 202. (a) The Congress finds—
(1) that the continuing technological progress and improvement
in methods of manufacture, packaging, and marketing of con-
sumer products has resulted in an ever-mounting increase, and
in a change in the characteristics, of the mass of material dis-
carded by the purchaser of such products;
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 371
(2) that the economic and population growth of our Nation,
and the improvements in the standard of living enjoyed by our
population, have required increased industrial production to meet
our needs, and have made necessary the demolition of old build-
ings, the construction of new buildings, and the provision of high-
ways and other avenues of transportation, which, together with
related industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations, have
resulted in a rising tide of scrap, discarded, and waste materials;
(3) that the continuing concentration of our population in ex-
panding metropolitan and other urban areas has presented these
communities with serious financial, management, intergovern-
mental, and technical problems in the disposal of solid wastes re-
sulting from the industrial, commercial, domestic, and other ac-
tivities carried on in such areas;
(4) that inefficient and improper methods of disposal of solid
wastes result in scenic blights, create serious hazards to the public
health, including pollution of air and water resources, accident
hazards, and increase in rodent and insect vectors of disease, have
an adverse effect on land values, create public nuisances, other-
wise interfere with community life and development;
(5) that the failure or inability to salvage and reuse such
materials economically results in the unnecessary waste and de-
pletion of our natural resources; and
(6) that while the collection and disposal of solid wastes should
continue to be primarily the function of State, regional, and local
agencies, the problems of waste disposal as set forth above have
become a matter national in scope and in concern and necessitate
Federal action through financial and technical assistance and
leadership in the development, demonstration, and application of
new and improved methods and processes to reduce the amount of
waste and unsalvageable materials and to provide for proper and
economical solid-waste disposal practices.
(b) The purposes of this Act therefore are—
(1) to initiate and accelerate a national research and develop-
ment program for new and improved methods of proper and
economic solid-waste disposal, including studies directed toward
the conservation of natural resources by reducing the amount of
waste and unsalvageable materials and by recovery and utilization
of potential resources in solid wastes; and
(2) to provide technical and financial assistance to State and
local governments and interstate agencies in the planning, devel-
opment, and conduct of solid-waste disposal programs.
[p. 997]
-------
372 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
DEFINITIONS
SEC. 203. 'When used in this Act—
(1) The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare; except that such term means the Secretary of the
Interior with respect to problems of solid waste resulting from the
extraction, processing, or utilization of minerals or fossil fuels where
the generation, production, or reuse of such waste is or may be con-
trolled within the extraction, processing, or utilization facility or
facilities and where such control is a feature of the technology or
economy of the operation of such facility or facilities.
(2) The term "State" means a State, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and
American Samoa.
(3) The term "interstate agency" means an agency of two or more
municipalities in different States, or an agency established by two or
more States, with authority to provide for the disposal of solid wastes
and serving two or more municipalities located in different States.
(4) The term "solid waste" means garbage, refuse, and other dis-
carded solid materials, including solid-waste materials resulting from
industrial, commercial, and agricultural operations, and from commu-
nity activities, but does not include solids or dissolved material in
domestic sewage or other significant pollutants in water resources,
such as silt, dissolved or suspended solids in industrial waste water
effluents, dissolved materials in irrigation return flows or other com-
mon water pollutants.
(5) The term "solid-waste disposal" means the collection, storage,
treatment, utilization, processing, or final disposal of solid waste.
(6) The term "construction", with respect to any project of con-
struction under this Act, means (A) the erection or building of new
structures and acquisition of lands or interests therein, or the acquisi-
tion, replacement, expansion, remodeling, alteration, modernization,
or extension of existing structures, and (B) the acquisition and installa-
tion of initial equipment of, or required in connection with, new or
newly acquired structures or the expanded, remodeled, altered, mod-
ernized or extended part of existing structures (including trucks and
other motor vehicles, and tractors, cranes, and other machinery)
necessary for the proper utilization and operation of the facility after
completion of the project; and includes preliminary planning to deter-
mine the economic and engineering feasibility and the public health
and safety aspects of the project, the engineering, architectural, legal,
fiscal, and economic investigations and studies, and any surveys,
designs, plans, working drawings, specifications, and other action
necessary for the carrying out of the project, and (C) the inspection
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 373
and supervision of the process of carrying out the project to
completion.
RESEARCH, DEMONSTRATIONS, TRAINING, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
SEC. 204. (a) The Secretary shall conduct, and encourage, cooperate
with, and render financial and other assistance to appropriate public
(whether Federal, State, interstate, or local) authorities, agencies,
and institutions, private agencies and institutions, and individuals in
the conduct of, and promote the coordination of, research, investiga-
tions, experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies
relating to the operation and financing of solid-waste disposal pro-
grams, the development and application of new and improved methods
of solid-waste disposal (including devices and facilities therefor),
[p. 998]
and the reduction of the amount of such waste and unsalvageable
waste materials.
(b) In carrying out the provisions of the preceding subsection, the
Secretary is authorized to—
(1) collect and make available, through publications and other
appropriate means, the results of, and other information per-
taining to, such research and other activities, including appro-
priate recommendations in connection therewith;
(2) cooperate with public and private agencies, institutions,
and organizations, and with any industries involved, in the prep-
aration and the conduct of such research and other activities;
and
(3) make grants-in-aid to public or private agencies and institu-
tions and to individuals for research, training projects, surveys,
and demonstrations (including construction of facilities), and
provide for the conduct of research, training, surveys, and
demonstrations by contract with public or private agencies and
institutions and with individuals; and such contracts for re-
search or demonstrations or both (including contracts for con-
struction) may be made in accordance with and subject to the
limitations provided with respect to research contracts of the
military departments in title 10, United States Code, section
2353, except that the determination, approval, and certification
required thereby shall be made by the Secretary.
(c) Any grant, agreement, or contract made or entered into under
this section shall contain provisions effective to insure that all informa-
tion, uses, processes, patents and other developments resulting from
any activity undertaken pursuant to such grant, agreement, or con-
-------
374 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
tract will be made readily available on fair and equitable terms to
industries utilizing methods of solid-waste disposal and industries
engaging in furnishing devices, facilities, equipment, and supplies to be
used in connection with solid-waste disposal. In carrying out the pro-
visions of this section, the Secretary and each department, agency, and
officer of the Federal Government having functions or duties under
this Act shall make use of and adhere to the Statement of Government
Patent Policy which was promulgated by the President in his memo-
randum of October 10, 1963. (3 CFR, 1963 Supp., p. 238.)
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the United
States shall not make any grant to pay more than two-thirds of the
cost of construction of any facility under this Act.
INTERSTATE AND INTERLOCAL COOPERATION
SEC. 205. The Secretary shall encourage cooperative activities by
the States and local governments in connection with solid-waste dis-
posal programs; encourage, where practicable, interstate, interlocal,
and regional planning for, and the conduct of, interstate, interlocal,
and regional solid-waste disposal programs; and encourage the enact-
ment of improved and, so far as practicable, uniform State and local
laws governing solid-waste disposal.
GRANTS FOR STATE AND INTERSTATE PLANNING
SEC. 206. (a) The Secretary may from time to time, upon such terms
and conditions consistent with this section as he finds appropriate to
carry out the purposes of this Act, make grants to State and interstate
agencies of not to exceed 50 per centum of the cost of making surveys
of solid-waste disposal practices and problems within the jurisdictional
[p. 999]
areas of such States or agencies, and of developing solid-waste dis-
posal plans for such areas.
(b) In order to be eligible for a grant under this section the State,
or the interstate agency, must submit an application therefor which—
(1) designates or establishes a single State agency (which
may be an interdepartmental agency) or, in the case of an inter-
state agency, such interstate agency, as the sole agency for carry-
ing out the purposes of this section;
(2) indicates the manner in which provision will be made to
assure full consideration of all aspects of planning essential to
statewide planning (or in the case of an interstate agency jurisdic-
tionwide planning) for proper and effective solid-waste disposal
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 375
consistent with the protection of the public health, including
such factors as population growth, urban and metropolitan de-
velopment, land use planning, water pollution control, air pollu-
tion control, and the feasibility of regional disposal programs;
(3) sets forth its plans for expenditure of such grant, which
plans provide reasonable assurance of carrying out the purposes
of this section;
(4) provides for submission of a final report of the activities
of the State or interstate agency in carrying out the purposes of
this section, and for the submission of such other reports, in
such form and containing such information, as the Secretary may
from time to time find necessary for carrying out the purposes of
this section and for keeping such records and affording such
access thereto as he may find necessary to assure the correctness
and verification of such reports; and
(5) provides for such fiscal-control and fund-accounting pro-
cedures as may be necessary to assure proper disbursement of
and accounting for funds paid to the State or interstate agency
under this section.
(c) The Secretary shall make a grant under this section only if
he finds that there is satisfactory assurance that the planning of
solid-waste disposal will be coordinated, so far as practicable, with
other related State, interstate, regional, and local planning activities,
including those financed in part with funds pursuant to section 701
of the Housing Act of 1954.
LABOR STANDARDS
SEC. 207. No grant for a project of construction under this Act
shall be made unless the Secretary finds that the application contains
or is supported by reasonable assurance that all laborers and me-
chanics employed by contractors or subcontractors on projects of the
type covered by the Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a—
276a-5), will be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on
similar work in the locality as determined by the Secretary of Labor
in accordance with that Act; and the Secretary of Labor shall have
with respect to the labor standards specified in this section the au-
thority and functions set forth in Reorganization Plan Numbered
14 of 1950 (15 F.R. 3176; 5 U.S.C. 1332-15) and section 2 of the
Act of June 13,1934, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276c).
OTHER AUTHORITY NOT AFFECTED
SEC. 208. This Act shall not be construed as superseding or limiting
the authorities and responsibilities, under any other provisions of law,
526-701 O - 73 - 26
-------
376 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, the
[p. 1000]
Secretary of the Interior, or any other Federal officer, department, or
agency.
PAYMENTS
SEC. 209. Payments of grants under this Act may be made (after
necessary adjustment on account of previously made underpayments
or overpayments) in advance or by way of reimbursement, and in such
installments and on such conditions as the Secretary may determine.
APPROPRIATIONS
SEC. 210. (a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, to carry out this Act,
not to exceed $7,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1966, not to
exceed $14,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967, not to
exceed $19,200,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968, and not to
exceed $20,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969.
(b) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary
of the Interior, to carry out this Act, not to exceed $3,000,000 for the
fiscal year ending June 30,1966, not to exceed $6,000,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1967, not to exceed $10,800,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1968, and not to exceed $12,500,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1969.
Approved October 20, 1965, 9:10 a.m.
[p. 1001]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 377
l.lf(l) SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
S. REP. No. 192, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965)
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS AND SOLID WASTE
DISPOSAL ACT
MAY 14, 1965.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. MUSKIE, from the Committee on Public Works, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 306]
The Committee on Public Works, to whom was referred the bill
(S. 306) to amend the Clean Air Act to require standards for control-
ling the emission of pollutants from gasoline-powered or diesel-powered
vehicles, to establish a Federal Air Pollution Control Laboratory, and
for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably
thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill do pass. The
amendments are indicated in the bill as reported and are shown in
linetype and italic.
PURPOSE
The purpose of title I of S. 306 is to—
(1) Provide for recommended motor vehicle exhaust emission
standards by the Automotive Vehicle and Fuel Pollution Techni-
cal Committee and, by regulations, for the establishment of
standards, requirements, or limitations on emissions from new
motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines and devices or motor
vehicle design not later than September 1, 1967. Such regulations
may be amended and become effective on date to be specified.
"Motor vehicle" is defined as any gasoline-powered, self-propelled
vehicle designed for transporting persons or property on a street or
highway. "New motor vehicle" is defined as a motor vehicle, the
equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred by a
manufacturer, distributor, or dealer to an ultimate purchaser.
(2) Provide for the prohibition of distribution in commerce
the manufacture for sale, the sale, or the offering for sale, intro-
duction, or delivery for introduction into commerce, or the im-
-------
378 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
portation into the United States for sale or resale, of any new
motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine manufactured after
the effective date of regulation unless it is in conformity with such
[P.I]
regulations. It is also required that such vehicles or engines
offered for importation must meet prescribed regulations. A
procedure is prescribed for inspection of plant and facilities and
for records and reports to be maintained by manufacturers.
Certain new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines may
be exempt from prohibitions.
(3) Provide for the development of standards for allowable
emissions from diesel-powered vehicles, and for recommendations
to be made to Congress by January 31, 1967, for possible legisla-
tion to regulate discharge of pollutants.
(4) Provide for enforcement procedures for the abatement of
air pollution adversely affecting a foreign country.
(5) Authorize the conduct and acceleration of research pro-
grams relating to means of controlling hydrocarbon emissions
resulting from the evaporation of gasoline in carburetors and
fuel tanks, and the means of controlling emissions of oxides of
nitrogen and aldehydes from gasoline-powered or diesel-powered
vehicles and low cost means of reducing sulfur oxide emissions
from the burning of fossil fuels. Add representatives of diesel-
powered industry to Automotive Vehicle and Fuel Pollution
Committee of the Clean Air Act.
(6) Authorize the construction of a Federal Air Pollution Con-
trol Laboratory.
The purpose of title II of S. 306 is to—
(1) Authorize the initiation and acceleration of a national
research and development program for new and improved meth-
ods of proper and economic solid waste disposal, reducing the
amount of waste and unsalvageable material and recovering and
utilizing potential sources of solid waste, and provide technical
and financial assistance to State and local governments and inter-
state agencies in planning, developing, construction, and conduct
of solid waste disposal programs.
(2) Provide that not to exceed 25 percent of funds appropriated
for this purpose may be made for grants-in-aid, or to contract
with, public or private agencies and institutions and to individuals
for research and training.
(3) Authorize grants to State, municipality, or intermunicipal
or interstate agency for the purpose of assisting in the develop-
ment of any project which will demonstrate a new or improved
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 379
method of disposing of solid waste. Up to two-thirds of the cost
of any project approved may be paid from funds appropriated.
No more than 12J/£ percent of appropriations authorized and
amended for projects may be made in any one State. Grantee
must have appropriate ordinances or regulations prohibiting
open burning of solid wastes and provide for enforcement action
to insure that beneficial results will occur. Also, assurances must
be given that proper and efficient operation and maintenance of
facility for which funds have been provided. All of the informa-
tion, copyrights, uses, processes, patents, and other developments
resulting from activity financed with Federal funds will be made
available to the general public.
(4) Encourage cooperative activities by States and local govern-
ments in connection with solid waste disposal programs, encour-
age planning, and encourage the enactment of improved,
[p. 2]
and, so far as practicable, uniform State and local laws govern-
ing solid waste disposal.
(5) Authorize up to 10 percent of funds available for the solid
waste disposal program to be used in connection with the grants
for support of air pollution control programs of the Clean Air
Act. Grants would be made in an amount of up to two-thirds of
the cost of making surveys of solid waste disposal practices and
problems within the jurisdictional areas of appropriate agencies,
and development of solid waste disposal plans. Assurances must
be given that the planning of solid waste disposal will be co-
ordinated with other related State, interstate, regional, and local
planning activities, including those financed in part with funds
pursuant to section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954.
(6) Insure compliance with provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act
for a project constructed under this act.
(7) Authorize to be appropriated $20 million for fiscal year
ending June 30, 1966, and fiscal year ending June 30, 1967, for
the solid waste disposal program and section 104 (d) of the Clean
Air Act.
GENERAL STATEMENT
The Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, over a
period of 2 years, has held numerous hearings on the problem of air
pollution. A number of these hearings have been held throughout the
country where the committee has learned firsthand the effect of air
pollution in our Nation. Extensive hearings were held as well in
Washington, D.C.
-------
380 LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
During January, February, June, and July 1964, following the
enactment of the Clean Air Act, the subcommittee conducted field and
technical hearings to obtain factual data to be used as a basis for
determining whether additional legislative action was required. Sub-
sequently, a subcommittee report entitled "Steps Toward Clean Air"
documented the findings of hearings and recommended legislative
action.
On January 7, 1965, 21 Senators introduced S. 306, which was
designed to provide legislative implementation to the recommenda-
tions contained in the subcommittee report. On April 6, 8, and 9,1964,
hearings were held in Washington, B.C., on the measure and testi-
mony was received from witnesses representing industry, State and
local governments, health organizations, conservation groups, Federal
officials, and other interested parties. On April 7, 1965, hearings were
held in Detroit, Mich., to obtain testimony from representatives of the
automobile industry on the portion of the measure relating to auto-
motive air pollution. Also, an inspection was made of research facilities
of the industry where firsthand information was obtained on tech-
niques developed to control automotive air pollution and the capa-
bility of the industry to reduce this source of pollution.
The committee believes that this legislation is essential if we are
to successfully combat the air pollution problems present at this time
and those which inevitably will occur unless early corrective action is
taken. Automotive exhausts are not the only source of air pollution,
but they are a major problem and they are increasing rapidly.
The committee has determined from the automotive industry's own
testimony that it can meet the California standards of 275 parts per
million of hydrocarbons and not more than 1.5 percent by volume of
[P. 31
carbon monoxide and does intend to meet them. The committee
believes that these standards can be applied and are reasonable. By
applying them, the Nation will take a major step toward the control
and abatement of air pollution.
The committee believes that exact standards need not be written
legislatively but that the Secretary should adjust to changing
technology.
The committee believes that the indicated costs of automotive
emission control equipment are modest and commensurate with the
need to reduce this major source of air pollution. The Secretary can
take early action in establishing standards of emissions for blowby
because of progress already made by industry in installing them on
many vehicles.
The committee also believes that the manner of meeting the stand-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 381
ards, whether by engine modification or by attaching a device, should
be left to the manufacturer's determination.
The Automotive and Fuel Pollution Technical Committee should
move rapidly with their recommendations to the Secretary.
The effectiveness of this program will depend in large part on proper
maintenance of motor vehicle engines equipped or modified to reduce
harmful exhaust emissions. The major obstacle to inspection is the
lack of a simple exhaust emission testing system adaptable to large
scale inspections. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
should carry forward activities to help develop means of assisting
States in testing motor vehicle emissions.
The committee expects that the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare will reach an understanding with each domestic manu-
facturer on how inspections will be made to determine compliance.
Inspections should not be such as to disrupt normal manufacturing
processes in or any way disrupt assembly line operations.
It is also evident to the committee that further research is needed
to determine effects of automotive pollutants other than hydrocarbons
and carbon monoxide and to find means of controlling them and to
advance the research activities relating to reducing the emissions of
oxides of sulfur produced by the combustion of sulfur-containing fuels.
The committee is convinced that a Federal Air Pollution Control
Laboratory is needed to provide facilities to carry out research and
experimentations in perfecting methods and means of reducing air
pollution; however, it is not expected or desired that the laboratory
duplicate available Federal basic research facilities.
The committee believes that it is important that the Clean Air Act
be amended so that not only is there provided a basis for action to
abate pollution in our country but also to adopt a procedure whereby
we can cooperate with foreign countries in cases involving endanger-
ment of health or welfare. It is expected that the Department will
initiate actions involving Canada, upon advice from the International
Joint Commission, and the appropriate governmental agency in the
case of situations involving Mexico. The language of the bill provides
for enforcement proceedings to correct international pollution prob-
lems originating in the United States. The committee urges the
administration to seek agreements with Canada and Mexico to help
protect U.S. citizens from air pollution originating in those countries.
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare had suggested
language which would provide for a conference procedure, in addition
to that provided for in the Clean Air Act relative to abatement of
[p-4]
air pollution. This would call for findings and recommendations by
-------
382 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
the Secretary but would be only advisory in nature and would be
admitted as part of the record of proceedings under the abatement
proceedings of the Clean Air Act. The committee is of the opinion
that the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has not yet
had sufficient experience to determine the necessity and desirability
of setting advisory standards. Also, such activities might dissipate
their efforts when these efforts should be concentrated on abatement
action. The committee is disappointed that the Department has not
been more active in pursuing the abatement courses provided for in
the Clean Air Act.
The committee believes that it is important that the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare coordinate their research and develop-
ment program in the solution of the air pollution problem with the
efforts of other Federal agencies, State and local agencies and groups,
and private companies and individuals who have knowledge and
information concerning the problem and its possible solution. The
committee is convinced that the solution to the air pollution problem
will require the utilization of all available talents.
The committee has learned of the vast amount of solid waste which
has to be disposed of each day, the problem incident to coping with its
sheer volume, and the effect on the health and welfare of our people.
Consequently, the committee believes that a Federal program of
assistance is essential to stimulate action in this field.
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The Congress, in taking action in passing the Clean Air Act, gave
recognition to and provided means of attacking air pollution which
results from excessive concentrations of gases, liquids and solids intro-
duced into the atmosphere by human activities. These pollutants are
generated by simple devices such as heating of homes and backyard
incinerators to some of the more complex sources which have emerged
as a result of our modern technology and booming industrial progress.
It was obvious, when the Clean Air Act was enacted into law, that
more specific legislative requirements would be needed from time to
time in order to provide the necessary tools to insure corrective
measures.
In all of the hearings held since the adoption of the Clean Air Act
of 1963, automotive exhaust from some 84 million automobiles, trucks,
and buses was cited as responsible for about 50 percent of the national
air pollution problem. Photochemical air pollution, or smog, is a
problem of growing national importance and is attributable largely to
the operation of the motor vehicle. This type of air pollution is
appearing with increasing frequency and severity in metropolitan
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 383
areas throughout the Nation, and studies indicate that it produces
adverse health effects, eye irritation, and plant damage.
A number of State governments are showing more concern for the
preservation of air quality and have taken steps to control automotive
air pollution and are evaluating the problem as a preliminary to taking
control steps.
The State of California leads in the establishment of standards for
regulation of automotive pollutant emissions. The acute smog problem
in Metropolitan Los Angeles forced the control of exhaust carbon
monoxide and hydrocarbons and crankcase emissions. Other
[p. 5]
States, such as New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Colorado,
Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, New Hampshire, and the District of
Columbia have imposed, or are considering the imposition of restric-
tions on automobitive emissions.
The California Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, on June 17,
1964, approved four exhaust control devices for installation on new
passenger cars. Pursuant to the California law, new 1966 vehicles for
which controls are available must be equipped with exhaust controls
to be eligible for California registration. On March 10, 1964, the
Automobile Manufacturers Association announced that 1967 model
year cars produced for California would be equipped with exhaust
emission control systems which would meet California standards for
hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. The Automobile Manufacturers
Association also advised that the high-volume production 1966 model
year cars delivered for sale in California would be equipped with
automotive exhaust emission control systems. In view of the fact that
the automobile is one of the principal sources of air pollution and
manufacturers have the capability of incorporating air pollution reduc-
tion facilities in their vehicles, there is no apparent reason why the
entire Nation should not benefit from such advances. Also, it would be
more desirable to have national standards rather than for each State
to have a variation in standards and requirements which could result
in chaos insofar as manufacturers, dealers, and users are concerned.
In addition to hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide, there are other
emissions which have been determined to be harmful, or potentially
harmful, but means of controlling them and the extent of their damage
has not been finally determined. Therefore, it is necessary to accom-
plish necessary research to find ways of effecting corrective action
where needed.
The Clean Air Act prescribes a procedure for actions to abate air
pollution in State and interstate areas of the Nation. However, there
is no provision which would authorize cooperative action with foreign
-------
384 . LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
countries when air pollution is endangering the health or welfare or
their people. It is important that we, in the interest of international
amity and in fairness to the people of other countries, afford them the
benefit of protective measures. International negotiations will be
necessary to provide reciprocal benefits for U.S. citizens.
The Clean Air Act directs the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare, under section 3(b)(8) to "develop effective and practical
processes, methods and prototype devices for the prevention or con-
trol of air pollution." The act also, under section 6, directs the Secre-
tary to place emphasis on the special problem of automotive vehicle
and fuel pollution and provides a sane approach to the problem for
the formation of a technical committee with industry and Govern-
ment representation to evaluate progress, to make recommendations,
and to report semiannually to the Congress.
It is clear that the new statutory provisions will require a substantial
new effort in the research and development aspects of control devices
to the prototype stage, and also careful evaluation and comparative
assessments of new and alternative techniques for control of automo-
tive pollution, as well as other types of industrial and domestic
pollution.
The committee is aware of the fact that there is existing authority
under the Public Health Service Act for the establishment of such
addi-
[p. 6]
tional institutions, hospitals, and stations as are necessary to enable
the Service to discharge its functions and duties. However, in the
discharge of his responsibility under the Clean Air Act, the Secre-
tary must be equipped to provide the assistance called for in facilities
that are properly located, constructed, equipped and staffed to pro-
vide the specialized services called for in establishing criteria, testing
of engines, testing of air pollution control devices, and conducting
research into methods and processes for reducing air pollution.
The problem of solid wastes collection and disposal is one of the
neglected areas of pollution control. Studies conducted by the Ameri-
can Public Health Association and the Public Health Service shows
that less than half of the cities and towns in the United States with
populations over 2,500 have approved sanitary methods of disposing
of the estimated 90 million tons of refuse they produce each year
and which must be removed and disposed of either through burning,
burial, or conversion into forms of organic matter for final disposition
or put to useful purposes.
State and local programs to stimulate local improvements in solid
wastes storage, collection and disposal are lacking. In 1964, only 12
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 385
States reported to the Public Health Service that they had identifiable
solid waste activities, while 31 indicated no program at all.
At the Federal level, activities have been meager in relation to the
size and scope of the problem. Although the Public Health Service
has, for many years, encouraged and supported research on solid
waste problems, its efforts would appear to fall far short of research
needs. The Public Health Service's total expenditure in fiscal year
1964 in this field was about $430,000, of which $360,000 was used to
support research projects carried out by non-Federal institutions.
MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL
Title I amendments to the Clean Air Act
Section 101 would amend the Clean Air Act by inserting a new
heading above the heading of section 1 as follows: "Title I—Air
Pollution Prevention and Control" and changing the numbering of
sections 1 through 7 as sections 101 through 107, redesignate sections
8 through 14 and references as sections 301 through 307, by inserting
immediately above the heading of redesignated section 301 "Title
III—General," and striking out present references and inserting
appropriate references to title and section numbers.
Motor vehicle pollution
A new title designated as "Title II—Control of Air Pollution
From Motor Vehicles" would be inserted immediately following re-
designated section 107 and would contain a series of sections desig-
nated as sections 202 through section 209.
New section 201 would designate title II as "Motor Vehicle Air
Pollution Control Act."
New section 202 would direct the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, by regulation, giving appropriate consideration to tech-
nological feasibility and economic costs, to prescribe standards, re-
quirements, or limitations applicable to the emissions of any kind of
substance, from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new
motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause or contribute to, or
are
[p. 7]
likely to cause or contribute to, air pollution which endangers the
health or welfare of any persons.
Regulations initially prescribed under this section shall, as soon as
practicable, be promulgated by the Secretary, to become effective no
later than September 1, 1967.
The Secretary is authorized to amend such regulations promulgated
-------
386 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
under this section, to become effective on the date specified in the
order promulgating the amendments.
New section 203 directs the Secretary, as soon as practicable, to
develop standards for allowable emissions from diesel-powered vehicles
manufactured and introduced into interstate commerce or imported
into the United States. The Secretary is also directed to make recom-
mendations to the Congress for additional legislation to regulate the
discharge of pollutants from diesel-powered vehicles by January 31,
1967.
New section 204 prohibits the introduction or delivery for introduc-
tion into commerce, or the importation into the United States for sale
or resale of any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine,
manufactured after the effective date of regulations which are appli-
cable to such vehicle or engine unless it is in conformity with such
regulations except that the Secretary may exempt any new motor
vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, or class thereof, from the pro-
hibition upon such terms and conditions as he may find necessary to
protect the public health or welfare, for the purpose of research,
investigations, studies, demonstrations, or training, or for reasons of
national security.
A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine offered for im-
portation by a manufacturer in violation of regulation shall be refused
admission into the United States, but the Secretary of the Treasury
and the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare may, by joint
regulation, provide for authorizing the importation of such a motor
vehicle upon such terms and conditions (including the furnishing of a
bond) as may appear to them appropriate to insure that motor vehicle
may be brought into conformity with the standards, requirements,
and limitations applicable.
A new motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine intended solely for
export shall not be subject to the prohibitions if it is shown that the
failure so to comply would not be in conflict with any standard, re-
quirement, or limitation imposed by the country of designation and
such compliance would make the vehicle unacceptable to the purchaser
or consignee.
New sections 205, 206, 207, 208, and 209 relate to injunction pro-
ceedings, penalties, inspections, records and reports and definitions
for new title II relating to control of air pollution from motor vehicles.
The committee has found that the automotive industry has the
capability for limiting the emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon
monoxide from both the crankcase and exhaust systems of gasoline-
powered motor vehicles and found a willingness to accept legislation
which would establish national standards, and it is the hope of the
committee that individual States will accept national standards rather
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 387
than additionally impose restrictions which might cause undue and
unnecessary expense to the user.
The committee has learned that the means of controlling diesel
emissions through design and manufacturing changes are not as readily
[p. 8]
accessible as in the case of gasoline-powered engines. Likewise, it
would be difficult, at this time, to establish a single national standard.
However, it is the belief of the committee that criteria can be estab-
lished for groups of diesel-powered vehicles. The committee strongly
urges that the joint industry-Government technical committee au-
thorized by the Clean Air Act, and further expanded in the bill to
include representatives of the diesel-powered vehicle industry, make
a concerted effort to determine the extent, effect, and ways and means
of controlling detrimental and offensive emissions from diesel-powered
vehicles.
The committee has made no provision for the periodic inspection of
vehicles to insure their proper operation and maintenance of emission
control facilities because of the many variations in State procedures
and the lack of suitable testing equipment for large-scale inspection.
However, it does feel strongly that the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare should work with the various States in developing
equipment for making rapid cheeks of operating characteristics of
control systems and in developing inspection procedures.
Section 102(a) of S. 306 would amend paragraph (1) of subsection
(c) of the redesignated section 105 of the Clean Air Act (which relates
to abatement of air pollution) by adding at the end thereof the
following new subparagraph:
(D) Whenever the Secretary, upon receipt of reports, surveys,
or studies from any duly constituted international agency, has
reason to believe that any pollution referred to in subsection (a)
which endangers the health or welfare of persons in a foreign
country is occurring, or whenever the Secretary of State requests
him to do so with respect to such pollution which the Secretary
of States alleges is of such a nature, the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare shall give formal notification thereof to
the air pollution control agency of the municipality where such
discharge or discharges originate, to the air pollution control
agency of the State in which such municipality is located, and
to the interstate air pollution control agency, if any, in the
jurisdictional area of which such municipality is located, and
shall call promptly a conference of such agency or agencies.
The Secretary shall invite the foreign country which may be
adversely affected by the pollution to attend and participate in
-------
388 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
the conference, and the representative of such country shall, for
the purpose of the conference and any further proceeding result-
ing from such conference, have all the rights of a State air
pollution control agency.
(b) So much of subsection (f) of such redesignated section 105 as
precedes clause (2) of such subsection is amended to read as follows:
(f) If action reasonably calculated to secure abatement of the
pollution within the time specified in the notice following the
public hearing is not taken, the Secretary—
(1) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons (A) in a State other than that
in which the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing
to such pollution) originate, or (B) in a
[p. 9]
foreign country, may request the Attorney General to bring
a suit on behalf of the United States to secure abatement
of the pollution.
The committee is concerned about the lack of authority for the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to cooperate with and
assist neighboring countries in solving mutual problems of air pollution
and also to institute abatement action against polluters in our own
country who are adversely affecting them. The committee believes
this to be a necessary amendment to the Clean Air Act and urges the
Secretaries of Health, Education, and Welfare and State to formulate,
at the earliest possible date, formal procedures to cope with and correct
such pollution problems.
Section 103 of S. 306 amends redesignated section 103 of the Clean
Air Act (which relates to research, investigations, and training) by
adding a new paragraph directing the conducting and accelerating of
research programs relating to the means of controlling hydrocarbon
emissions resulting from the evaporation of gasoline in carburetors
and fuel tanks, and the means of controlling emissions of oxides of
nitrogen and aldehydes from gasoline-powered or diesel-powered
vehicles, and to carry out such research, and directs the Secretary to
consult with the technical committee established under the Clean Air
Act to deal with automotive vehicle and fuel pollution, and for research
concerning diesel-powered vehicles he may add to the committee
representatives from the diesel-powered vehicle industry as he deems
appropriate. The new paragraph also provides for conducting and
accelerating research directed toward the development of improved
low-cost techniques designed to reduce emissions of oxides of sulfur
produced by the combustion of sulfur-containing fuels.
There is also authorized to be constructed a Federal Air Pollution
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 389
Control Laboratory to be staffed and equipped as necessary to conduct
such phases of the national research and development program for
the prevention and control of air pollution as deemed appropriate.
The committee is convinced that the provisions of section 103 of
the bill which relate to the research with respect to means of controlling
hydrocarbon emissions emitting from carburetors and fuel tanks and
means of controlling oxides of nitrogen and aldehydes from gasoline
or diesel-powered vehicles is of extreme importance in attacking the
problem posed by these emittants and sources. Emphasis is now on
hydrocarbon control, although it has become clear that the other
component of photochemical smog, oxides of nitrogen, will require
control. Since means have not been perfected to control these emis-
sions, the committee urges that research be accelerated to determine
effects of not only oxides of nitrogen and aldehydes, but also other
motor vehicle emissions and determine ways and means of controlling
them.
In order to carry out the various research and development pro-
grams necessary to work out means of controlling air pollution from
both mobile and stationary sources, the committee is convinced that
an air pollution control laboratory is essential and is seriously con-
cerned that the accelerated and expanded Federal air pollution con-
trol program might be seriously hampered by the lack of adequate
facilities to perform the essential functions as provided for in the Clean
Air Act and in this bill.
[p. 10]
The committee also wants to emphasize the importance of accelerat-
ing the research work now underway by the Federal Government, the
coal industry and other groups in developing low-cost techniques de-
signed to reduce emissions of oxides of sulfur produced by the combus-
tion of sulfur-containing fuels.
Section 104 of the bill amends redesignated section 106 of the Clean
Air Act (automotive vehicle and fuel pollution) by inserting at the
end the following:
The technical committee appointed pursuant to subsection (a)
shall recommend standards for the allowable exhaust emissions
of pollutants from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle
engines to the Secretary not later than January 31, 1966.
It is the desire of the committee that the technical committee pro-
ceed as rapidly as possible in making recommendations to the Secre-
tary of Health, Education, and Welfare so that he will have the
benefit of their advice prior to September 1, 1967, when he is to pre-
scribe standards of allowable emissions from new motor vehicles or
new motor vehicle engines. It is the opinion of the committee that
-------
390 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
such recommendations should be made not later than January 31,
1966, to allow the Secretary sufficient time to determine their effective-
ness and overall effect on the industry and users.
Title II—Solid Waste Disposal
Section 201 designates this title as the "Solid Waste Disposal Act."
Section 202 enumerates the purposes of this act, which are to initiate
and accelerate a national research and development program for new
and improved studies directed toward the conservation of natural
resources by reducing the amount of waste and unsalvageable ma-
terials and by recovery and utilization of potential resources in solid
wastes; and provide technical and financial assistance to State and
local governments and interstate agencies in the planning, develop-
ment, establishment, and conduct of solid waste disposal programs.
Section 203 of the bill contains definitions relating to solid waste
disposal.
Section 204 (research, demonstrations, training, and other activi-
ties) provides that the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
shall conduct, and encourage, cooperate with, and render financial and
other assistance to appropriate public (whether Federal, State, inter-
state, or local) authorities, agencies, and institutions, private agencies
and institutions, and individuals in the conduct of, and promote the
coordination of, research, investigations, experiments, training, demon-
strations, surveys, and studies relating to the operation and financing
of solid-waste disposal programs, the development and application of
new and improved methods of solid-waste disposal (including devices
and facilities therefor), and the reduction of the amount of such waste
and unsalvageable waste materials.
In carrying out the provisions of the preceding subsection, the
Secretary is authorized to—
(1) collect and make available, through publications and other
appropriate means, the results of, and either information pertain-
ing to, such research and other activities; including appropriate
recommendations in connection therewith;
[p. ll]
(2) cooperate with public and private agencies, institutions,
and with any industries involved, in the preparation and the
conduct of such research and other activities; and
(3) make grants-in-aid to, or contract with, public or private
agencies and institutions and individuals for research and training
projects, but not in excess of 25 percent of the total amount
appropriated for any fiscal year may be obligated for such
purposes.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 391
(4) make grants to any State, municipality, or intermunicipal,
or interstate agency for the purpose of assisting in the develop-
ment (including the construction of facilities) of any project
which will demonstrate a new or improved method of disposing of
solid wastes, except that (A) not more than two-thirds of the cost
of any project approved by the Secretary may be paid from the
appropriations made pursuant to this act; (B) not more than
12^ percent of the appropriations made and expended for this
purpose may be expended in any one State; (C) no grant shall be
made to any municipality that has not enacted or is not subject to,
a law, ordinance or other regulation prohibiting open burning of
solid wastes and containing enforcement procedures insuring that
disposal facilities will have a beneficial effect on reducing air
pollution; and (D) no grant shall be made for any facility until
the applicant has made provision satisfactory to the Secretary to
assure the proper and efficient operation and maintenance of the
facility after completion of the construction thereof; and (E) no
grant shall be made to any State, municipality, or interstate
agency for demonstration projects until the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare has consulted with the appropriate
official as designated by the Governor or Governors.'
There is provided that no part of any appropriated funds may be
expended pursuant to authorization given by this act involving any
scientific or technological research or development activity unless
such expenditure is conditioned upon provisions effective to insure
that all information, copyrights, uses, processes, patents, and other
developments resulting from that activity will be made freely available
to the general public. It is further provided that the owner of any
background patent relating to any such activity shall not be deprived
without his consent, of any right which owner may have under that
patent.
Section 205 provides that the Secretary shall encourage cooperative
activities by the States and local governments in connection with solid
waste disposal programs; encourage, where practicable, interstate,
interlocal, and regional planning for, and the conduct of, interstate,
interlocal, and regional solid waste disposal programs; and encourage
the enactment of improved and, so far as practicable, uniform State
and local laws governing solid waste disposal.
Section 206 of the bill provides that not to exceed 10 percent of
amounts appropriated for the solid waste disposal program for any
fiscal year may be used by the Secretary to make grants to State or
interstate air pollution control agencies in any amount up to two-
thirds of the cost of making or arranging for surveys of solid waste
disposal practices and problems within the jurisdictional areas of
526-701 O - 73 - 27
-------
392 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
such agencies, and of developing solid waste disposal plans for such
areas. The Secretary shall make a grant under this provision only
[p. 12]
if he finds that there is satisfactory assurance that the planning of
solid waste disposal will be coordinated, so far as practicable, with
other related State, interstate, regional, and local planning activities,
including those financed in part with funds pursuant to section 701
of the Housing Act of 1954.
Section 207 of the bill makes the provision of the Davis-Bacon Act
applicable to grants for projects constructed under the solid waste
disposal program.
Sections 208 and 209 relate to effect on other authority and
payments.
Section 210 of the bill authorizes $20 million for fiscal years ending
June 30, 1966, and June 30, 1967, to finance the program of solid
waste disposal and allow not to exceed 10 percent of such funds to
provide grants-in-aid for support of air pollution control programs.
The committee considers the purposes of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act to be one of the most significant steps in improving the health
and welfare of our people since the enactment of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act and the Clean Air Act and feels that the modest
proposal of $20 million annually for 2 years is well justified as a means
of making further studies of the problem and devising means of
coping with it.
The program is to be administered by the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare; however, in section 203 of the bill (defini-
tions) the following language is included:
(a) The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare; except that such term means the Secre-
tary of the Interior with respect to the problems of solid waste
resulting from the extraction, processing, or utilization of minerals
or fossil fuels where the generation, production, or reuse of such
waste is or may be controlled within the extraction, processing,
or utilization facility or facilities and where such control is a
feature of the technology or economy of the operation of such
facility or facilities.
The committee wishes to emphasize its intention that title II of
the bill shall in no way be construed to confer upon the Secretary of
Interior any authority with respect to research on or the control of
air pollution, or to impair, diminish or dilute the authority of the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare with respect to research
or control of air pollution.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 393
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with subsection (4) of rule XXIX of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill as re-
ported are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is
enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic).
AN ACT To improve, strengthen, and accelerate programs for the prevention and
abatement of air pollution
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled, That the Act of July 14, 1955,
[P. 13]
as amended (42 U.S.C. 1857-1857g), is hereby amended to read as
follows:
"TITLE I—AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL
"FINDINGS AND PURPOSES
"SECTION |1.] 101. (a) The Congress finds—
"(1) that the predominant part of the Nation's population is
located in its rapidly expanding metropolitan and other urban
areas, which generally cross the boundary lines of local jurisdic-
tions and often extend into two or more States;
"(2) that the growth in the amount and complexity of air
pollution brought about by urbanization, industrial development,
and the increasing use of motor vehicles, has resulted in mounting
dangers to the public health and welfare, including injury to
agricultural crops and livestock, damage to and the deterioration
of property, and hazards to air and ground transportation ;
"(3) that the prevention and control of air pollution at its
source is the primary responsibility of States and local govern-
ments; and
"(4) that Federal financial assistance and leadership is essential
for the development of cooperative Federal, State, regional, and
local programs to prevent and control air pollution.
"(b) The purposes of this [Act] Title are—
"(1) to protect the Nation's air resources so as to promote the
public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its
population;
"(2) to initiate and accelerate a national research and develop-
ment program to achieve the prevention and control of air
pollution;
-------
394 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"(3) to provide technical and financial assistance to State and
local governments in connection with the development and execu-
tion of their air pollution prevention and control programs; and
"(4) to encourage and assist the development and operation of
regional air pollution control programs.
"COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES AND UNIFORM LAWS
"SEC. [2.] 102. (a) The Secretary shall encourage cooperative
activities by the States and local governments for the prevention and
control of air pollution; encourage the enactment of improved and, so
far as practicable in the light of varying conditions and needs, uniform
State and local laws relating to the prevention and control of air
pollution; and encourage the making of agreements and compacts
between States for the prevention and control of air pollution.
"(b) The Secretary shall cooperate with and encourage cooperative
activities by all Federal departments and agencies having functions
relating to the prevention and control of air pollution, so as to assure
the utilization in the Federal air pollution control program of all
appropriate and available facilities and resources within the Federal
Government.
"(c) The consent of the Congress is hereby given to two or more
States to negotiate and enter into agreements or compacts, not in con-
flict with any law or treaty of the United States, for (1) cooperative
[p. 14]
effort and mutual assistance for the prevention and control of air
pollution and the enforcement of their respective laws relating thereto,
and (2) the establishment of such agencies, joint or otherwise, as they
may deem desirable for making effective such agreements or compacts.
No such agreement or compact shall be binding or obligatory upon
any State or party thereto unless and until it has been approved by
Congress.
"RESEARCH, INVESTIGATIONS, TRAINING, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
"SEC. [3.1103. (a) The Secretary shall establish a national research
and development program for the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion and as part of such program shall—
"(1) conduct, and promote the coordination and acceleration
of research, investigations, experiments, training, demonstra-
tions, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent,
prevention, and control of air pollution; [and]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 395
"(2) encourage, cooperate with, and render technical services
and provide financial assistance to air pollution control agencies
and other appropriate public or private agencies, institutions,
and organizations, and individuals in the conduct of such activi-
ties; [and]
"(3) conduct investigations and research and make surveys
concerning any specific problem of air pollution in cooperation
with any air pollution control agency with a view to recommend-
ing a solution of such problem, if he is requested to do so by such
agency or if, in his judgment, such problem may affect any com-
munity or communities in a State other than that in which the
source of the matter causing or contributing to the pollution is
located; [andj
"(4) initiate and conduct a program of research directed to-
ward the development of improved, low-cost techniques for ex-
tracting sulfur from fuels [.]; and
"(5) conduct and accelerate research programs (A) relating to the
means of controlling hydrocarbon emissions resulting from the evap-
oration of gasoline in carburetors and fuel tanks, and the means
of controlling emissions of oxides of nitrogen and aldehydes from
gasoline-powered or diesel-powered vehicles, and to carry out such
research the Secretary shall consult with the technical committee
established under section 106 of this Act, and for research concerning
diesel-powered vehicles he may add to such committee such representa-
tives from the diesel-powered vehicle industry as he deems appro-
priate; and (B) directed toward the development of improved low-cost
techniques designed to reduce emissions of oxides of sulfur produced
by the combustion of sulfur-containing fuels.
"(b) In carrying out the provisions of the preceding subsection the
Secretary is authorized to—
"(1) collect and make available, through publications and other
appropriate means, the results of and other information, includ-
ing appropriate recommendations by him in connection therewith,
pertaining to such research and other activities;
"(2) cooperate with other Federal departments and agencies,
with air pollution control agencies, with other public and private
agencies, institutions, and organizations, and with any industries
[P. 15]
involved, in the preparation and conduct of such research and
other activities;
"(3) make grants so air pollution control agencies, to other pub-
lic or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and organizations,
-------
396 LEGAL COMPILAOION—AIR
and to'individuals, for purposes stated in subsection (a)(l) of this
section:
"(4) contract with public or private agencies, institutions, and
organizations, and with individuals, without regard to sections
3648 and 3709 of the Revised Statutes (31 U.S.C. 529; 41 U.S.C.
5);
"(5) provide training for, and make training grants to, per-
sonnel of air pollution control agencies and other persons with
suitable qualifications;
"(6) establish and maintain research fellowships, in the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare and at public or non-
profit private educational institutions or research organizations;
"(1) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other Federal
departments and agencies, and with other public or private agen-
cies, institutions, and organizations having related responsibilities,
basic data on chemical, physical, and biological effects of varying
air quality and other information pertaining to air pollution and
the prevention and control thereof; and
"(8) develop effective and practical processes, methods, and
prototype devices for the prevention or control of air pollution.
"(c) (1) In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this
section the Secretary shall conduct research on, and survey the results
of other scientific studies on, the harmful effects on the health or
welfare of persons by the various known air pollution agents (or
combinations of agents).
"(2) Whenever he determines that there is a particular air pollution
agent (or combination of agents), present in the air in certain quanti-
ties, producing effects harmful to the health or welfare of persons, the
Secretary shall compile and publish criteria reflecting accurately the
latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of
such effects which may be expected from the presence of such air
pollution agent (or combination of agents) in the air in varying quanti-
ties. Any such criteria shall be published for informational purposes
and made available to municipal, State, and interstate air pollution
control agencies. He shall revise and add to such criteria whenever
necessary to reflect accurately developing scientific knowledge.
"(3) The Secretary may recommend to such air pollution control
agencies and to other appropriate organizations such criteria of air
quality as in his judgment may be necessary to protect the public
health and welfare.
"(d) The Secretary is authorized to construct a Federal Air Pollution
Control Laboratory and shall staff and equip such laboratory as necessary
to conduct such phases of the national research and development program
for the prevention and control of air pollution as he deems appropriate.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 397
"GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
"SEC. [4] lOlf.. (a) From the sums appropriated annually for the
purposes of this [Act] Title but not to exceed 20 per centum of any
such appropriation, the Secretary is authorized to make grants to air
pollution control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost of
[p. 16]
developing, establishing, or improving programs for the prevention
and control of air pollution: Provided, That the Secretary is authorized
to make grants to intermunicipal or interstate air pollution control
agencies (described in [section 9(b)] section 302(b) (2) and (4)) in an
amount up to three-fourths of the cost of developing, establishing, or
improving, regional air pollution programs. As used in this subsection,
the term 'regional air pollution control program' means a program for
the prevention and control of air pollution in an area that includes the
areas of two or more municipalities, whether in the same or different
States.
"(b) From the sums available under subsection (a) of this section
for any fiscal year, the Secretary shall from time to time make grants
to air pollution control agencies upon such terms and conditions as
the Secretary may find necessary to carry out the purpose of this sec-
tion. In establishing regulations for the granting of such funds the
Secretary shall, so far as practicable, give due consideration to (1) the
population, (2) the extent of the actual or potential air pollution prob-
lem, and (3) the financial need of the respective agencies. No agency
shall receive any grant under this section during any fiscal year when
its expenditures of non-Federal funds for air pollution programs will
be less than its expenditures were for such programs during the
preceding fiscal year. No grant shall be made under this section until
the Secretary has consulted with the appropriate official as designated
by the Governor or Governors of the State or States affected.
"(c) Not more than 12^ per centum of the grant funds available
under subsection (a) of this section shall be expended in any one State.
"(d) Not to exceed 10 per centum of amounts appropriated pursuant to
section 210 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act for any fiscal year may be
used by the Secretary to make grants to State or interstate air pollution
control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost of making or
arranging for surveys of solid waste disposal practices and problems
within the jurisdtctional areas of such agencies, and of developing solid
waste disposal plans for such areas. The Secretary shall make a grant
under this section only if he finds that there is satisfactory assurance that
the planning of solid-waste disposal will be coordinated, so far as prac-
ticable, with other related State, interstate, regional, and local planning
-------
398 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
activities, including those financed in part with funds pursuant to section
701 of the Housing Act of 1954.
"ABATEMENT OF AIR POLLUTION
"SEC. [5.J 105. (a) The pollution of the air in any State or States
which endangers the health or welfare of any persons, shall be subject
to abatement as provided in this section.
"(b) Consistent with the policy declaration of this [Act], Title,
municipal, State, and interstate action to abate air pollution shall be
encouraged and shall not be displaced by Federal enforcement action
except as otherwise provided by or pursuant to a court order under
subsection (g).
"(c) (1) (A) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State, a
State air pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of the
Governor and the State air pollution control agency for the State in
which the municipality is situated) the governing body of any mu-
nicipality, the Secretary shall, if such request refers to air pollu-
[p. 17]
tion which is alleged to endanger the health or welfare of persons in a
State other than that in which the discharge or discharges (causing or
contributing to such pollution) originate, give formal notification
thereof to the air pollution control agency of the municipality where
such discharge or discharges originate, to the air pollution control
agency of the State in which such municipality is located, and to the
interstate air pollution control agency, if any, in whose jurisdictional
area such municipality is located, and shall call promptly a conference
of such agency or agencies and of the air pollution control agencies of
the municipalities which may be adversely affected by such pollution,
and the air pollution control agency, if any, of each State, or for each
area, in which any such municipality is located.
"(B) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State, a State air
pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of the Governor
and the State air pollution control agency for the State in which the
municipality is situated) the governing body of any municipality,
the Secretary shall, if such request refers to alleged air pollution which
is endangering the health or welfare of persons only in the State in
which the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such
pollution) originate and if a municipality affected by such air pollu-
tion, or the municipality in which such pollution originates, has either
made or concurred in such request, give formal notification thereof to
the State air pollution control agency, to the air pollution control
agencies of the municipality where such discharge or discharges origi-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 399
nate and of the municipality or municipalities alleged to be adversely
affected thereby, and to any interstate air pollution control agency,
whose jurisdictional area includes any such municipality and shall
promptly call a conference of such agency or agencies, unless, in the
judgment of the Secretary, the effect of such pollution is not of such
significance as to warrant exercise of Federal jurisdiction under this
section.
"(C) The Secretary may, after consultation with State officials of
all affected States, also call such a conference whenever, on the basis
of reports, surveys, or studies, he has reason to believe that any pollu-
tion referred to in subsection (a) is occurring and is endangering the
health and welfare of persons in a State other than that in which the
discharge or discharges originate. The Secretary shall invite the co-
operation of any municipal, State, or interstate air pollution control
agencies having jurisdiction in the affected area on any surveys or
studies forming the basis of conference action.
"(D) Whenever the Secretary, upon receipt of reports, surveys, or
studies from any duly constituted international agency, has reason to
believe that any pollution referred to in subsection (a) which endangers the
health or welfare of persons in a foreign country is occurring, or whenever
the Secretary of State requests him to do so with respect to such pollution
which the Secretary of State alleges is of such a nature, the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare shall give formal notification thereof to the
air pollution control agency of the municipality where such discharge or
discharges originate, to the air pollution control agency of the State in
which such municipality is located, and to the interstate air pollution
control agency, if any, in the jurisdictional area of which such municipal-
ity is located, and shall call promptly a conference of such agency or
agencies. The Secretary shall invite the foreign country which may be
adversely affected by the pollution to attend and participate in the con-
ference, and the representative of such country shall, for the purpose
[p. 18]
of the conference and any further proceeding resulting from such confer-
ence, have the all rights of a State air pollution control agency.
"(2) The agencies called to attend such conference may bring such
persons as they desire to the conference. Not less than three weeks'
prior notice of the conference date shall be given to such agencies.
"(3) Following this conference, the Secretary shall prepare and for-
ward to all air pollution control agencies attending the conference a
summary of conference discussions including (A) occurrence of air
pollution subject to abatement under this Act; (B) adequacy of meas-
ures taken toward abatement of the pollution; and (C) nature of
delays, if any, being encountered in abating the pollution.
-------
400 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"(d) If the Secretary believes, upon the conclusion of the conference
or thereafter, that effective progress toward abatement of such pollu-
tion is not being made and that the health or welfare of any persons
is being endangered, he shall recommend to the appropriate State,
interstate, or municipal air pollution control agency (or to all such
agencies) that the necessary remedial action be taken. The Secretary
shall allow at least six months from the date he makes such recom-
mendations for the taking of such recommended action.
"(e) (1) If, at the conclusion of the period so allowed, such remedial
action or other action which in the judgment of the Secretary is
reasonably calculated to secure abatement of such pollution has not
been taken, the Secretary shall call a public hearing, to be held in or
near one or more of the places where the discharge or discharges caus-
ing or contributing to such pollution originated, before a hearing board
of five or more persons appointed by the Secretary. Each State in
which any discharge causing or contributing to such pollution origi-
nates and each State claiming to be adversely affected by such pollu-
tion shall be given an opportunity to select one member of such hearing
board and each Federal department, agency, or instrumentality having
a substantial interest in the subject matter as determined by the
Secretary shall be given an opportunity to select one member of such
hearing board, and one member shall be a representative of the
appropriate interstate air pollution agency if one exists, and not less
than a majority of such hearing board shall be persons other than
officers or employees of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare. At least three weeks' prior notice of such hearing shall be
given to the State, interstate, and municipal air pollution control
agencies called to attend such hearing and to the alleged polluter or
polluters.
"(2) On the basis of evidence presented at such hearing, the hearing
board shall make findings as to whether pollution referred to in sub-
section (a) is occurring and whether effective progress toward abate-
ment thereof is being made. If the hearing board finds such pollution
is occurring and effective progress toward abatement thereof is not
being made it shall make recommendations to the Secretary concern-
ing the measures, if any, which it finds to be reasonable and suitable
to secure abatement of such pollution.
"(3) The Secretary shall send such findings and recommendations
to the person or persons discharging any matter causing or contribut-
ing to such pollution; to air pollution control agencies of the State or
States and of the municipality or municipalities where such discharge
or discharges originate; and to any interstate air pollution control
agency whose jurisdictional area includes any such municipality, to-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 401
gether with a notice specifying a reasonable time (not less than six
months) to secure abatement of such pollution.
[p. 19]
["(f) If action reasonably calculated to secure abatement of the
pollution within the time specified in the notice following the public
hearing is not taken, the Secretary—
"(1) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons in a State other than that in which
the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such
pollution) originate, may request the Attorney General to bring
a suit on behalf of the United States to secure abatement of
pollution, andj
"(/) // action reasonably calculated to secure abatement of the pollution
within the time specified in the notice following the public hearing is not
taken, the Secretary—
"(1) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons (A) in a State other than that in which
the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such pollu-
tion) originate, or (JB) in a foreign country, may request the Attorney
General to bring a suit on behalf of the United States to secure
abatement of the pollution, and
"(2) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering the
health or welfare of persons only in the State in which the dis-
charge or discharges (causing or contributing to such pollution)
originate, at the request of the Governor of such State, shall pro-
vide such technical and other assistance as in his judgment is
necessary to assist the State in judicial proceedings to secure
abatement of the pollution under State or local law or, at the
request of the Governor of such State, shall request the Attorney
General to bring suit on behalf of the United States to secure
abatement of the pollution.
"(g) The court shall receive in evidence in any suit brought in a
United States court under subsection (f) of this section a transcript
of the proceedings before the board and a copy of the board's recom-
mendations and shall receive such further evidence as the court in its
discretion deems proper. The court, giving due consideration to the
practicability of complying with such standards as may be applicable
and to the physical and economic feasibility of securing abatement of
any pollution proved, shall have jurisdiction to enter such judgment,
and orders enforcing such judgment, as the public interest and the
equities of the case may require.
"(h) Members of any hearing board appointed pursuant to subsec-
-------
402 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
section (e) who are not regular full-time officers or employees of the
United States shall, while participating in the hearing conducted by
such board or otherwise engaged on the work of such board, be en-
titled to receive compensation at a rate fixed by the Secretary, but not
exceeding $50 per diem, including travel time, and while away from
their homes or regular places of business they may be allowed travel
expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by
law (5 U.S.C. 73b-2) for persons in the Government service employed
intermittently.
"(i) (1) In connection with any conference called under this section,
the Secretary is authorized to require any person whose activities
result in the emission of air pollutants causing or contributing to air
pollution to file with him, in such form as he may prescribe, a report,
based on existing data, furnishing to the Secretary such information
as may reasonably be required as to the character, kind, and quantity
of pollutants discharged and the use of devices or other means to
[p. 20]
prevent or reduce the emission of pollutants by the person filing such
a report. After a conference has been held with respect to any such
pollution the Secretary shall require such reports from the person
whose activities result in such pollution only to the extent recom-
mended by such conference. Such report shall be made under oath or
otherwise, as the Secretary may prescribe, and shall be filed with the
Secretary within such reasonable period as the Secretary may pre-
scribe, unless additional time be granted by the Secretary. No person
shall be required in such report to divulge trade secrets or secret
processes and all information reported shall be considered confidential
for the purposes of section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code.
"(2) If any person required to file any report under this subsection
shall fail to do so within the time fixed by the Secretary for filing the
same, and such failure shall continue for thirty days after notice of
such default, such person shall forfeit to the United States the sum of
$100 for each and every day of the continuance of such failure, which
forfeiture shall be payable into the Treasury of the United States,
and shall be recoverable in a civil suit in the name of the United
States brought in the district where such person has his principal
office or in any district in which he does business: Provided, That the
Secretary may upon application therefor remit or mitigate any for-
feiture provided for under this subsection and he shall have authority
to determine the facts upon all such applications.
"(3) It shall be the duty of the various United States attorneys,
under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States, to
prosecute for the recovery of such forfeitures.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 403
"AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE AND FUEL POLLUTION
"SEC. [6.1 106. (a) The Secretary shall encourage the continued
efforts on the part of the automotive and fuel industries to develop
devices and fuels to prevent pollutants from being discharged from the
exhaust of automotive vehicles, and to this end shall maintain liaison
with automotive vehicle, exhaust control device, and fuel manufac-
turers. For this purpose, he shall appoint a technical committee, whose
membership shall consist of an equal number of representatives of the
Department and of automotive vehicle, exhaust control device, and
fuel manufacturers. The committee shall meet from time to time at the
call of the Secretary to evaluate progress in the development of such
devices and fuels and to develop and recommend research programs
which could lead to the development of such devices and fuels.
"(b) One year after enactment of this section, and semi-annually
thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Congress on measures
taken toward the resolution of the vehicle exhaust pollution problem
and efforts to improve fuels including (A) occurrence of pollution as a
result of discharge of pollutants from automotive exhaust; (B) prog-
ress of research into development of devices and fuels to reduce pollu-
tion from exhaust of automotive vehicles; (C) criteria on degree of
pollutant matter discharged from automotive exhausts; (D) efforts to
improve fuels so as to reduce emission of exhaust pollutants; and (E)
his recommendations for additional legislation, if necessary, to regulate
the discharge of pollutants from automotive exhausts.
"(c) The technical committee appointed pursuant to subsection (a)
shall recommend standards for the allowable exhaust emissions of pollut-
[p. 21]
ants from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines to the Secre-
tary not later than January 31, 1966.
"COOPERATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES TO CONTROL AIR POLLUTION
FROM FEDERAL FACILITIES
"SEC. [7.] 107. (a) It is hereby declared to be the intent of Congress
that any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over any
building installation, or other property shall, to the extent practicable
and consistent with the interests of the United States and within any
available appropriations, cooperate with the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare and with any air pollution control agency in
preventing and controlling the pollution of the air in any area insofar
as the discharge of any matter from or by such building, installation,
or other property may cause or contribute to pollution of the air in
such area.
-------
404 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
"(b) In order to control air pollution which may endanger the health
or welfare of any persons, the Secretary may establish classes of poten-
tial pollution sources for which any Federal department or agency
having jurisdiction over any building, installation, or other property
shall, before discharging any matter into the air of the United States,
obtain a permit from the Secretary for such discharge, such permits to
be issued for a specified period of time to be determined by the Secre-
tary and subject to revocation if the Secretary finds pollution is
endangering the health and welfare of any persons. In connection with
the issuance of such permits, there shall be submitted to the Secretary
such plans, specifications, and other information as he deems relevant
thereto and under such conditions as he may prescribe. The Secretary
shall report each January to the Congress the status of such permits
and compliance therewith.
"TITLE II—CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION FROM MOTOR
VEHICLES
"SHORT TITLE
"Sec. 201. This title may be cited as the 'Motor Vehicle Air Pollution
Control Act'. «
"ESTABLISHMENT OF STANDARDS
"Sec. 202. (a) The Secretary shall be regulation, giving appropriate
consideration to technological feasibility and economic costs, prescribe
standards, requirements, or limitations applicable to the emission of any
kind of substance, from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new
motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause or contribute to, or
are likely to cause or contribute to, air pollution which endangers the
health or welfare of any persons.
"(b) Regulations initially prescribed under this section shall, as soon
as practicable, be promulgated by the Secretary, to become effective no
later than September 1, 1967.
"(c) The Secretary is authorized to amend such regulations promul-
gated under this section, to become effective on the date specified in the
order promulgating the amendments thereto.
[p. 22]
"DIESEL CRITERIA
Sec. 203. The Secretary shall, as soon as practicable, develop standards
for allowable emissions from diesel powered vehicles manufactured and
introduced into interstate commerce or imported into the United States.
The Secretary shall make recommendations to the Congress for additional
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 405
legislation to regulate the discharge of pollutants from diesel powered
vehicles by January 31, 1967.
"PROHIBITED ACTS
Sec. 204. (a) The following acts and the causing thereof are pro-
hibited—
"(1) in the case of a manufacturer of new motor vehicles or new
motor vehicle engines for distribution in commerce, the manufacture
for sale, the sale, or the offering for sale, or the introduction or
delivery for introduction into commerce, or the importation into the
United States for sale or resale of any new motor vehicle or new motor
vehicle engine, manufactured after the effective date of regulations
under this title which are applicable to such vehicle or engine unless
it is in conformity with such regulations (except as provided in
subsection (&));
"(2) for any person to fail or refuse to permit entry or inspection
pursuant to section 207, or to permit access to records pursuant to
section 207, or to fail to make reports required under section 208; or
"(3) for any person to remove or render inoperative any device or
element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle
engine in compliance with regulations under this title prior to its
sale and delivery to the ultimate purchaser.
"(b)(l) The Secretary may exempt any new motor vehicle or new motor
vehicle engine, or class thereof, from subsection (a), upon such terms and
conditions as he may find necessary to protect the public health or welfare,
for the purpose of research, investigations, studies, demonstrations, or
training, or for reasons of national security.
"(2) A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine offered for im-
portation by a manufacturer in violation of subsection (a) shall be refused
admission into the United States, but the Secretary of the Treasury and
the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare may, by joint regulation,
provide for authorizing the importation of such a motor vehicle upon such
terms and conditions (including the furnishing of a bond) as may appear
to them appropriate to insure that any such motor vehicle will be brought
into conformity with the standards, requirements, and limitations ap-
plicable to it under this title.
"(3) A new motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine intended solely for
export, and so labeled or tagged on the outside of the container and on the
vehicle or engine itself, shall not be subject to the provisions of subsection
(a) if it is shown that the failure so to comply would not be in connict
with any standard, requirement, or limitation imposed by the country of
designation and such compliance would make the vehicle unacceptable to
the purchaser or consignee.
[p- 23]
-------
406 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"Injunction Proceedings
"Sec. 205. (a) The district courts of the United States shall
have jurisdiction to restrain violations of paragraph (1), (2), or
(3) of section 20% (a).
"(b) Actions to restrain such violations shall be brought by and
in the name of the United States. In any such action, subpenas
for witnesses who are required to attend a district court in any
district may run into any other district.
"Penalties
"Sec. 206. Any person who violates paragraph (1), (2), or (3)
of section 204(a) shall be subject to a fine of not more than
$1,000. Such violation with respect to section 204(a)(l) and
204(a)(3) shall constitute a separate offense with respect to each
new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine.
"Inspections
"Sec. 207. For purposes of enforcement of this title, officers and
employees designated by the Secretary, upon presenting appropri-
ate credentials and a written notice to the owner, operator, or
agent in charge, are authorized to enter, at reasonable times, any
factory, warehouse, or other business establishment or premises
where new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines are manu-
factured, assembled, or held prior to their sale or delivery to the
ultimate consumer, or are being worked on after such sale or de-
livery, and to make a reasonable inspection of such vehicles or
engines to determine compliance with this title and regulations
thereunder.
"Records and Reports
"Sec. 208. (a) Every manufacturer shall establish and maintain
such records, make such reports, and provide such information as
the Secretary may reasonably require to enable him to determine
whether such manufacturer has acted or is acting in compliance
with this title and regulations thereunder.
"(b) All information reported shall be considered confidential
for the purpose of section 1905 of title 18 of the United States
Code, except where such information is related to other officers or
employees concerned with carrying out this Act or when relevant
in any proceeding under this Act.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 407
"Definitions for Title II
"Sec. 209. As used in this title—
"(a) The term 'manufacturer' means any person engaged in the
manufacturing or assembling of new motor vehicles or motor ve-
hicle engines, or importing such vehicles or engines for resale, or
who acts for and is under the control of any such person in con-
nection with the distribution of new motor vehicles or motor vehi-
cle engines, but shall not include any dealer with respect to new
motor vehicles or motor vehicle engines received by him in com-
merce.
"(b) The term 'motor vehicle' means any gasoline powered self-
propelled vehicle designed for transporting persons or property on
a street or highway.
"(c) The term 'new motor vehicle' means a motor vehicle the
equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred by a
manufacturer, distributor, or dealer to an ultimate purchaser.
[p. 24]
" (d) The term 'dealer' means any person resident or located in
any State who is engaged in the sale or the distribution of new
motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines to the ultimate pur-
chaser.
"(e) The term 'ultimate purchaser' means, with respect to any
new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, the first person,
other than a dealer purchasing in his capacity as a dealer, who in
good faith purchases such new motor vehicle or new engine for
purposes other than resale.
"(/) The term 'commerce' means (1) commerce between any
place in any State and any place outside thereof; and (2) com-
merce wholly within the District of Columbia.
"TITLE III—GENERAL
"Administration
"SEC. [8.] 301. (a) The Secretary is authorized to prescribe
such regulations as are necessary to carry out his functions under
this Act. The Secretary may delegate to any officer or employee
of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare such of his
powers and duties under this Act, except the making of regula-
tions, as he may deem necessary or expedient.
" (b) Upon the request of an air pollution control agency, per-
sonnel of the Public Health Service may be detailed to such agency
526-70L O - 73 - 28
-------
408 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act. The
provisions of section 214 (d) of the Public Health Service Act
shall be applicable with respect to any personnel so detailed to the
same extent as if such personnel had been detailed under section
214 (b) of that Act.
"(c) Payments under grants made under this Act may be made
in installments, and in advance or by way of reimbursement, as
may be determined by the Secretary.
"DEFINITIONS
"SEC. [9.] 302. When used in this Act—
" (a) The term 'Secretary' means the Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare.
" (b) The term 'air pollution control agency' means any of the
following:
"(1) A single State agency designated by the Governor of
that State as the official State air pollution control agency
for purposes of this Act:
(2) An agency established by two or more States and hav-
ing substantial powers or duties pertaining to the prevention
and control of air pollution;
"(3) A city, county, or other local government health au-
thority, or, in the case any city, county, or other local govern-
ment in which there is an agency other than the health
authority charged with responsibility for enforcing ordi-
nances or laws relating to the prevention and control of air
pollution, such other agency; or
"(4) An agency of two or more municipalities located in
the same State or in different States and having substantial
powers or duties pertaining to the prevention and control of
air pollution.
"(c) The term 'interstate air pollution control agency' means
"(1) an air pollution control agency established by two or
more States, or
[p. 25]
"(2) an air pollution control agency of two or more munici-
palities located in different States.
"(d) The term 'State' means a State, the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and
American Samoa.
"(e) The term 'person' includes an individual, corporation,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 409
partnership, association, State, municipality, and political sub-
division of a State.
"(f) The term 'municipality' means a city, town, borough, coun-
ty, parish, district, or other public body created by or pursuant to
State law.
" (g) All language referring to adverse effects on welfare shall
include but not be limited to injury to agricultural crops and live-
stock, damage to and the deterioration of property, and hazards to
transportation.
"OTHER AUTHORITY NOT AFFECTED
"SEC. [10.] 803. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of
this section, this Act shall not be construed as superseding or lim-
iting the authorities and responsibilities, under any other provi-
sion of law, of the Secretary or any other Federal officer, depart-
ment, or agency.
"(b) No appropriation shall be authorized or made under sec-
tion 301, 311, or 314 (c) of the Public Health Service Act for any
fiscal year after the fiscal year ending June 30, 1964, for any pur-
pose for which appropriations may be made under authority of
this Act.
"RECORDS AND AUDIT
"SEC. [11.] 304. (a) Each recipient of assistance under this Act
shall keep such records as the Secretary shall prescribe, including
records which fully disclose the amount and disposition by such
recipient of the proceeds of such assistance, the total cost of the
project or undertaking in connection with which such assistance
is given or used, and the amount of that portion of the cost of the
project or undertaking supplied by other sources, and such other
records as will facilitate an effective audit.
" (b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the
Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly
authorized representatives, shall have access for the purpose of
audit and examinations to any books, documents, papers, and rec-
ords of the recipients that are pertinent to the grants received
under this Act.
"SEPARABILITY
"SEC. [12.] 305. If any provision of this Act, or the application
of any provision of this Act to any person or circumstance, is held
invalid, the application of such provision to other persons or cir-
-------
410 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
cumstances, and the remainder of this Act, shall not be affected
thereby.
"APPROPRIATIONS
"SEC. [13.] 306. [(a) There is hereby authorized to be appro-
priated to carry out section 4 of this Act for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30, 1964, not to exceed $5,000,000.]
[p. 26]
[" (b) ] There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to carry
out [this Act] Title I not to exceed $25,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1965, not to exceed $30,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1966, and not to exceed $35,000,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1967.
"SHORT TITLE
"SEC. [14.] 307. This Act may be cited as the 'Clean Air Act'."
SEC. 2. The title of such Act of July 14, 1955, is amended to
read "An Act to provide for air pollution prevention and control
activities of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
and for other purposes".
[p. 27]
l.lf (2) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN
COMMERCE
H.R. REP. No. 899, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965)
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom
was referred the bill (S. 306) to amend the Clean Air Act to re-
quire standards for controlling the emission of pollutants from
gasoline-powered or diesel-powered vehicles, to establish a Federal
Air Pollution Control Laboratory, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
PURPOSES OF LEGISLATION
The committee substitute would broaden the present authority
of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in two areas
affecting the public health and welfare: (1) air pollution, and (2)
solid waste disposal.
The committee substitute would add a new title II to the Clean
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 411
Air Act providing for control of air pollution from motor vehicles.
This title would authorize the Secretary to prescribe by regulation
as soon as practicable performance standards applicable to new
motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines with regard to air
pollution which endangers the health or welfare of any person.
In addition, the committee substitute would amend the Clean
Air Act so as to permit a foreign country in the case of air pollu-
tion emanating from the United States which endangers the
health or welfare of persons in such foreign country to participate
in conferences called by the Secretary of HEW and, for the pur-
poses of such conferences and proceedings resulting therefrom,
have all the rights of a State air pollution control agency. This
privilege is conditioned, however, upon the foreign country grant-
ing reciprocal rights to the United States.
Finally, the committee substitute provides for the conduct and
acceleration of research programs relating to means of controlling
air pollution caused by motor vehicles in two respects, (1) hydro-
carbon emissions resulting from the evaporation of gasoline, and
(2) emissions of oxides
[p. 1]
of nitrogen and aldehydes. Additionally, such research is to be
directed toward the development of improved low cost techniques
designed to reduce emissions of oxides of sulfur produced by the
combustion of sulfur-containing fuels.
The remainder of the committee substitute is related to a pro-
gram of research and demonstrations to be carried on by the Sec-
retary of HEW and the Secretary of the Interior with regard to
solid waste disposal.
SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSION STANDARDS
FOR NEW FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION
Before discussing the purposes of the bill, the Committee de-
sires to eliminate any possible misunderstanding concerning a
proposed instruction being considered by the Bureau of the Budg-
et, establishing standards for emissions of oxides of sulfur from
new Federal installations. During the hearings there was consid-
erable discussion of these proposed standards. It was felt by some
that the standards were unnecessarily high, and would, as a prac-
tical matter, eliminate the use of coal or imported residual fuel oil
in new Federal installations. Fears were expressed that, once
-------
412 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
these standards were established for new Federal installations, it
was possible that these standards might later be applied to exist-
ing Federal installations; and also be applied by States and local
communities.
[p. 2]
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
One of the more serious problems facing our society today is the
increasing contamination of our environment arising out of our
increasingly industrialized and urbanized society. The trends of
economic growth, technological progress, and rising urban popu-
lations have helped to create environmental contamination par-
ticularly in two areas (1) air pollution, especially emanating from
motor vehicles, affecting thousands of communities in all parts of
the country and imposing a serious threat to public health and
national welfare, and (2) difficulties encountered in the efficient
and economical disposal of solid waste.
AIR POLLUTION
Air pollution is associated with the occurrence and worsening of
such respiratory diseases as asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, and
lung cancer, and is responsible for economic losses amounting to
several billion dollars annually.
Motor vehicle pollution
The need for a nationwide attack on the motor vehicle pollution
problems is beyond question. More than 85 million motor vehicles
are now in use in the United States, and their number increases
every year. Air sampling studies conducted over the last several
years leave
[p. 3]
no doubt that automotive smog is occurring with increasing fre-
quency and severity in urban areas throughout the United States.
Every automobile gives off, in addition to carbon dioxide, nu-
merous unburned hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, and traces of
other substances. As these byproducts of the operation of auto-
mobiles become concentrated in the atmosphere, they are acted
upon by sunlight, leading to the formation of ozone (a highly poi-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 413
sonous variety of oxygen), and automotive smog, which has seri-
ous adverse effects upon the health of persons exposed to it.
In a report of the Secretary of HEW to the Congress pursuant
to the Clean Air Act submitted December 17, 1964 (S. Doc. No. 7,
89th Cong.), a number of health problems arising out of automo-
tive air pollution were discussed. For example, in one study, 260
mice of a cancer resistant strain were exposed to the atmosphere
of the Los Angeles freeways for a 2-year period. Autopsies re-
vealed that 2 percent of these mice developed lung tumors, while
184 control animals developed none. Other studies concerning the
effects of ozone on plants and animals showed that damage was
done to plants by concentrations as low as 5 parts per 100 mil-
lion, and that adverse effects on the health of guinea pigs occurred
after their exposure to concentrations of ozone as low as 0.34
parts per million. Adverse effects on human beings occurred after
2-hour exposures of from 0.6 to 0.8 parts per million.
Oxides of nitrogen, even in small concentrations, showed ad-
verse effects upon the health of laboratory animals. For example,
when rats were exposed for 213 days to concentrations of nitro-
gen dioxide at 12.5 parts per million, about 10 percent of the rats
died of pulmonary complications with strikingly voluminous lungs
(emphysema). In addition, carbon monoxide which occurs in
automobile exhausts tends to have serious adverse effects upon
persons exposed to even low concentrations.
According to the report of the Secretary of HEW referred to
above, in large metropolitan communities throughout the United
States motor vehicles are responsible for a large percentage of the
ingredients in the atmosphere which lead to photochemical smog;
about 97 percent of the total olefms, 40 to 80 percent of the total
hydrocarbons, and 14 to 67 percent of the oxides of nitrogen. It
has been shown that the automobile discharges appreciable quan-
tities of oxides of nitrogen from the exhaust pipe and discharges
hydrocarbons from the exhaust pipe, the crankcase, the carbu-
retor and the fuel tank.
The problem of motor vehicle pollution is growing and is des-
tined to continue growing unless steps are taken to bring it under
effective control. The country's motor vehicle population is rising
and is becoming increasingly concentrated in urban areas, which
already bear the major burden of the contemporary air pollution
problem. Estimates are that total motor vehicle emissions into the
atmosphere will increase by 75 percent in the next 10 years if
effective controls are not applied and will more than double by
1985.
-------
414 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
The technical knowledge and skills needed to achieve a signifi-
cant reduction in motor vehicle pollution are now available. The
automobile industry has indicated that equipment has been devel-
oped for reducing tailpipe emissions, which account for the major
share of motor vehicle pollution, and that this equipment will be
supplied on cars for distribution
[p. 4]
in California beginning with the 1966 model year, in compliance
with the laws of that State. Furthermore, in testimony before
the Subcommittee on Public Health and Welfare, representatives
of the automobile manufacturers indicated that similar equipment
could be supplied on all new cars manufactured in the United
States by the 1968 model year, if such measures were mandatory
under Federal law.
The committee is convinced that motor vehicle exhaust control
standards on a national scale are necessary and would be of bene-
fit to the entire country. Public concern about this problem is
clearly increasing, as indicated, for example, by the steps taken or
proposed in many States to deal with motor vehicle pollution.
While the committee is cognizant of the basic rights and responsi-
bilities of States for control of air pollution, it is apparent that
the establishment of Federal standards applicable to motor vehi-
cle emissions is preferable to regulation by individual States. The
high rate of mobility of automobiles suggests that anything short
of nationwide control would scarcely be adequate to cope with the
motor vehicle pollution problem.
In addition, the objective of achieving fully effective control of
motor vehicle pollution will not be accomplished overnight. This
means, of course, that even after control systems are made man-
datory for new vehicles, it will take several years to reach the
point at which essentially all automobiles are equipped with such
systems. Moreover, the techniques now available provide only a
partial reduction in motor vehicle emissions. For the future, bet-
ter methods of control will clearly be needed; the committee ex-
pects that the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare will
accelerate its efforts in this area. It is clear, however, that if
steps are not taken now to apply existing knowledge and skills,
the motor vehicle pollution problem and the hazards it poses to
public health and welfare will attain even larger dimensions.
Prevention of new pollution problems
In the context of the total effort to achieve cleaner air in Ameri-
can communities, efforts to prevent new air pollution problems
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 415
from arising must be accorded equal priority with efforts to re-
solve existing problems. Economic growth and technological prog-
ress are constantly adding new sources of air pollution to the old.
In many instances, preliminary investigations would undoubtedly
serve to indicate ways in which to prevent new activities from
adding to community air pollution, often at less cost than if action
were postponed until a new problem is fullblown.
The adoption of the Clean Air Act has drawn attention to this
aspect of the fight against air pollution. The Clean Air Act in-
cludes authority for Federal action to secure abatement of exist-
ing interstate and certain intrastate problems. In the opinion of
the committee, it would be equally desirable to provide means of
investigating and finding practical solutions for potential new air
pollution problems before they become a reality.
International air pollution problems
Extension of the existing Federal abatement authority to cases
of air pollution affecting neighboring countries is a reasonable
and desirable step. The boundaries that separate the United
States from Canada and Mexico do not block the flow of pollution
originating within our borders, nor do they shield persons living
in those countries from the adverse effects of
[p. 5]
such pollution. As a member of the North American community,
the United States cannot in good conscience decline to protect its
neighbors from pollution which is beyond their legal control.
Therefore the bill provides remedies for foreign countries ad-
versely affected by air pollution emanating from the United States,
if reciprocal rights are granted to the United States.
Research on oxides of sulfur and motor vehicle pollution control
The bill includes provisions relating to activities of the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare in research on various
aspects of air pollution control. A pressing need exists for the
development of improved, low-cost techniques for reducing sulfur
oxide emissions from fuel combustion sources. The oxides of sulfur
are one of the most widespread of all classes of air pollutants and
they are among the most injurious to human health and the most
damaging to property and vegetation. It is essential that control
techniques be developed which will safeguard public health and
welfare against the hazards of sulfur oxide pollution and which
-------
416 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
can be applied without disrupting present patterns of fuel produc-
tion and consumption in the United States. The Clean Air Act
directs the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to con-
duct research on the development of low-cost techniques for ex-
tracting sulfur from fuels. This approach, as well as other poten-
tial solutions, need further exploration. The reported bill pro-
vides for acceleration of Federal research on this problem. Also
included is provision for accelerated research on certain important
aspects of motor vehicle pollution for which practical solutions do
not now exist.
The bill also provides authority for establishment, staffing, and
equipping of Federal air pollution control facilities to carry out
the Secretary's functions. The need for such installations is un-
derlined by the expanding responsibilities of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare in the field of air pollution control
and by the growing magnitude and complexity of the air pollution
problem. In years to come, adequate protection of the national
air resource will demand increasingly effective and sophisticated
techniques for control of air pollution. It is imperative that the
Congress take steps to provide facilities appropriate for the major
research and development efforts that will be necessary to con-
tinue progress in understanding the nature and effects of air pol-
lution and to develop new and improved control methods.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Title II of the bill deals with the subject of the disposal of solid
wastes. This growing public health problem has increasingly been
brought to the committee's attention in recent years. This year
the following bills have been introduced and are pending before
the committee dealing with this subject, in addition to the reported
bill: H.R. 890 (Mr. Roosevelt), H.R. 4798 (Mr. Roybal), H.R.
4854 (Mr. Kluczynski), H.R. 4878 (Mr. Hawkins), H.R. 4940
(Mr. Celler), H.R. 5182 (Mr. Van Deerlin), H.R. 5373 (Mr. Gor-
man), H.R. 5560 (Mr. Brown of California), H.R. 5568 (Mr. Din-
gell), and H.R. 8248 (Mr. Matthews).
Testimony favorable to this legislation was submitted to the
committee from the National League of Cities, the National Asso-
ciation of Sanitarians,
[p. 6]
the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers, the American Public
Works Association, the American Medical Association, the Massa-
chusetts Department of Public Health, the Arizona State Depart-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 417
ment of Health, the Nevada State Department of Health, the
Washington State Department of Health, the cities of New York,
Oakland, Calif., Boise, Idaho, East Orange, N.J., Milwaukee,
Wis., Seattle, Wash., Philadelphia, Pa., and the Los Angeles
County Board of Supervisors, as well as the New Jersey Division
of Environmental Health, the Department of Agricultural Engi-
neering of the University of California, the Department of Civil
Engineering of the University of Kansas, and the Department
of Civil Engineering of West Virginia University.
Solid waste collection and disposal activities create one of the
most serious and most neglected aspects of environmental con-
tamination affecting public health and welfare. Solid wastes in-
clude a great variety of things that individuals, manufacturers,
commercial establishments, and communities discard as no longer
usable, such as garbage, rubbish, ashes, street refuse, demolition
debris, construction refuse, abandoned automobile hulks, old re-
frigerators and furniture, and the wastes from slaughterhouses,
canneries, manufacturing plants, and hospitals. The dimensions
of the problem are staggering. Available data indicate that cur-
rent production nationally of solid wastes in urban communities
amounts to a half billion pounds daily, and it has been estimated
that the total will rise to approximately three times that amount
by 1980.
The efforts now being made to deal with the problem are clearly
inadequate. Less than half of the cities and towns in the United
States with populations of more than 2,500 have programs for
sanitary disposal of solid wastes. All too often, refuse is dis-
posed of by methods that create unhealthful, insanitary, and un-
sightly environmental conditions. Such practices contribute to
air, water, and soil pollution and create breeding places for dis-
ease-carrying insects and rodents. Accumulations of litter, refuse,
and junk cause fire hazards, contribute to accidents and destroy
the beauty of cities and the countryside.
In the opinion of the committee, immediate action must be
taken to initiate a national program directed toward finding and
applying new solutions to the waste disposal problem. This is a
challenge which State and local governments cannot meet with-
out assistance from the Federal Government. The handling and
disposal of solid wastes are costly operations that strain the re-
sources of State and local agencies. Approximately $3 billion a
year is being spent today for refuse collection and disposal
through services provided by local governments and private entre-
-------
418 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
preneurs. In contrast, less than $500,000 annually is being spent
to improve methods of solid waste disposal.
The committee takes note of the role being played by the sec-
ondary materials industry in reclaiming materials that would
otherwise add to the solid waste problem. The committee, there-
fore, expects that the funds authorized under this act will be used
to demonstrate new and improved methods in solid waste disposal
and not for facilities that would duplicate those operated by the
secondary materials industry.
Commonly used waste disposal practices, such as sanitary land-
filling and incineration have many shortcomings. Space for land-
fills is becoming increasingly scarce in and around urban areas.
Municipal incinerators often
[p. 7]
add to community air pollution problems. The difficulties in-
volved in disposing of solid wastes are frequently compounded
by interjurisdictional disputes relating to unhealthful conditions
and public nuisances.
The current Federal program in this field is conducted under
the general authority of the Public Health Service Act and is not
sufficiently broad in scope to provide the degree of assistance that
State and local governments must have in order to meet their
waste disposal problems. Nor is the program adequate to meet
pressing needs for research aimed at the development of new and
better methods of handling solid wastes.
Few technological advances have been made in this field in re-
cent years, since only a small fraction of the needed technical
resources are being devoted to the problem. A primary need is
for a national research program that will utilize the competencies
of government and a broad spectrum of scientific institutions to
develop improved methods of solid waste disposal, particularly
methods of reusing materials of potential economic value. The
time gap between research and its application must be narrowed.
This can best be accomplished by establishing demonstration proj-
ects and by training activities to increase the competence of tech-
nical personnel in this field.
In addition, Federal financial assistance is needed to encourage
and help States and interstate agencies to undertake surveys of
solid waste disposal practices and to develop solid waste disposal
plans on a statewide or interstate basis.
It is evident that statutory provisions establishing a national
program to meet and accomplish these objectives for improved
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 419
solid waste handling must include the following basic elements:
(1) authority for the conduct and support of research, investiga-
tions, experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies
relating to the operation and financing of solid waste disposal
programs, the development and application of new and improved
methods of solid waste disposal, and the reduction of the amount
of unsalvageable waste materials, and for the collection and dis-
semination of technical information; (2) provision must be made
for interstate and interlocal cooperation in the establishment and
conduct of solid waste disposal programs; (3) authority for
grants to State and interstate agencies of not to exceed 50 percent
of the cost of surveys of practices and problems to provide for the
development of solid waste disposal plans for areas within their
jurisdictions.
The committee is of opinion that the present bill is a logical re-
sponse to the growing waste disposal problem. The bill provides
for the establishment of a national program of assistance to
States, communities, and industries for prevention, control, and
solution of solid waste problems. It would accelerate the mobiliza-
tion of resources to attack current solid waste problems and pro-
vides the basis for initiation of a long-range program of research
and development directed toward discovery and early application
of new and improved methods of solid waste disposal.
SECTION-BY-SECTION SUMMARY
The following is a summary of the provisions of the reported
bill other than those technical, clerical, and conforming changes
necessary to carry out the basic provisions of the bill.
[p. 8]
This bill consists of two titles. Title I comprises a number of
amendments to the Clean Air Act. Title II consists of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act.
TITLE I OF THE BILL
Section 101 of title I of the bill divides the existing Clean Air
Act into two titles. The first seven sections of the Clean Air Act
are made title I. The last seven sections of the Clean Air Act are
made title III. Section 101 of the bill also inserts in the Clean Air
Act a new title II, consisting of nine sections numbered 201
through 209. The following explanation is of these nine sections:
Section 201 provides that title II of the Clean Air Act may be
cited as the Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act.
-------
420 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
Section 202 requires the Secretary to prescribe as soon as prac-
ticable standards applicable to the emission of substances from
new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines which cause or
contribute to, or are likely to cause or contribute to, air pollution
endangering the health or welfare of persons. These standards
are to apply to motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines whether
these vehicles or engines are designed as complete systems or in-
corporate other devices to prevent or control such pollution. The
Secretary is to take into consideration technological feasibility
and economic cost in establishing his standards. These standards,
and amendments thereto, are to take effect on the date prescribed
by the Secretary, but he is required to give consideration in estab-
lishing this date to the period reasonably necessary for compli-
ance by industry.
Section 203 (a) prohibits the manufacturer of new motor vehi-
cles or new motor vehicle engines to sell, offer for sale, or to intro-
duce or deliver for introduction into commerce, or to import into
the United States for sale or resale, any new motor vehicle or new
motor vehicle engine which does not comply with the applicable
standards prescribed under section 202. Further, it is prohibited
for any person to remove or render inoperative any device or ele-
ment of design installed on or in a vehicle or engine in compliance
with regulations prior to its sale and delivery to the ultimate con-
sumer. Finally, it is prohibited for any person to fail or refuse to
make reports or to provide information required in section 207,
or to fail or refuse access to, or the copying of, records as required
by that section.
Section 203 (b) permits the Secretary to exempt a new motor
vehicle or any motor vehicle engine from this act for the purpose
of research, investigation, study, demonstration, or training, or
for reasons of national security. This subsection further provides
that if a new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine is offered
for importation into the United States in violation of the applica-
ble standards the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare may provide for such importation
upon terms and conditions necessary to insure that the vehicle or
engine will be brought into conformity to these standards. If the
vehicle or engine is finally refused admission into the United
States, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to dispose of
it in accordance with custom laws unless it is exported within a
prescribed period, but he may not dispose of any such vehicle or
engine in any manner which will result in the sale to the ultimate
consumer of a vehicle or engine that does not comply with the ap-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 421
plicable standards. This subsection further provides that a new
motor ve-
[P. 9]
hide or new motor vehicle engine intended solely for export and
so designated will not be subject to the standards authorized by
this act.
Section 204 authorizes the Federal district courts to restrain
violations of section 203(a) (1), (2), or (3).
Section 205 provides that violations of section 203 (a) (1), (2),
or (3) shall be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000. Each
violation of section 203 (a) (1) and (3) shall constitute a separate
offense with respect to each motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine.
Section 206 provides that if a manufacturer applies, the Secre-
tary shall test or require to be tested any new motor vehicle or
engine submitted by the manufacturer to determine whether it
conforms with the applicable standards. If such vehicle or engine
conforms, the Secretary is required to issue a certificate to that
effect which shall be valid for a period set by the Secretary, but
for at least 1 year. Any other new motor vehicle or engine sold by
that manufacturer which is materially the same as the test vehicle
or engine for which a certificate has been issued shall be deemed
to be in conformity with the standards applicable to such vehicle
or engine.
Section 207 (a) requires every manufacturer to maintain rec-
ords and make reports, and provide information which the Sec-
retary requires to enable him to determine whether the manufac-
turer is in compliance with this title of the Clean Air Act, and
upon request such manufacturer is required to permit an officer or
employee of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
at reasonable times to have access to and to copy these records.
Section 207 (b) provides that any information reported or ob-
tained by the Secretary or his representative which contains or
relates to a trade secret or other matter referred to in section
1905 of title 18 of the United States Code shall be considered con-
fidential for the purposes of such section except that such infor-
mation may be disclosed to other officials and employees con-
cerned in carrying out this act or when relevant to any proceeding
under this act. There is also a specific disclaimer that this section
is not to be construed to authorize the Secretary or anyone under
his control to withhold information from the committees of Con-
gress.
Section 208 contains definitions of the following terms for the
-------
422 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
purposes of title II of the Clean Air Act: (1) manufacturer; (2)
motor vehicle; (3) new motor vehicle; (4) dealer; (5) ultimate
purchaser; and (6) commerce.
Section 209 authorizes appropriations to carry out this title.
These appropriations are for the following amounts: $470,000 for
fiscal 1966; $845,000 for fiscal 1967; $1,195,000 for fiscal 1968; and
$1,470,000 for fiscal 1969.
Section 102 of the bill amends redesignated section 105(c) (1) of
the Clean Air Act by adding at the end thereof a new subpara-
graph (D). This new subparagraph (D) would authorize the Sec-
retary either whenever he receives reports from a duly consti-
tuted international agency and has reason to believe that air pollu-
tion in this country endangers the health or welfare of persons in
a foreign country, or upon request of the Secretary of State, to
give formal notification to the air pollution control agency of the
municipality where the discharge originates, to that agency for
the State in which the municipality is located and to any inter-
state air pollution control agency, if any, in the jurisdictional area
of which such municipality is located, and to call a conference of
such agency or agencies. The foreign country adversely affected
by pollution is to be invited to participate in the conference
[p. 10]
and in all further proceedings and if it participates, it shall have
the rights of a State air pollution control agency. This subpara-
graph (D) is to apply however only to a foreign country which
the Secretary determines has given the United States essentially
the same rights with respect to the prevention or control of air
pollution which occurs in that country as is given to that country
by this provision. A conforming change is made in subsection (f)
of redesignated section 105 of the Clean Air Act to authorize a
suit to be brought to abate air pollution involving a foreign
country which has participated in a conference and other pro-
ceedings relating to abatement.
Section 103 of the bill amends redesignated section 103 of the
Clean Air Act to specifically provide that as a part of the national
research and development program for the prevention and control
of air pollution the Secretary is to conduct and accelerate research
programs relating to the control of hydrocarbon emissions result-
ing from gasoline evaporation in carburetors and fuel tanks and
the means of controlling emissions of oxides of nitrogen and alde-
hydes from gasoline-powered or diesel-powered vehicles and to
conduct and accelerate research programs directed toward the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 423
development of improved low-cost techniques designed to reduce
emission of oxides of sulfur produced by the combustion of sulfur-
containing fuels. This section further amends section 103 of the
Clean Air Act to authorize the Secretary to construct, staff, and
equip necessary facilities to carry out his functions under this
act. Finally this section also adds a new subsection (e) to section
103 of the Clean Air Act which would provide that if in the judg-
ment of the Secretary a substantial air pollution problem may re-
sult from any discharges in the atmosphere, he may call a con-
ference concerning this potential air pollution problem to be held
in or near the place where such discharge is or will occur. All
interested parties must be given an opportunity to be heard at the
conference. If on the basis of the conference the Secretary finds
that the discharge if permitted to take place or to continue is like-
ly to cause or contribute to air pollution subject to abatement un-
der section 105, he is required to send his findings together with
his recommendations for preventing the pollution to the offenders,
and to the appropriate State, interstate, and local agencies. His
findings and recommendations are to be advisory only but are to
be admitted together with the record of the conference as part of
the record of formal abatement proceedings under section 105 of
the Clean Air Act.
TITLE II OP THE BILL
Title II of the bill provides for a national program of research
and development for new and improved methods of proper and
economic solid waste disposal. This title consists of 10 sections.
Section 201 provides that this title may be cited as the Solid
Waste Disposal Act.
Section 202 cites a number of congressional findings relating to
the necessity for this legislation and a declaration of the basic
purposes of the Act which are (1) to initiate a national research
and development program relating to solid waste disposal, includ-
ing studies directed toward conserving natural resources and re-
covering and utilizing potential resources in solid wastes and (2)
to provide technical and financial assistance to State
[p. HI
and local governments and interstate agencies in planning, devel-
oping, and conducting solid waste disposal programs.
Section 203 defines for the purposes of this title the following
terms: (1) Secretary, (2) State, (3) interstate agency, (4) solid
526-701 O - 73 - 29
-------
424 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
wastes, (5) solid waste disposal, (6) construction. The term Sec-
retary is so defined that it will mean the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare except with respect to problems of solid
waste resulting from the extraction, processing, or utilization of
minerals or fossil fuels where the generation, production, or re-
use of such waste is or may be controlled within the extraction,
processing, or utilization facility or facilities and where such con-
trol is a feature of the technology or economy of the operation of
such facility or facilities in which case the term will mean the
Secretary of the Interior. Thus, with respect to most solid waste
disposal programs, this act will be administered by the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare but with respect to those solid
waste disposal programs specified in the definition the act will be
administered by the Secretary of the Interior.
Section 204 authorizes the Secretary to conduct and encourage,
cooperate with, and render financial and other assistance to ap-
propriate public (whether Federal, State, interstate, or local) au-
thorities, agencies, and institutions, private agencies and institu-
tions, and individuals in the conduct of, and promote the coordina-
tion of, research, investigations, experiments, training, demon-
strations, surveys, and studies relating to the operation and
financing of solid-waste disposal programs, the development and
application of new and improved methods of solid-waste disposal
(including devices and facilities therefor), and the reduction of
the amount of such waste and unsalvageable waste materials. In
carrying out this provision, the Secretary is authorized: (1) To
collect and make available publications and other information per-
taining to research, including recommendations, (2) to cooperate
with public and private agencies and industries in the preparation
and conduct of research and other activities, and (3) to make
grants-in-aid to public or private agencies, institutions, and indi-
viduals for research, training projects, surveys, and demonstra-
tions, including construction of facilities, and in addition to pro-
vide for such research, training, surveys, and demonstrations by
contract.
Subsection (c) provides that any agreement or contract entered
into by the Secretary pursuant to the authority granted by this
act shall contain provisions that all information, uses, processes,
patents, and other developments resulting from any activity un-
dertaken pursuant to such agreement or contract will be made
readily available on fair and equitable terms to industries using
solid-waste disposal methods and industries engaging in furnish-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 425
ing devices, facilities, equipment, and supplies to be used in con-
nection with solid-waste disposal.
At the present time there are in existence some Federal statutes
applicable to specified agencies relating to patents resulting from
research and development activities carried on by private indus-
try pursuant to grants made and contracts entered into by these
agencies. There is not in existence, however, a Federal statute
setting forth a generally applicable patent policy. Such legislation
is now under consideration by the Congress. If and when the Con-
gress enacts such legislation, its provisions may take the place of
the instant provision. Until such time, however, the Secretary
would be directed to insert in all agreements or contracts entered
into pursuant to this legis-
[P. 12]
lation appropriate provisions agreed to between the contracting
parties which would be designed to achieve the objective set
forth in this provision.
Finally, this section contains a limitation that no grant is to be
made which would result in the United States paying more than
two-thirds of the construction cost of a facility constructed under
this act.
Section 205 provides that the Secretary is to encourage all
cooperative activities by the State and local governments in con-
nection with their solid-waste disposal programs, including the
planning and conduct thereof and he is required to encourage
enactment of improved and, to the extent practicable, uniform
State and local laws governing solid-waste disposal.
Section 206 authorizes the Secretary to make grants to State
and interstate agencies of up to 50 percent of the cost of making
surveys of solid-waste disposal practices and problems within the
jurisdictional areas of such States or agencies and of developing
solid-waste disposal plans. In order to be eligible for such a grant
the applicant must: (1) Designate a sole agency to carry out the
purposes of this act, (2) provide for full consideration of all as-
pects of planning for proper and effective solid-waste disposal
consistent with the protection of the public health, (3) set forth
plans for expenditure of the grant which provide reasonable as-
surance of carrying out the purposes of this section, (4) provide
for submission of a final report containing necessary information,
and (5) provide fiscal control and fund accounting procedures to
assure proper disbursement and accounting of funds. The Secre-
tary may make a grant under this section only if he finds that
-------
426 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
there is satisfactory assurance that the planning of solid-waste
disposal will be coordinated to the extent practicable with all
other related planning activities.
Section 207 provides that the Davis-Bacon Act will apply to any
grant for a construction project under this act.
Section 208 is a provision designed to insure that no existing
authority will be superseded or limited by the provisions of this
act.
Section 209 provides that payments of grants may be made in
advance or by way of reimbursement and in such installments and
on such conditions as the Secretary may prescribe.
Section 210 authorizes appropriations. Subsection (a) author-
izes appropriations to the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare in the following amounts; $7 million for fiscal 1966, $14
million for fiscal 1967, $19,200,000 for fiscal 1968, and $20 million
for fiscal 1969.
Subsection (b) authorizes appropriations to the Secretary of
the Interior in the following amounts: $3 million for fiscal 1966,
$6 million for fiscal 1967, $10,800,000 for fiscal 1968, and $12,500,-
000 for fiscal 1969.
[p. 13]
EXPLANATION OF DRAFT BILL: "THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ACT"
A bill "To prevent air, water, and other environmental pollu-
tion from solid wastes through strengthening and acceleration of
research in, and the development and demonstration of, new and
improved methods of proper and economic solid-waste disposal,
including reduction of the amount of waste and unsalvageable ma-
terials and recovery and utilization of potential resources in solid
wastes". This bill may be referred to by the short title "Solid-
Waste Disposal Act".
In his recent message to the Congress on natural beauty, the
President emphasized the need for proper solid-waste disposal as
a vital factor in maintaining and improving the health of our Na-
tion and the beauty of the environment in which we live. He
pointed out that:
"Continuing technological progress and improvement in meth-
ods of manufacture, packaging, and marketing of consumer prod-
ucts has resulted in an ever-mounting increase of discarded mate-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 427
rial. We need to seek better solutions to the disposal of these
wastes."
And he recommended legislation to:
"Assist the States in developing comprehensive programs for
some forms of solid waste disposal.
"Provide for research and demonstration projects leading to
more effective methods for disposing of or salvaging solid wastes."
The purpose of the present draft bill is to carry out these
recommendations.
The problem of solid-waste disposal is all-pervasive and has
become national in scope. Its growth is compounded by two
factors: first, the increasing per capita refuse production asso-
ciated with a rising standard
[p. 22]
of living and rapid technological changes, and second, population
growth and concentration. Already, as pointed out by the Presi-
dent, we must dispose of half a billion pounds of such wastes
every day. The collection and disposal services, with their ob-
vious shortcomings, are now costing the American public $2.8
billion per year. And it is estimated that by 1980 total refuse
production in the Nation will reach a level of over 520 billion
pounds a year, with further increases in succeeding years.
Improper and inadequate solid-waste handling and disposal
practices contribute directly to unhealthful, insanitary, and un-
sightly environmental conditions. Such practices cause air, water,
and land pollution problems, and create breeding places for
disease-carrying insects and rodents. Accumulations of litter,
refuse, and junk are eyesores, create fire hazards, and cause
accidents. In short, the solid-waste problem is a growing menace
to the healthfulness and beauty of our cities and countryside.
Handling and disposal of garbage, rubbish, and other solid-
waste materials from our communities, businesses, and industries
is, as above indicated, a costly operation, and it is too often an
ineffectual one. Land for this purpose is becoming scarce in and
near urban areas. Interjurisdictional disputes arise because of
the health and nuisance conditions associated with improper solid-
waste disposal. The problem is one that States and local govern-
ments, and the industries whose activities produce solid waste,
cannot well solve alone. Vigorous action should and will continue
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and the Clean Air
Act, to control contamination of water and air from solid and
other wastes, and the President has recommended amendment of
-------
428 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
those acts to stop such pollution at its source. But action under
those acts is not enough. Immediate action is needed to start a
national program directed toward the solution of problems of
solid-waste disposal to stem the health, nuisance, and blight prob-
lems caused by improper and inadequate handling and disposal of
solid wastes. The attainment of this goal will require the con-
bined resources of the Federal, State, and local governments as
well as industry and research institutions.
What is needed at this point is not a large-scale Federal con-
struction grant program to build more disposal plants of the anti-
quated types now in use, for these are not the answer to the
problem. Very few technological advances have been made in
this field in recent years, and only a small fraction of the needed
technical brain power is being devoted to the problem. We need
a national research program that will utilize the competencies of
Government and a broad spectrum of scientific institutions and
talent to improve methods of solid-waste disposal. We need to
develop new methods of conversion and of safe, healthful, and
economic utilization of solid wastes. And we must narrow the
time gap between research and its application. This can best be
accomplished by establishing demonstration projects on an operat-
ing-scale to solve the safety, feasibility, management, and engi-
neering problems and develop basic criteria tailored to fit the op-
erations, and by the training of technicians in the latest methods.
Federal stimulus and financial assistance are needed, moreover,
to encourage and help States and interstate agencies to undertake
statewide and interstate surveys of solid-waste disposal practices,
and to develop solid-waste disposal plans on a statewide or inter-
state area basis.
[p. 23]
The essential elements of the proposed "Solid-Waste Disposal
Act" would confer authority to:
1. Conduct, encourage, and cooperate with—and to provide
financial and technical assistance to—public and private agencies,
institutions, and individuals in carrying out research, investiga-
tions, experiments, demonstrations (including facility construc-
tion for that purpose), surveys, training, and other activities
directed toward improvement of solid-waste practices. Such ac-
tivities would be concerned with all aspects of the problem, in-
cluding development of new and improved methods of disposal and
dissemination of research findings to technical and other interested
groups.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 429
2. Encourage interstate and interlocal cooperation in establish-
ing and conducting solid-waste disposal programs.
3. Make grants to State and interstate agencies of not to exceed
50 percent of the cost of surveys of disposal practices and of the
development of State and interstate plans. The intent of this
authorization is to provide for the development of plans which
would include consideration of such factors as technical, adminis-
trative, inter-governmental, legislative, and economic aspects, and
of land-use planning but does not contemplate use of these funds
for land-use planning itself.
Thus, the act would authorize a broad national program of
research, demonstration, surveys, training, and aid for State and
interstate planning and cooperation of solid-waste problems.
This Department would be responsible for administration of the
act, except that the Secretary of Interior would be responsible for
"solid waste resulting from the extraction, processing, or utiliza-
tion of minerals and fossil fuels where the generation, production,
or reuse of such wastes is or may be controlled within the extrac-
tion, processing, or utilization facility or facilities and where such
control is a feature of the technology or economy of the operation
of such facility or facilities." This arrangement would make the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare responsible for ad-
ministration of the act with respect to solid-waste problems of
communities, including those problems which may affect the gen-
eral environments of communities, and including those solid wastes
or solid-waste residues that result from business and industrial
activities and become part of the community's solid-waste disposal
system. The Department of Interior, as above indicated, would
be responsible for solving industrial solid-waste problems within
facilities engaged in extraction, processing, or utilization of min-
erals and fossil fuels in the circumstances above defined. In the
latter connection, it should be noted that the disposal, control, and
reclamation of waste products resulting from the extraction, proc-
essing, and utilization of mineral substances are important tech-
nologic and economic factors in the effective conservation of min-
eral resources as well as the economics of the mineral-based indus-
tries. The Department of the Interior, through the Bureau of
Mines, has for many years approached the problem of minimizing
waste mainly from the standpoint of conserving the resource.
Specifically, it has sought instances where improved recovery sys-
tems would reduce mineral losses, and incidentally reduce the
volume of the products finally discarded. It has concentrated its
-------
430 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
attention on those instances where improvements in recovery
promised direct economic gains to the industry.
[p. 24]
The proposed legislation would require the Federal Government
to emphasize the effects of mineral-industry-based wastes on the
total environment and require that more attention be directed
to instances where waste disposal practices might be improved
for the dual purposes of conserving the resource and of conserv-
ing other resource values, including natural beauty. This legisla-
tion would enable the Secretary of the Interior to carry out a
research and planning program designed to meet the problems
of solid-waste disposal resulting from the extraction, processing,
or utilization of minerals or fossil fuels where such activities are
or could be controlled within the operating or extractive facilities.
In summary, the act would establish a national program of
assistance to States, communities, and industries for prevention
and control of solid-waste problems. It would mobilize resources
to attack current solid-waste problems and would initiate a longer
range program of research and development directed toward dis-
covery and application of new and improved methods of solid-
waste disposal.
[p. 25]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
431
l.lf(3) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. Ill (1965)
l.lf (3) (a) May 18: Considered and passed Senate, pp. 10779-19781
AMENDMENT OF THE CLEAN
AIR ACT AND ESTABLISH-
MENT OP THE FEDERAL AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL LABO-
RATORY
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President,
I ask unanimous consent that the Sen-
ate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 178, S. 306.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill
will be stated by title.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill
(S. 306) to amend the Clean Air Act
to require standards for controlling
the emission of pollutants from gaso-
line-powered or diesel-powered ve-
hicles, to establish a Federal Air Pol-
lution Control Laboratory, and for
other purposes.
[p. 10779]
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, on
December 17, 1963, President Johnson
signed into law the Clean Air Act
which replaced previous Federal legis-
lation in the air pollution field and
provided the groundwork for the ini-
tiation of a comprehensive national
program for the prevention and con-
trol of air pollution.
We recognized at the time that the
Clean Air Act provided an excellent
vehicle for our efforts to control and
abate air pollution. We also recog-
nized that further legislative action
would probably be necessary to bolster
certain portions of the act.
The additional legislative needs
were brought into focus during our
field and technical hearings which
were conducted during the first part
of 1964. I believe our subcommittee
report, "Steps Toward Clean Air,"
provides an excellent justification for
the legislative proposals contained in
S. 306, which is before us today.
On January 7, 1965, 21 Senators
introduced S. 306, which was designed
to implement the recommendations
contained in the subcommittee report.
We held hearings in Washington,
D.C., on April 6, 8, and 9, and in De-
troit, Mich., on April 7. While in De-
troit we initiated the research and
testing facilities of the major automo-
tive manufacturers to determine the
progress being made in the develop-
ment of techniques to control harmful
emissions from gasoline-powered mo-
tor vehicles.
On May 14, 1965, S. 306, now spon-
sored by 24 Senators, was reported
with the unanimous approval of the
Senate Committee on Public Works.
The committee amended the legislation
to reflect the findings of the subcom-
mittee in the course of its hearings
and field investigation.
We believe S. 306 represents a sub-
stantial advance in our efforts to im-
prove the quality of our air. We
believe the bill, as reported by the
Committee on Public Works, is sub-
stantially improved over the version
as introduced. It is an effective bill
and it is a reasonable bill. We urge its
passage by the Senate.
S. 306 represents a broad attack
on the problems of air pollution. Its
principal objectives are as follows:
The purpose of title I of S. 306 is
to:
First. Provide for recommended
motor vehicle exhaust emission stand-
ards by the Automotive Vehicle and
Fuel Pollution Technical Committee
and, by regulations, for the establish-
ment of standards, requirements, or
limitations on emissions from new
motor vehicles or new motor vehicle
engines and devices or motor vehicle
-------
432
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
design not later than September 1,
1967. Such regulations may be amend-
ed and become effective on date to be
specified. "Motor vehicle" is defined
as any gasoline-powered, self-pro-
pelled vehicle designed for transport-
ing persons or property on a street
or highway. "New motor vehicle" is
defined as a motor vehicle, the equi-
table or legal title to which has never
been transferred by a manufacturer,
distributor, or dealer to an ultimate
purchaser.
Second. Provide for the prohibition
of distribution in commerce the manu-
facture for sale, the sale, or the offer-
ing for sale, introduction, or delivery
for introduction into commerce, or
the importation into the United States
for sale or resale, of any new motor
vehicle or new motor vehicle engine
manufactured after the effective date
of regulation unless it is in conform-
ity with such regulations. It is also
required that such vehicles or engines
offered for importation must meet
prescribed regulations. A procedure is
prescribed for inspection of plant and
facilities and for records and reports
to be maintained by manufacturers.
Certain new motor vehicles or new
motor vehicle engines may be exempt
from prohibitions.
Third. Provide for the development
of standards for allowable emissions
from diesel-powered vehicles, and for
recommendations to be made to Con-
gress by January 31, 1967, for possi-
ble legislation to regulate discharge
of pollutants.
Fourth. Provide for enforcement
procedures for the abatement of air
pollution adversely affecting a foreign
country.
Fifth. Authorize the conduct and
acceleration of research programs re-
lating to means of controlling hydro-
carbon emissions resulting from the
evaporation of gasoline in carburetors
and fuel tanks, and the means of con-
trolling emissions of oxides of nitro-
gen and aldehydes from gasoline-
powered or diesel-powered vehicles
and low cost means of reducing sulfur
oxide emissions from the burning of
fossil fuels. Add representatives of
diesel-powered industry to Automo-
tive Vehicle and Fuel Pollution Com-
mittee of the Clean Air Act.
Sixth. Authorize the construction of
a Federal Air Pollution Control Lab-
oratory.
The purpose of title II of S. 306 is
to:
First. Authorize the initiation and
acceleration of a national research
and development program for new
and improved methods of proper and
economic solid waste disposal, reduc-
ing the amount of waste and unsal-
vageable materials, and recovering
and utilizing potential sources of solid
waste, and provide technical and fi-
nancial assistance to State and local
governments, and interstate agencies
in planning, developing, construction,
and conduct of solid waste disposal
programs.
Second. Provide that not to exceed
25 percent of funds appropriated for
this purpose may be made for grants-
in-aid, or to contract with, public or
private agencies and institutions, and
to individuals for research and train-
ing.
Third. Authorize grants to State,
municipality, or intermunicipal, or in-
terstate agency for the purpose of as-
sisting in the development of any
project which will demonstrate a new
or improved method of disposing of
solid waste. Up to two-thirds of the
cost of any project approved may be
paid from funds appropriated. No
more than 12% percent of appropri-
ations authorized and amended for
projects may be made in any one
State. Grantee must have appropriate
ordinances or regulations prohibiting
open burning of solid wastes and pro-
vide for enforcement action to insure
that beneficial results will occur. Also,
assurances must be given that proper
and efficient operation and mainte-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
433
nance of facility for which funds have
been provided. All of the information,
copyrights, uses, processes, patents,
and other developments resulting
from activity financed with Federal
funds will be made available to the
general public.
Fourth. Encourage cooperative ac-
tivities by States and local govern-
ments in connection with solid waste
disposal programs, encourage plan-
ning, and encourage the enactment of
improved, and, so far as practicable,
uniform State and local laws govern-
ing solid waste disposal.
Fifth. Authorize up to 10 percent
of funds available for the solid waste
disposal program to be used in con-
nection with the grants for support
of air pollution control programs of
the Clean Air Act. Grants would be
made in an amount of up to two-
thirds of the cost of making surveys
of solid waste disposal practices and
problems within the jurisdictional
areas of appropriate agencies, and
development of solid waste disposal
plans. Assurances must be given that
the planning of solid waste disposal
will be coordinated with other related
State, interstate, regional, and local
planning activities, including those fi-
nanced in part with funds pursuant
to section 701 of the Housing Act of
1954.
Sixth. Insure compliance with pro-
visions of the Davis-Bacon Act for a
project constructed undes this act.
[p. 10782]
Seventh. Authorize to be appropri-
ated $20 million for fiscal year ending
June 30, 1966, and fiscal year ending
June 30, 1967, for the solid waste dis-
posal program and section 104 (d) of
the Clean Air Act.
I want to emphasize the importance
of the automotive pollution exhaust
control provisions of the bill. In all
our hearings and investigations of
this problem we have been confronted
by the fact that 50 percent of our na-
tional air pollution problem is at-
tributable to the 84 million automo-
biles, trucks, and buses on our high-
ways. Each day these vehicles dis-
charge into the air an estimated 250,-
000 tons of carbon monoxide, 16,500
to 33,000 tons of hydrocarbons and
4,000 to 12,000 tons of nitrogen ox-
ides. We cannot afford to allow this
rate of pollution to continue.
There is a demonstrated need for
nationwide controls on exhaust emis-
sions. The automotive industry has
advised us that they can meet the
California standards for nationwide
distribution by the fall of 1967 and
that the cost of the necessary engine
and exhaust system modifications is
modest.
The committee considers the prob-
lem of diesel exhausts a serious one,
but it is clear from the information
available to us that it would be im-
possible for us to establish diesel ex-
haust emission controls with existing
technological knowledge. The legisla-
tion directs the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare to develop
diesel exhaust criteria as a prelimi-
nary step to possible controls on these
emissions.
Another area where action must be
deferred is that involving exhaust
emission inspections for private ve-
hicles. The Secretary is directed to
report to the Congress on the develop-
ment of simple and effective test de-
vices which would be adaptable to a
State-operated inspection program.
The committee is very much con-
cerned with the magnitude of the solid
waste disposal problem. Each day our
Nation must dispose of 520 million
pounds of refuse which must be re-
moved or disposed of either through
burning, burial, or conversion into
forms of organic matter for final dis-
position, or put to useful purposes.
The modest research and development
program included in S. 306 will en-
able us to find economic and effective
-------
434
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
ways of dealing with these byprod-
ucts of our society.
Mr. President, we recognize that we
are just beginning in our attack on
air pollution. But we can take some
comfort that we are moving earlier
on this problem than we did on water
pollution. I have been encouraged by
response to our efforts. I have been
pleased by the constructive attitude
shown by industrialists. I think Amer-
icans are responding to President
Johnson's call for an improvement in
the quality of American life.
At this time, Mr. President, I want
to express my appreciation to the
chairman of the Public Works Com-
mittee [Mr. McNamara] for his lead-
ership and understanding and to the
members of the Subcommittee on Air
and Water Pollution and the full com-
mittee for their cooperation and as-
sistance. I think we have done a con-
structive job for the Senate and for
the Nation. I urge the passage of
S. 306.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, was read the
third time, and passed.
[p. 10783]
(b) Sept. 23: Considered in House, pp. 24941-24943
AMENDING THE CLEAN AIR ACT
Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, by di-
rection of the Committee on Rules, I
call up the resolution, House Resolu-
tion 587, and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as
follows :
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this
resolution it shall be in order to move that
the House resolve itself into the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union
for the consideration of the bill (S. 306) to
amend the Clean Air Act to require standards
for controlling the emission of pollutants from
gasoline-powered or diesel-powered vehicles, to
establish a Federal Air Pollution Control Labor-
atory, and for other purposes. After general
debate, which shall be confined to the bill and
shall continue not to exceed two hours, to be
equally divided and controlled by the chairman
and ranking minority member of the Com-
mittee on Interstate and Federal Commerce,
the bill shall be read for amendment under
the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to
consider the substitute amendment recommend-
ed by the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce now in the bill and such substitute
for the purpose of amendment shall be con-
sidered under the five-minute rule as an orig-
inal bill. At the conclusion of such considera-
tion the Committee shall rise and report the
bill to the House with such amendments as
may have been adopted, and any Member may
demand a separate vote in the House on any
of the amendments adopted in the Committee
of the Whole to the bill or committee substi-
tute. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto
to final passage without intervening motion
except one motion to recommit with or with-
out instructions.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman
from Indiana [Mr. MADDEN] is recog-
nized for 1 hour.
Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may require and
pending that I yield 30 minutes to
the gentleman from California [Mr.
SMITH].
Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 587
provides an open rule with 2 hours of
general debate on S. 306, a bill to
amend the Clean Air Act to require
standards for controlling the emission
of pollutants from gasoline-powered
or diesel-powered vehicles, to estab-
lish a Federal Air Pollution Control
Laboratory, and for other purposes.
The resolution also makes it in order
to consider the committee substitute
as an original bill for the purpose of
amendment.
S. 306, as reported, would broaden
the present authority of the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare in two areas affecting the public
health and welfare: First, air pollu-
tion; and second, solid waste disposal.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
435
The bill would add a new title II to
the Clean Air Act providing for con-
trol of air pollution from motor ve-
hicles. This title would authorize the
Secretary to prescribe by regulation
as soon as practicable performance
standards applicable to new motor ve-
hicles and new motor vehicle engines
with regard to air pollution which en-
dangers the health or welfare of any
person.
In addition, the bill would amend
the Clean Air Act so as to permit a
foreign country in the case of air
pollution emanating from the United
States which endangers the health or
welfare of persons in such foreign
country to participate in conferences
called by the Secretary of HEW and,
for the purposes of such conferences
and proceedings resulting therefrom,
have all the rights of a State air pol-
lution control agency. This privilege
is conditioned, however, upon the for-
eign country granting reciprocal
rights to the United States.
Finally, the bill provides for the
conduct and acceleration of research
programs relating to means of con-
trolling air pollution caused by motor
vehicles in two respects: First, hydro-
carbon emissions resulting from the
evaporation of gasoline; and second,
emissions of oxides of nitrogen and
aldehydes. Such research is to be di-
rected toward the development of im-
proved low-cost techniques designed
to reduce emissions of oxides of sulfur
produced by the combustion of sulfur-
containing fuels.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption
of House Resolution 587 in order that
S. 306 may be considered.
[p. 24941]
Mr. SMITH of California. Mr.
Speaker, two new titles are added to
the Clean Air Act by S. 306. Title I
covers the problem of auto exhaust
caused by internal combustion en-
gines. The Secretary of HEW is re-
quired to prescribe as soon as possi-
ble standards applicable to the
emission of pollution from new auto-
mobiles which contribute to the en-
dangering of the public health. He is
also to set the date when such stand-
ards are to take effect. Automobile
manufacturers are or will be prohib-
ited from selling or importing for sale
any new motor vehicles or engines
which do not conform to the standards
prescribed. Federal district courts
will have jurisdiction of violations
and may levy fines of up to $1,000 for
each violation. Appropriations author-
ized are $470,000 for fiscal 1966,
$845,000 for 1967, and $1,195,000 for
1968, and $1,470,000 for 1969 or ap-
proximately $4 million.
Mr. Speaker, I am in support of
this particular title of the bill and, to
be perfectly honest, I am not certain
just what the legislation can do with
regard to this problem, because it is
primarily a problem in my area of
Los Angeles, Calif., and vicinity. We
passed laws in our State legislature
there relating to this and we have
been investigating this problem. We
had a number of tests and examina-
tions made. Cars will have to be pro-
vided with certain devices in the near
future in order to be sold in Cali-
fornia. In any event, I am happy to
see the Government come into it if
they can be of help. I say that because
2 years ago we had the Clean Air Act,
which was first passed on the floor.
The biggest problem with regard to
this is in California. I supported that
act and voted for it and presented
the rule. A few days later a few of
my conservative constituents said, "If
you are going to spend money like
this, I am no longer going to support
you. Take me off your newsletter list."
Politics are sometimes strange indeed.
Now, I am for title I, and I hope
that it works out.
Title II is another question, because
this provides for a national program
of research and development of new
and improved methods of waste dis-
-------
436
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
posal. The Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare is authorized to
conduct, encourage, and render finan-
cial assistance to Federal, State, in-
terstate, and local authorities, private
institutions, and individuals who are
conducting research or related studies
of the problem of disposal. Grants are
authorized to such agencies. They may
be up to two-thirds of the cost of con-
struction of the facility.
Additionally, grants of up to one-
half may be made to State and inter-
state agencies for surveys of prac-
tices and problems with regard to
waste disposal. To qualify for such
grants the agency must be the sole
agency designated by the State or
interstate group for the purpose of
making such a study and have a pro-
gram prepared under which the grant
will be expended, and have fiscal con-
trols and accounting procedures to as-
sure proper disbursement.
Appropriations are authorized un-
der this in the following amounts: $7
million for fiscal year 1966, $14 mil-
lion for fiscal year 1967, $19.2 million
for 1968, and $20 million for 1969.
These are controlled by the Secretary
of HEW. The Secretary of the In-
terior has the following authoriza-
tions: $3 million for 1966, $6 million
for 1967, $10.8 million for 1968, and
$12.5 million for 1969.
This new disposal program added
to the clean air bill will cost around
$96 million. There are minority views
signed by seven Members. Their ob-
jection is to the solid waste disposal
program as just mentioned in title
II. They do not believe that the Fed-
eral Government should be involved
in the financing of this program. It
was not in the bill as passed by the
other body but was added in the full
committee after hearings were com-
pleted at the suggestion of the De-
partment of HEW. Also the minority
views object to the solid waste pro-
gram being tied to a bill to control
air pollution.
*****
The resolution was agreed to.
[p. 24943]
l.lf(3)(c) Sept. 24: Considered and passed House, amended, pp.
25049-25059; 25061-25065; 25072
CLEAN AIR AND SOLID WASTE
DISPOSAL ACT
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I move
that the House resolve itself into the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union for the considera-
tion of the bill (S. 306) to amend the
Clean Air Act to require standards
for controlling the emission of pollut-
ants from gasoline-powered or diesel-
powered vehicles, to establish a Fed-
eral Air Pollution Control Laboratory,
and for other purposes.
The motion was agreed to.
IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Accordingly, the House resolved it-
self into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for
the consideration of the bill S. 306,
with Mr. FLOOD in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
By unanimous consent, the first
reading of the bill was dispensed
with.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule,
the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr.
HARRIS] will be recognized for 1 hour
and the gentleman from Nebraska
[Mr. CUNNINGHAM] will be recog-
nized for 1 hour.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Arkansas [Mr. HARRIS].
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I
yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, this is a bill that is
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
437
highly important to the health of the
Nation. We have just finished, after
considerable debate, a bill highly im-
portant to the future health of our
people. This bill does not appear to
be the type of bill that offers the
same sentimental attraction, but there
is nothing more important to the
health of our people than having
wholesome, clean air to breathe. That
is what this bill is designed to do. It
proposes to meet, as far as possible,
the problem of pollution of the air in
a way that will not interfere with our
economy or with our industry, but
will continue to serve the needs of
the people of our Nation. It does, how-
ever, seek to meet what we are going
to have to come to a decision on.
We have observed over the years
that the problem of air pollution is
growing each year.
It will be remembered that in the
88th Congress our committee reported
and the Congress passed a bill to im-
prove, strengthen, and accelerate pro-
grams for the prevention and abate-
ment of air pollution. That was a very
important program. It was something
new, something visionary.
It presented a step toward meeting
the problems that are absolutely a
must insofar as the future of our
people are concerned. We tried to meet
certain of these problems that we
know existed insofar as air pollution
is concerned and attempted, in a lim-
ited way, to provide for the abatement
of this problem.
Now, Mr. Chairman, we have to-
day a bill which deals primarily with
two public health problems.
First, air pollution resulting from
emissions from automobiles. Now, Mr.
Chairman, this is very important I
suppose to every family or almost
every family in the United States.
Then, second, the problems involved
in the disposal of solid waste. Our
committee was unanimous in report-
ing title I of this bill which deals with
automotive air pollution.
[p. 25049]
However, I frankly admit, Mr.
Chairman, that there was a great deal
of controversy in the committee and
probably will be here in the Commit-
tee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union today, over title II of the
bill dealing with solid waste disposal.
Mr. Chairman, title I of this bill
deals with air pollution resulting from
the operation of motor vehicles and
provides authority for the Secretary
of the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare to establish stand-
ards for emission from new gasoline-
powered and new diesel-powered
motor vehicles. These standards, Mr.
Chairman, will apply to the motor
vehicles manufactured on and after
the date established by the Secretary,
The automotive industry has in-
formed our committee that the in-
dustry will be able to meet the na-
tionwide standards by 1968, which
means that it is anticipated automo-
biles sold throughout the United
States during the fall of 1967 and
thereafter will very likely meet such
standards prescribed by the Secretary
to meet this problem.
There were many bills introduced
and referred to our committee. Under
some of them specific standards were
established for motor vehicles. We
have not adopted specific standards in
the legislation for obvious reasons,
but have left the criteria flexible so
that the Secretary would be able to
prescribe feasible and reasonable
standards.
We have to recognize that we will
have problems in the future that we
cannot precisely see today. Ideally,
the only type of emissions that would
occur from gasoline powered or diesel
engines would be carbon dioxide and
water. Unfortunately, the process of
burning of fuel that takes place in-
side the engine of a motor vehicle is
-------
438
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
not complete enough to lead to this
result. This means, then, that the ex-
haust from the automobile, or from
trucks or buses, contain some of the
fuel that is not completely burned. It
is therefore discharged into the atmos-
phere as hydrocarbons. Due to incom-
plete combustion some carbon mon-
oxide is discharged. Oxides of nitrogen
are also formed, and when weather
conditions are such that the exhaust
fumes from the automobiles tend to
accumulate, they are acted on by the
sunlight, resulting in what is familiar-
ly known as "smog." Due to local geo-
graphic and weather conditions, smog
exists in Los Angeles to a worse ex-
tent than in any other city in the
United States.
However, from our hearings we
have developed that many of your
larger cities are beginning to have
problems arising out of air pollution,
to which the automobile exhaust is
making a significant contribution.
Speaking of Los Angeles, I was in
Los Angeles in 1960 during the Na-
tional Democratic Convention. I had
heard a great deal about the smog in
Los Angeles. I frankly had some
doubts about it myself. I was there
about 3 days with no results. My
doubts were confirmed, that all of this
talk about smog in Los Angeles was a
bit of publicity. But about the fourth
or fifth day something happened to
me. My eyes began to burn. I thought
somebody had thrown some dust or
something in my face I did not know
about, or they had squirted some-
thing, and it got in my eyes.
I remember I was driving out of
Los Angeles, about 60 miles down to-
ward San Diego. This thing was both-
ering me no little bit. Then I suddenly
came to fully realize that the smog
had hit.
I then became thoroughly convinced
that all of these reports we had been
receiving as to the problem in Cali-
fornia were actually not a figment
of the imagination.
Polluted air constitutes not only a
nuisance—it is a health problem as
well. Just recently, a study was con-
ducted of the excess deaths attribut-
able to air pollution in New York
City during the period January 29 to
February 12, 1963—a period during
which weather conditions were such
as to lead to concentrations of pollut-
ants in the air at that city.
This study revealed that during
that particular 2-week period of un-
usually high air pollution, over 400
of the 4,596 deaths that occurred in
the city were attributable primarily to
air pollution. This was not all caused
by emissions from automobiles. It
was caused from other activities with-
in that great metropolitan city.
So there are many sources of air
pollution in addition to automobile
exhaust and these other factors con-
tributed significantly to the excess
deaths during this episode that oc-
curred in New York City during
1963. It must be realized, however,
that air pollution attributable to auto-
mobiles played a significant part in
this episode.
In addition to dealing with the
problems of automotive air pollution,
title I of this bill would also provide
that the Secretary may call a confer-
ence wth respect to air pollution ad-
versely affecting persons in Mexico
or Canada. Where such a conference
has been called, the representatives
of these two nations, Mexico and Can-
ada, would have all the rights of a
State air pollution control agency.
But this provision contained in the
bill as provided by the other body
was amended to provide that a foreign
country would have such rights as
provided in this section only if recip-
rocal rights are provided for persons
in the United States by such foreign
countries.
We think that is a reasonable pro-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
439
vision and a reasonable requirement.
In addition, the commitbee added a
section to the bill providing that if
the Secretary determines an air pollu-
tion problem may result from dis-
charges in the atmosphere, he may
call a conference in which all inter-
ested persons are to be given an
opportunity to be heard. After the
conference the Secretary may make
findings and recommendations. These
recommendations, of course, would be
advisory in character but would be
admitted together with the record of
the conference as a part of any abate-
ment proceedings brought thereafter.
Now the bill, as passed by the Sen-
ate, would have authorized the Sec-
retary to construct, staff and equip
a Federal air pollution control labora-
tory. Our committee amended this au-
thority to make it more flexible and
to permit the Secretary to establish,
equip and staff such facilities as he
determines to be necessary to carry
out this authority.
We think under the circumstances
since we are just entering on this pro-
gram and there are many problems
that are going to develop which we
cannot foresee at this time that there
should be more flexibility for the Sec-
retary to meet such problems as they
develop.
One other feature of the bill relat-
ing to air pollution deserves some
mention. This is the provision provid-
ing for accelerated research programs
relating to, first, the control of hydro-
carbon emissions from motor vehicles
and, secondly, to low-cost techniques
to reduce emissions of oxide of sulfur
produced by combustion of sulfur-
containing fuel.
Let me deviate for just a moment.
There was a bill that I introduced in
connection with this program that
would give the Secretary authority to
control the fuel used in any Federal
buildings within the United States.
That had to do with any expansion or
new construction in the future.
Obviously what would have occurred
in that regard is that we would have
legislated the use of other fuels than
coal or fuel oil. The information that
we developed during the hearings of
the committee provided that if this au-
thority, which is rather general, was
given to the Secretary and the Secre-
tary would carry out what was pro-
posed, that, along with a program
that had been proposed for adoption
by the Bureau of the Budget, it would
have meant difficulties for the coal
and fuel oil industries.
So, during the course of the hear-
ings, we tried to clarify what was in-
volved. The Bureau of the Budget
apparently was not satisfied with
what was proposed. Conferences were
held, and they did not approve the
proposed order. But there was infor-
mation that came to us that although
the Bureau of the Budget had not ap-
proved this order, they were going to
proceed anyway to put this principle
into effect. We were told that it was
proposed to inaugurate a program
which would virtually say that any
new buildings of the Federal Govern-
ment in the future could not use coal
or residual fuel oil substantially be-
cause of the sulfur content. The rea-
son for that is that most of the coal
and imported residual fuel oil used
has such a sulfur content that it
would be beyond what the regulation
would provide.
This created quite a controversy,
and I believe appropriately so. We
pursued the subject and sought to
make it abundantly clear by getting
a letter from the Department, which
Members will find incorporated on
pages 2 and 3 of the report. In that
letter the Department assures the
committee and the Congress that it
will undertake no further effort to in-
voke such a broad, general policy
merely by regulation. In that way we
eliminate the serious objection that
was offered by the coal industry and
the fuel oil industry.
526-701 O - 73 - 30
-------
440
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
I believe it is important to mention
that point because of the attitude of
some in the Department who had arbi-
trarily taken it upon themselves to try
[p. 25050]
to bring about, through regulation,
such a principle without having it
cleared as it should be through the
regular, established order, if not by
congressional action, then through the
Bureau of the Budget.
We would expect—and, of course, I
know we can expect—the Department
to carry out its policy in that regard.
Mr. Chairman, title II of the bill
deals with the problem of the disposal
of solid waste. There are those who
feel that this is an unnecessary in-
vasion and interference by the Gov-
ernment into a problem that should
be primarily local.
If we accepted the viewpoint of
those who feel that the Federal Gov-
ernment is going to assume the re-
sponsibility and the obligation of dis-
posing of garbage and all solid waste
of municipalities all over this country,
then they would be right, but I want
to make it abundantly clear here and
now that that is not the purpose of
the program.
The purpose of this program is re-
search, investigations, experiments,
training, surveys, studies and demon-
strations, relating to the operation of
financing and otherwise disposing of
this solid waste product. That is what
this program involves.
This program was contained in the
bill passed by the Senate. It is in-
cluded in legislation proposed by many
of our colleagues. The report men-
tions the various Members who have
introduced legislation along this line,
all of which bills were referred to the
committee.
Other than the bill to which I re-
ferred a moment ago, having to do
with Federal facilities, the bill given
most consideration was that offered
by the distinguished chairman of the
House Committee on Public Works,
the gentleman from Maryland [Mr.
FALLON], and the bill which passed
the Senate, being considered today,
S. 306.
What we did was along the lines
generally proposed in S. 306, which is
the bill most acceptable to the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, to the President and his admin-
istration. Many of the provisions of
the gentleman's bill are included in
this.
This is a highly important title to
this bill. Even though it is going to be
somewhat controversial, I believe that
when we conclude the debate the over-
whelming sentiment in the House will
be behind it. We should understand
what is proposed. We should be far-
sighted enough to take this advanced
step toward doing something about
solid waste disposal through inciner-
ation and other means which might
be developed, some of which are not
in existence today. This should be of
great interest to the overwhelming
majority of the House.
Remember that more than one-half
of all the cities in the United States,
with populations in excess of 2,500
have inadequate or improper waste
disposal practices. Smaller communi-
ties in particular have had to resort
to open dumps and equally unhealth-
ful and unsanitary methods. Such
practices are menaces both to the com-
munities themselves and to the rural
countryside.
As a result many communities have
been subject to litigation, which has
been brought by many people because
of highly unsatisfactory conditions
caused by mounting volumes of gar-
bage, refuse, and debris which must
be disposed of. Fly- and rodent-breed-
ing places, water and air pollution
and general nuisances are all directly
associated with these situations. More
and more, these cities of all sizes are
confronted with insoluble problems
and are requesting the types of as-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
441
sistance provided by S. 306. Many of
the smaller cities are requesting as-
sistance from the Federal Govern-
ment. If these problems continue to
grow unattended, they can, only get
worse—and costlier—to solve in the
long run. For these important reasons,
the establishment of a national pro-
gram of research and demonstration
as provided in S. 306 is a vital need to
communities, small and large, and to
rural residents as well.
I urge Members to get a copy of
the report and turn to page 7 and just
read the information which we have
developed here about the accumulation
of litter and refuse and junk which
causes fire hazards and contributes to
accidents and destroys the beauty of
the cities and countryside. What is the
use of having a beautiflcation pro-
gram which is going to be brought to
this House in a few days if at the
same time we are going to permit a
situation to exist where there is no
proper method for dealing with such
rubbish as demolition debris, con-
struction refuse, or abandoned ma-
terial, such as old refrigerators, waste
from slaughterhouses, canneries, and
manufacturing plants, and all of this
other stuff that is dumped in this
country every day. What we are try-
ing to do here is to develop some
method of new techniques whereby
these cities can have available meth-
ods to use besides taking it out in the
countryside and dumping it, which
creates a condition that I know the
people of this country just do not
want. This is highly important and
I think it should be seriously consid-
ered by this Committee.
Mr. STEED. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARRIS. I shall be glad to
yield to the gentleman from Okla-
homa.
Mr. STEED. I thank the gentleman
for yielding.
Let me say first a few years ago
when I served as a member of the
subcommittee which held hearings on
the smog situation in Los Angeles I
was privileged to hear the scientists
from UCLA give a detailed report on
the research they had done. After
hearing that and ever since I have
been a strong advocate of this type
of legislation in the field of air pollu-
tion.
I would like to address my question
to the part of title II of the bill con-
cerning solid waste disposal and to
call attention to the second paragraph
of your report on page 8 where you
make mention of the fact that the
committee does not want anything in
this legislation to duplicate work be-
ing done in this area by the second-
ary materials industry. I have in my
district a company, the International
Disposal Corp., which for many years
has been spending large sums of
money experimenting with a process
which is now perfected and which is
now in the process of being put into
commercial production, which deals
with one phase of solid waste disposal.
What I would like to know from the
chairman is this: Do you think the
terms of this bill are broad enough to
cover an activity of this sort and pro-
tect it from having their activities
duplicated by the provisions of this
bill? Or does it require additional lan-
guage in the bill to include this type
of activity along with the secondary
materials industry?
Mr. HARRIS. The committee
thought in its deliberate consideration
of this problem that it had sufficiently
resolved this question. I would like to
quote the sentence following the sen-
tence that the gentleman read in the
House report on page 8. I think this
explains the attitude of the commit-
tee and what we intended, anyway. If
we do not do it to the satisfaction of
the gentleman and other Members, we
will be glad to do so in order to make
it clear that that is what we intend.
We said there:
-------
442
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
The committee, therefore, expects that the
funds authorized under this act will be used
to demonstrate new and improved methods in
solid waste disposal and not for facilities that
would duplicate—
And I repeat—
not for facilities that would duplicate those
operated by the secondary materials industry.
We did not intend to interfere with
the magnificent effort of such compa-
nies as the gentleman has referred to
in his own State.
Mr. STEED. Mr. Chairman, I ap-
preciate what the chairman has said.
I am in hopes that the Department
will realize that any activity under
this bill, if it becomes law, that dupli-
cates this sort of thing would not be
in keeping with the spirit and intent
of the committee and the bill and
would also be a foolish waste of pub-
lic funds.
Mr. HARRIS. The gentleman has
accurately stated the committee's in-
tention.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARRIS. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, I
thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I have a constituent
who has written me about title II of
this legislation. This gentleman ap-
pears to be in the scrap iron business
and he writes in part as follows:
S. 306 in its present form needs more study
and certainly a new definition of "solid waste."
Scrap iron that feeds our steel mills and paper
stock that conserves our forests and feeds the
paper mills certainly is not "waste" or "junk."
The question I have to ask of the
gentleman is whether or not the gen-
tleman would consider that scrap iron
which is for use in steel mills is to be
included within the definition as a
solid waste.
Mr. HARRIS. We had some discus-
sion of that particular program. I
think it was decided that to single out
any one product or commodity might
make it necessary to go on ad in-
finitum and
[p.25051]
single out others that it would be
obvious that scrap iron and even such
matters as could be baled and utilized
as we do in this country would not be
considered as solid waste as we define
in this legislation.
Mr. McCLORY. In other words, it
is the intention to provide research and
studies in cooperation with local and
State governments with regard to
solid waste that we want to get rid
of and not solid waste which we want
to sell and utilize in industry in some
other way.
Mr. HARRIS. Yes. I might say the
kind of solid waste that would be re-
ferred to as trash or rubbish or gar-
bage that they get from homes and
so forth and which pose a problem to
a community, particularly in the met-
ropolitan areas where there are gov-
ernmental entities all intertwined,
represent a different matter. Here you
have a governmental entity in this
vicinity, and in an adjoining vicinity
another one, and the maybe another
one. This presents a health problem
in solid waste disposal. There is no
way in which these governmental en-
tities can deal with this problem as it
should be dealt with except by agree-
ment, and that is always difficult.
We had testimony from certain of
our cities that have this problem
where certain entities of Government
felt that another one should assume
more responsibility, and that one said,
"No, this one should do it," and the
first thing you know they go around
in circles and nothing is done, which
creates these hazardous health prob-
lems.
I feel that we can by demonstration
and experiment and new techniques
deal with those Government entities
and come up with new methods of dis-
posal to meet this ever-growing prob-
lem in our society.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
443
Mr. McCLORY. That is the way I
understand it.
Mr. HARRIS. What the gentleman
has referred to is a product that does
not come from a municipality as solid
waste, as such, but is a product that
is utilized in our industrial, private
endeavors in this country. We do talk
in the record about reclaiming cer-
tain solid waste, but that means re-
claiming this kind of solid waste that
I am talking about and not reclaiming
such items as scrap iron, which would,
through the processes we know of in
this country, be utilized again in our
industrial output.
Mr. McCLORY. I thank the gentle-
man.
Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARRIS. I shall be glad to
yield to the gentleman from Okla-
homa.
Mr. EDMONDSON. I thank the
chairman, because it has been a dis-
tinct pleasure to hear this presenta-
tion by the distinguished chairman
of the great committee which has
brought this bill to the floor of the
House. I have had the feeling once
again that we are listening to one of
the really statesmanlike legislators of
this body in the presentation that has
been made.
Mr. Chairman, the report of the
committee makes reference to a prob-
lem which undoubtedly is a growing
national problem with reference to
the effective control of motor vehicle
pollution and it states—and I believe
that probably it is going to take sev-
eral years to get to a point of effective
control—but it goes on and states that
the techniques now available provide
only a partial reduction in motor ve-
hicle emission and for the future bet-
ter methods of control will clearly be
needed.
The question I would like to address
to the gentleman is with reference to
the letter which is reprinted in the
report at pages 38 and the following
pages, in which the Secretary of the
Department of the Interior points out
the program which has been conducted
in this field for some time by the De-
partment of the Interior, and points
out that the expertise of the Depart-
ment of the Interior is available to
the Secretary of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare in
connection with the solution of this
problem.
I would like to make quite certain,
based upon a reading of this bill, that
the committee does intend that the
Secretary of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare con-
tinue to avail himself of the expertise
of other departments and to seek their
judgment and assistance in connection
with this very serious national prob-
lem. I believe the Department of the
Interior is in a position to make a
very distinct contribution in this field.
I know that the Bureau of Mines with
its facilities in particular have been
working on this for a very long time
and have come up in my opinion with
some outstanding contributions.
It is my hope that when title I is
placed completely under the authority
of the Secretary of the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare,
that it is, nonetheless, the intention
of this great committee and its chair-
man that the Secretary of the De-
partment of Health, Education, and
Welfare continue to make full use of
the facilities and personnel as well as
the expertise of the Department of
the Interior in connection with this
problem.
Mr. HARRIS. The gentleman is
correct, that it is the intention that
the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare—the Secretary—utilize
the services of any and all of the Gov-
ernment agencies, of industry, local
governments, State governments, and
any source whatsoever which can be
of assistance in this field.
The bill provides that the Secretary
must consider these views that will be
-------
444
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
submitted from other sources in con-
nection with these air pollution pro-
grams.
With respect to solid wastes, I will
say further to the gentleman, if he
will observe the bill itself, in title II
there is $92 million authorized to deal
with this problem over a period of 4
years.
Also approximately $60 million of
this authorization is made available
to the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, and the other $32 million
is made available to the Secretary of
the Department of the Interior, to
carry out work in the field of solid-
waste disposal.
Mr. EDMONDSON. If I understand
correctly, the effective working rela-
tionship between those two depart-
ments as they now exist would con-
tinue. A good deal of the work of the
Department of Interior has been con-
ducted at times with funds made
available by the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare to
carry out projects of the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare.
I was hoping, with some very under-
standable instances of the role of the
Secretaries of Health, Education, and
Welfare in this air pollution field, it
was still the intention of this commit-
tee that effective working relation-
ships of this type would utilize the ex-
perts of other departments in the
future.
Mr. HARRIS. The gentleman is
correct. It was made very clear in the
original act passed in the 88th Con-
gress on abatement of air pollution
that we intended for that principle
to be carried out.
Mr. MCCARTHY. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARRIS. I yield to the gentle-
man from New York.
Mr. MCCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I
am most interested in section 102
providing for the international control
of air pollution. Since I come from
Buffalo, which is on the United States-
Canadian border, with only about a
half mile of water separating us, can
the gentleman cite a case of how sec-
tion 102 would work in this instance
of pollution emanating from the
United States in the Buffalo area and
going over to Fort Erie in Ontario,
right across the Niagara River?
Mr. HARRIS. There would be a
problem from Buffalo into Canada.
That problem would be recognized.
The people in Canada affected would
raise some objection. They would
through the regular procedures make
a complaint to our country. Before
they could proceed to bring about any
program to deal with the subject they
would have to be in agreement for
reciprocal treatment. On the agree-
ment of reciprocity there would be
inaugurated a program by the Secre-
tary to deal with that particular
problem, and similar to the problem
existing in Chicago and other places.
Mr. MCCARTHY. The Secretary of
HEW upon request of the Secretary
of State would convene a conference;
is that correct?
Mr. HARRIS. That would be one
approach to it. We do not say pre-
cisely that is the way it is going to
be done, but I am sure our own Gov-
ernment would require any official
complaint to be brought through reg-
ular channels. It is entirely possible
that the municipality across from
Buffalo, Fort Erie, Ontario, the mu-
nicipality itself would make the com-
plaint direct to the Secretary. Then
the Secretary would investigate and
declare what procedure was necessary
to bring about reciprocity. Then after
that had been established the pro-
gram as provided in this bill would
come into play, and they would
through public hearings and regular
procedures develop the problem and
see if there were some way it could
be reached.
Mr. MCCARTHY. I thank the chair-
man very much.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
445
want to make it clear again that this
does not
[p. 25052]
mean that the Federal Government is
taking over the solid waste disposal
problem. To the contrary, the Solid
Waste Disposal Act is, I repeat, aimed
at mobilization of all levels of govern-
ment, Federal, State, and local, re-
cruiting the talents of scientists and
other specialists in industry to par-
ticipate in a nationwide program
affecting the health and well-being of
most of our citizens.
It is traditional in this country for
the Federal Government to lend as-
sistance in eliminating a national
problem. This is a national problem—
do not overlook that. And it is tradi-
tional for the Federal Government to
aid in meeting problems through sup-
porting research demonstrations and
training when local, State and private
sources are unable to cope with the
magnitude of the problem.
So let me emphasize that the Fed-
eral moneys are only a small fraction
of the governmental expenditures in
this field. But even so they would be
directed at across-the-board activities
which are intended to be beneficial to
all of our great country.
Let us not overlook the fact that
solid wastes are related to and con-
tribute to our air and water pollution
problems. Certainly if this Congress
can provide national programs for ac-
tion against air and water pollution,
we can at least do something about
this problem that is as significant as
in all respects of the same magnitude
as the problem of solid wastes disposal
throughout the Nation today.
Our committee by an overwhelming
majority commends this legislative
program as one of the great forward
steps in an attempt to deal with a
national problem. We hope that the
House will approve this bill in its
entirety.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Arkansas has consumed 50 min-
utes and has 10 minutes remaining.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Nebraska [Mr. CUNNINGHAM]
for 1 hour.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chair-
man, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I want to commend
our distinguished chairman who has
very carefully and in detail explained
this very important piece of legisla-
tion. A little while ago we passed a
bill on heart, cancer, and stroke—an
important piece of legislation I am
sure. But to me there is very little
legislation that I can think of that is
more important than the bill we now
have under consideration. Because to-
day we have a polluted atmosphere
and this particular bill gets at one of
the root causes of certain types of
cancer including lung cancer.
We passed a bill not long ago where
our committee brought before the
House and the House passed the bill,
to stamp a cigarette package with a
warning saying that smoking is dan-
gerous to your health, and so forth.
There is no proof and there was no
proof before our committee that we
could rely upon, that cigarette smok-
ing causes lung cancer. But there is
proof that certain types of noxious
fumes from automobiles and diesel
trucks and chemical plants, and so
forth do cause and are the cause of
certain types of lung cancer. So this
bill is very important.
What this country needs is good,
clean, pure air. I remember when I
came here about 10 years ago our dis-
tinguished colleague, the gentleman
from Minnesota [Mr. BLATNIK], made
a statement to this body and said:
Within 10 years the most important prob-
lem this country will face is the problem of
having an ample supply of good, clean, pure
water.
Through his efforts and the support
of this House we have made great
-------
446
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
strides, so that today we are on the
road to victory in this battle for good,
clean, pure, water. So this bill today
is beginning that same type of battle
so that maybe 10 years hence we will
be able to have good, clean, pure air
to breathe.
Doctors tell us that the finest form
of exercise is just walking around in
the out of doors. But how many of us
can walk outdoors without inhaling
all of these lousy, obnoxious fumes?
One cannot walk around the block
without breathing them in. So the
people are not exercising as they
should because so many of them know
that this is true.
I wish to speak just a moment on
the subject of solid waste disposal.
I am favorable that that provision
should remain in this bill. I wonder if
I could direct a question to the dis-
tinguished chairman. I was going to
ask if he might answer the following
inquiry: Under the definition of "solid
waste," would the chairman think that
the term would include leaves that fall
in the autumn time?
Mr. HARRIS. It is conceivable that
it could include refuse that might
come from leaves, because they would
become a part of waste disposal,
which I know the gentleman has ex-
perienced in great metropolitan areas.
I know at my own home we burn our
leaves in a wire basket or similar
container in the back yard. It creates
certain disposal waste that we must
do something with. So in that way
leaves could become a solid waste.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I appreciate
that response. That is the way I read
the legislation. I understand that it
would be included.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman would yield further, I wish
to reiterate that it is not the intention
to take over the problem of waste
disposal. The program is designed to
find new ways, methods, and tech-
niques of disposing of solid wastes in
order that we can make those ways,
methods, and so forth available to the
municipalities and the communities of
our country for waste disposal.
Mr. CUNNJNGHAM. I thank the
chairman. I understand that perfect-
ly. Where I come from, and I am not
speaking only of leaf disposal but of
the burning of leaves, we are not al-
lowed to burn leaves willy-nilly at
any time of the day. They must be
burned in a certain type of container,
and only during a certain period of
the day.
My temporary home here in Arling-
ton County has no such restrictions.
Any Member who lives in Arlington
County knows what a terrible situa-
tion we have over there when every-
one is burning their leaves out in the
street, on the sidewalk, or in their
backyards. Those fumes hang over the
neighborhood for hours upon hours.
So I think that is an important
point that should be researched be-
cause I believe that it, too, has some-
thing to do with lung cancer and re-
lated diseases.
Mr. Chairman, as I said, our dis-
tinguished chairman has amply de-
scribed this legislation. It is most de-
sirable legislation. If the day ever
comes that we can breathe good, pure
clean air, then I think we shall really
have accomplished a great deal toward
the good health of the American peo-
ple.
Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time
as he might consume to the gentleman
from Minnesota [Mr. NELSEN].
Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Chairman, I
shall not use much time.
I wish to point out that there was
complete agreement on most parts of
this bill. The automotive industry has
been quite concerned, because there
are many proposals on legislative
fronts dealing with these problems,
they fear that we might be running
into situations in which many States
would come up with regulatory legis-
lation setting up standards for con-
trol of exhaust fumes and so forth.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
447
There also seemed to be some need
for national standards in this field in
other related areas. Of course, by en-
actment of a law such as this this
problem would be eliminated.
We did find in the committee some
disagreement as to the part of the bill
relating to disposal of solid waste.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. NELSEN. I yield to the gentle-
man from Arkansas.
Mr. HARRIS. One matter I over-
looked, which I believe ought to be
called to the attention of the Mem-
bers, is the cost to the public of a
program dealing with the matter of
emissions from automobiles.
Representatives of the automobile
industry appeared before the commit-
tee, and testified at length on the pro-
gram, and in support of it. It was
their general estimate, as I recall,
that this might entail an additional
cost of approximately $50 per auto-
mobile.
It should be mentioned also that the
industry has developed a device for
control of emissions from automobiles
which is a State requirement in Cali-
fornia for 1966 because of conditions
in Los Angeles.
There are those who feel perhaps
this will entail an increased cost to
the consumer in the price of an auto-
mobile. It is entirely possible an addi-
tional cost may be required. We pro-
vide that at the appropriate time,
when standards are provided by the
Secretary, under the well-established
procedures that we develop here, these
devices must be included to solve the
problem. We provide that it may be a
built-in device, ultimately, instead of
a different attachment, say a device
attached to the carburetor or the
crankcase or the engine head, as the
case may be. This has to come sooner
or later, to take care of the problem
with respect to exhaust fumes. This
will add some cost.
It may be that as time goes on these
built-in devices within motors will
take
[p.25053]
care of the problem. How much the
increased cost might be at that time
we cannot say.
We could very well afford to do
without some of the very elaborate
things which are included in the auto-
mobiles of the country today, in order
to take care of this kind of problem
which presents a health hazard.
Mr. NELSEN. I thank the gentle-
man.
I might point out that in the com-
mittee the section of the bill dealing
with solid waste was the only section
which seemed to be in some dispute.
We found there were those who had
the opinion that it should not be in
this bill and should be treated as a
separate subject. I believe the Senate
took it out of its bill. However, it has
been considered in another measure
there.
We did feel we should make one
suggestion, contained in our minority
views. The Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare made this
statement:
The collection and disposal of solid wastes
should continue to be primarily the function
of State, regional, and local agencies.
We continued:
We do not agree, however, with its final
conclusion because it is our position that the
Federal Government should not participate in
solid waste disposal by providing financial aid
including construction money and technical as-
sistance, as the bill provides.
Now, as the chairman has pointed
out, the purpose which he seeks to
gain is experimental, to determine
ways in which we can handle this solid
waste, not primarily to give assistance
to communities to eliminate their per-
sonal or local problems but more in
the direction of finding a method that
all communities could finally follow.
-------
448
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
However, I might mention the lan-
guage on page 34 of the bill is rather
broad, but I do think that the legis-
lative history will pretty well nail
down what the intent of the Congress
is. I might say, however, that there
is a minority view in the report which
I have personally signed. I think there
is considerable controversy relative to
this particular section and consider-
able misunderstanding.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. NELSEN. I will be happy to
yield to the gentleman.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I would
like to join the gentleman also in es-
tablishing the legislative history which
the chairman attempted to establish
and which he has done so effectively
here by saying that the solid waste
disposal program is one for research
and finding new methods of trying to
handle the problem rather than, as
you just stated, going out and trying
to solve the individual community
problems of disposing of solid waste.
So I think this is firmly understood
in the debate today and there should
be no area for misunderstanding what
we intend. With this in mind I would
very strongly support this proposal
as well as this legislation and urge its
passage.
Mr. Chairman, only recently in the
administration of another President
this Congress gave initial recognition
to the serious problems which our so-
ciety must face in regard to the con-
trol of the quality of air around us.
I speak of the Clean Air Act of 1963
which was one of the last major bills
signed into law by President Kennedy.
The passage of that legislation firmly
established the concern of the Con-
gress and the bill now before this body
is a further manifestation and exten-
sion of our desire to insure clean air
for the generations of Americans yet
to come.
This legislation has two primary
areas of concern: the abatement of air
pollution and the development of a na-
tional program of research into new
and improved methods of proper and
economic solid waste disposal. These
two provisions are in a sense interde-
pendent on one another. For if we
are to conquer the problems of pro-
viding a clean atmosphere we must
be prepared to meet the exigencies of
all situations which are contributing
to the contamination of that atmos-
phere.
The air pollution title of the bill
centers primarily on attacking the
problem of motor vehicle pollution. In
the next 10 years the amount of pol-
lution emitted in the air will increase
by approximately 75 percent. The
legislation before us requires the Sec-
retary to prescribe allowable stand-
ards of emissions for new motor ve-
hicles. These standards will insure
that the minimum amount of pollu-
tion is being emitted.
Once these standards have been es-
tablished it shall then be illegal for
any motor vehicles to be manufac-
tured which do not contain the
necessary modifications to guarantee
that the standards are being complied
with. During our hearings on the
legislation the automotive industry
indicated a willingness to both aid in
the determination of what the allow-
able standards should be and comply
with those standards once the Secre-
tary had determined their adequacy. I
think this cooperation on the part of
the manufacturers is both commend-
able and indicative of the fact that
they too recognize the urgency of the
problem.
The committee has recognized that
the collection and disposal of solid
wastes is, and should remain, pri-
marily a function of State, regional,
and local agencies. But our hearings
on this matter also brought out the in-
creased need in this area for new
methods and processes. It has there-
fore become necessary to conduct
studies on the national level to develop
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
449
new and improved methods of proper
and economic solid-waste disposal. The
bill will also provide assistance to
State governments and interstate
agencies in planning, developing, and
conducting solid-waste disposal pro-
grams. These programs are not an
encroachment upon the reserve pre-
rogatives of the States, but rather an
effort at assisting the States in an
area that is fast outgrowing the pres-
ent methods of treatment. In com-
parison with the $3 billion figure that
is being spent on refuse collection and
disposal, the $500,000 being spent on
studying advanced methods of dis-
posal is far and away inadequate.
Currently Federal efforts in this
field are confined solely to the Public
Health Service Act and it is not suffi-
ciently broad in scope to aid the States
in providing assistance for their pro-
grams. Nor are the current Federal
efforts in this field sufficiently ade-
quate to meet the pressing needs for
reesarch in this area.
In short, Mr. Chairman, the magni-
tude of the problem we are attempt-
ing to deal with makes this legislation
vitally necessary. When we consider
the number of motor vehicles on our
highways, the vast concentration of
people and industry in our urban
areas, and the projected increases in
both of these factors we can then, and
only then, get some idea of the goals
of this undertaking. I urge passage
of this farsighted measure to insure
that the current problems in air pollu-
tion and solid-waste disposal are ade-
quately met.
Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Chairman, I
would point out that the cost will be
$92.5 million for this purpose in the
next 3 years. Of course, as I stated
earlier in the consideration of other
legislation before the committee, I
think without question there are
many, many things that would have
great merit which we could do. How-
ever, we do need to proceed with cau-
tion wherever possible in the way of
the expenditure of taxpayer dollars.
Our country continues to go deeper
into debt, and we want to be sure
every dollar we spend is properly
spent.
Mr. Chairman, I have no further
requests for time.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chair-
man, I yield 10 minutes to the gentle-
man from New York [Mr. HALPERN].
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Chairman, I
am pleased indeed to lend my support
to S. 306, for I believe that this bill
represents the first major step to-
ward defeating the menace of air
pollution. Coming from a large metro-
politan area, I am well aware of the
enormity of this problem, and I feel
that the Federal Government must
join in the efforts already undertaken
by State and municipal governments
to overcome this situation. The Amer-
ican people want clean, healthful, in-
vigorating air, and it is our responsi-
bility to translate that aspiration into
a reality by passing this bill.
I am not a member of the commit-
tee which has labored long and effec-
tively for this legislation. I appreciate
the privilege of joining in the debate,
but I have had a deep concern.
I want to commend the distin-
guished chairman, the gentleman
from Arkansas [Mr. HARRIS] and ex-
tend my compliments to the minority
spokesman, the gentleman from Ne-
braska [Mr. CUNNINGHAM] for their
enlightened and superb work in this
field and I wish to congratulate the
committee for bringing before us the
legislation we are debating today.
One of the key provisions of this
bill is that which authorizes the Sec-
retary of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare to establish safe standards for
automobile exhaust, and requires the
automobile industry to equip new en-
gines with emission control devices
capable of meeting these standards.
I am addressing my remarks today to
-------
450
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
title I of the bill, since it is similar in
earlier in the session to provide
[p. 25054]
just this authority and testified on the
proposal before this fine committee. I
am gratified to see such a provision
in the bill before us today. For fully
50 percent of the Nation's air pollu-
tion is attributable to the exhaust
which pours incessantly from our 84
million vehicles.
All the carbon monoxide and most
of the nitrogen dioxide which poisons
our air comes from the tailpipes of
automobiles, and this has been grow-
ing worse every year. The Department
of Air Pollution Control in New York
City issued a report at the end of
1963 which revealed that the carbon
monoxide content of the city's air had
increased by 50 percent that year, and
the nitrogen dioxide content, by 87.5
percent—and this has been growing
steadily worse each year. I have
watched and studied the statistics
which document the growth of the air
pollution problem, and I want to see
that trend reversed.
The property damage wrought by
air pollution defies credibility. Arthur
Benline, the able commissioner of New
York City's Department of Air Pollu-
tion Control, has estimated that air
pollution accounts for an economic loss
to New York property owners of over
$520 million annually. But the toll this
takes in the health of our people is
even more serious. This has been care-
fully studied last year by the New
York Academy of Medicine, and be-
fore that, at the National Council on
Air Pollution. The evidence amassed
demonstrates overwhelmingly that air
pollution contributes to chronic res-
piratory disease. Even though no di-
rect causal relationship has been es-
tablished between automotive exhaust
and any particular disease, ample evi-
dence has been accumulated which
would link air pollution to various
respiratory ailments. For example, a
definite relationship has been demon-
strated between asthma attacks and
the level of sulfur dioxide in urban
air, and a similar correlation has been
shown to exist between lung cancer
and urban air pollution. I think if we
can provide for control of the pollu-
tion caused by cars, trucks, and buses,
we will be taking a giant stride for-
ward in safeguarding the health of all
Americans.
There can be no doubt that this is
a Federal responsibility. Though tra-
ditionally, air pollution control has
been within the province of State and
local governments, two factors im-
pinge the problem on us. First, if
States were left to establish independ-
ent standards for automobile exhaust
emission, for example, chaos would
ensue. Manufacturers would be bur-
dened with producing cars which
would have to meet 50 different stand-
ards, and if an automobile owner
moved from one State to another, his
vehicle would have to be overhauled.
Second, if one State were to promul-
gate and enforce effective pollution
control regulations, and a neighbor-
ing State were lax, the former would
still have to contend with the dirt,
foreign particles, and noxious fumes
carried by the wind from the latter
State. Thus, uniformity is absolutely
necessary, and the Congress must ac-
cept this responsibility, and should
welcome the opportunity to help our
people purify their air.
Equipping new engines with emis-
sion control devices will not be pro-
hibitively expensive. The Chrysler
Corp., for example, has produced a
clean air kit costing only $13 to $24,
which would reduce total emissions
by 65 to 70 percent, and spokesmen
for the auto industry agree that such
a device can be mass-produced in time
for the 1968 models. This small addi-
tion to the cost of a new car is but a
fraction of the savings which result
from the repeal of the excise tax on
automobiles, and a very modest price
indeed for clean air.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
451
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like
to say that I fully support the other
major provision of this bill which pro-
vides for fuller Federal participation
in research and experimental pro-
grams designed to assist the States in
developing sound solid waste disposal
projects. This Federal help is desper-
ately needed, and I believe that the
nature of the assistance provided in
this bill is well tailored to meet this
pressing need.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chair-
man, I ask unanimous consent that
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
LINDSAY] may extend his remarks at
this point in the RECORD and include
extraneous matter.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Nebraska?
There was no objection.
Mr. LINDSAY. Mr. Chairman, I
shall come directly to the point: The
bill before us today will not do the
job. It approaches the urgent, critical
problem of air pollution with hesita-
tion and timidity.
It provides no money whatever to
States or cities for a frontal attack
on their defiled atmospheres.
Air pollution is a national concern.
It affects, in varying degrees, every
one of our largest cities. Its resolution
demands strong, effective national
legislation.
Our fresh air is a precious national
resource which, in common with many
of our natural resources, has been
misused, demeaned and in many in-
stances contaminated. Only 2 years
ago, 405 New Yorkers died during a
15-day period of intense air pollution.
Most of the victims were aged and ill.
But life was as precious to them as
to the young.
Hundreds of similar but less severe
incidents caused by polluted air have
been reported across the country. Bad
air not only affects our health, but
costs us billions of dollars yearly in
cleaning and laundry bills. At best, it
is unsightly.
Air pollution is a silent and largely
invisible enemy, one we have not even
begun to fight. In my judgment, this
bill (S. 306) is not much more than
a beginning.
My first criticism of the bill is that
it establishes no deadline whatever
for national control of insidious motor
vehicle fumes. These emissions ac-
count for about 40 percent of the pol-
lution in New York City's air.
The bill simply directs the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare to prescribe its emission stand-
ards "as soon as practicable." The es-
tablishment and enforcement of na-
tional controls upon pollutants cars
and trucks spew into our air forms
the heart of any Federal air pollution
abatement program. Yet the language
of this bill is unhurried and even
lackadaisical.
The bill I introduced earlier this
year to amend the Clean Air Act
would have required the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare to
prescribe the California maximum
emission standards for all new cars
and trucks to take effect 1 year after
enactment of the bill. As passed by
the Senate, S. 306 directed that na-
tional standards be adopted no later
than September 1, 1967. The Senate
deadline was eliminated.
I appreciate the reluctance of the
Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce to write into the bill fixed
standards of a highly technical nature.
I believe, however, that a firm date
should be set for the application of
antipollution regulations to motor ve-
hicle manufacturers. The Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare
can be instructed to set standards ad-
ministratively; they need not be
spelled out in the act.
If standards are imposed adminis-
tratively, I see no reason why max-
imums cannot be placed on the emis-
sion of hydrocarbons and carbon mon-
-------
452
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
oxide by cars and trucks manufactured
in the United States next year.
A second criticism of this bill is that
it contains no followup enforcement
period. It provides fines for manufac-
turers who fail to meet Federal stand-
ards on exhaust emission, but it is
silenced thereafter. My bill, H.R. 7065,
authorizes Federal grants of $15 mil-
lion a year to States to help them in-
spect control devices and engine modi-
fications to determine whether vehicles
in use actually meet national criteria.
Many of the States could perform this
duty in conjunction with existing
safety inspection programs. I think it
regrettable that this provision was not
adopted.
Third, the bill virtually ignores one
of the most obvious sources of air pol-
lution in our cities: Incinerators. New
York City alone has almost 20,000
incinerators, and they contribute enor-
mously to the city's often foul air.
Incinerators are responsible for much
of the soot afflicting all our major
cities. In New York, 60 tons of flyash
and other debris falls on every square
mile each month.
My bill authorized $100 million a
year in grants to assist cities in the
acquisition and installation of air pol-
lution control devices to minimize the
dirty discharges from solid waste dis-
posal plants.
The committee bill bypasses in-
cinerator smoke and embarks upon
a $92.5 million program to develop bet-
ter methods of disposing of solid
wastes, which is largely tangential to
our objective of clean air.
The disposal of trash and garbage
presents growing difficulties for cities,
particularly New York. Almost 520
million pounds of refuse must be col-
lected in our urban areas every day
of the year. We must develop efficient
low-cost methods of disposing of this
gigantic pile of refuse.
While I applaud the assistance the
bill provides for waste disposal I
lament the failure to attack the im-
mediate source
[p. 25055]
of air pollution, which is the smoke
produced by incinerators now burning
off solid wastes.
Fourth, I strongly object to the re-
tention of the 12% -percent limitation
on the amount of grants that may be
awarded to any one State under the
Clean Air Act of 1963. Congress al-
most automatically places a State
limitation on funds authorized in na-
tional legislation, and the unvarying
effect is to discriminate against our
larger States. More precisely, it is un-
fair to the Nation's largest cities.
The limitation in this bill is perhaps
the most foolish of all. The most acute
air pollution problems in the United
States are in New York City and Los
Angeles. Under the limitation, New
York and California can qualify for
no more assistance than New Mexico,
which has no discernible difficulty with
polluted air.
The policy may possess a certain
amount of logic in other legislation;
but when we are dealing with a prob-
lem which manifestly is most serious
in our largest cities the formula makes
no sense whatever. I do not suggest
that the appropriations under this or
any other nationwide congressional
program be allocated on a first come,
first served basis, for it would dis-
criminate against our smaller cities
and States. My bill calls for the State
limitation to be raised only slightly,
from 12% percent to 20 percent. I
am disappointed that the section was
discarded.
Fifth, my bill would have awarded
business and industry a form of in-
vestment credit or an accelerated de-
preciation schedule on purchases of air
pollution control facilities. The objec-
tive was to stimulate antipollution
efforts by such businesses as Con-
solidated Edison in New York City.
The provision was eliminated, ap-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
453
parently on the recommendation of the
Bureau of the Budget, which said:
We believe that tax measures should gen-
erally not be proposed as portions of substan-
tive legislation.
The Bureau's position has merit.
Congress should not make piecemeal
tax revisions, but should initiate a
complete reform of the Nation's tax
structure. I should point out, at the
same time, that Congress enacted two
major amendments to the Internal
Revenue Code, both dealing with
medical expense deductions, when it
passed the Medicare Act earlier this
year. The procedure hardly followed
the Bureau's stated philosophy.
While I am far from satisfied with
the bill as presented to the House, I
shall vote for it and I urge my col-
leagues to do so. I think it ironic,
however, that the strongest passage in
the bill, the one that will most benefit
New York City, concerns solid waste
disposal and not air pollution. While
the disposal of the city's waste is
highly important, I do not believe it
should take priority over a meaning-
ful attack on the far more pressing
danger of poisoned air.
It is my intention, accordingly, to
continue to work for a better bill, one
which will recognize the growing peril
inherent in defiled air and direct
forceful action against it.
Hr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield
such time as he may consume to the
distinguished gentleman from Colorado
[Mr. McVlCKER].
Mr. McVlCKER. Mr. Chairman, I
am extremely pleased to join with so
many of my colleagues in support of
S. 306.
Earlier this year I introduced a bill
H.R. 7394, which had a similar pur-
pose. I am gratified that many of the
provisions of my bill are incorporated
in the measure which we are consider-
ing here today.
My interest in this subject extends
back many years. In fact I fought for
air pollution legislation when I served
in the Colorado General Assembly.
Any effective action in this area is go-
ing to require the energetic effort and
close cooperation of government agen-
cies at all levels—Federal, State, and
local. This bill will make that kind of
cooperation possible.
I am equally concerned with the dis-
posal of solid waste, inasmuch as that
is one of the most pressing problems
confronting my fast-growing suburban
district. In that connection I would
like to acquaint my colleagues of the
House with the constructive steps
taken by one of my progressive com-
munities to cope with this problem.
The discussion thus far clearly
demonstrates that the Members of this
body are acutely aware of the urgent
need to purge our cities of the deadly
contaminants which foul their atmos-
phere. I am confident the Congress
will lend concrete support to State
and local efforts in this area.
How ridiculous such a problem
would have seemed to our forebears.
How ridiculous even to the Congress
of a decade ago. Clean air? We take it
for granted, we could say up until
just a few years ago. To think that
legislators would have to discuss ways
and means of preserving air, the one
thing the world is full of.
The very fact that we have come to
the point in our civilization where
legislators discuss the matter is serious
in itself. It is serious, nay perilous,
because in the course of the workings
of our democracy matters reach the
legislation stage only at the last
critical moment. That means that ex-
perts view a given situation with alarm
for years before the public picks up
the cry and by the time the cry reaches
the legislative halls the situation has
reached a point where it may or may
not be too late to do something about.
The real question before us is not,
or should not be, whether or not to
enact legislation to control air pollu-
-------
454
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
tion. The question that hangs before
our civilization is whether or not it
is too late to do anything at all. Think
for a moment of the news stories over
the last few years about air pollution.
The fogs, the smogs, the hazes, the
smazes. The increase of respiratory
diseases. The decline of vegetation and
wildlife in our urban areas due, among
other things, to bad air.
My State of Colorado has long been
noted for its crystal-pure air. In re-
cent years the air pollution in Denver
has become a problem. Denver is a
thriving metropolis, but the Denver
area does not have nearly the popula-
tion concentration of some of these
eastern megalopolises. So suddenly
there is air pollution a mile above sea
level in only a moderately large popu-
lation center. And Boulder, a city of
some 50,000 souls 27 miles northwest
of Denver, now has an air-pollution
problem.
Where does it end? Soon there will
be no hamlet safe from the poisonous
fumes spewing from our modern in-
dustrial civilization. There is no course
open to us but to enact legislation.
Then we sit back and hope and pray
that this legislation does not come too
late.
I would like to discuss another as-
pect of the measure which we are con-
sidering here today.
The provisions of title II of S. 306,
which is known as the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, will be of tremendous
benefit to the people of the Second
District of Colorado. The four major
counties I have the good fortune to
represent, once predominantly rural
in character, are urbanizing at an ex-
tremely rapid rate. With the growth
and concentration of population the
disposal of solid waste has become one
of the area's most critical problems.
The municipalities and counties in my
district are responsible for providing,
at the minimum, safe and sanitary
places for the disposal of solid wastes,
and many of the cities and towns col-
lect refuse as well. In addition, the
modified sanitary landfill operation
where the city and county of Denver
puts most of its solid waste is located
in Adams County, part of the Second
District. Thus, the counties within my
district are the recipients of the solid
waste from another jurisdiction as
well as being required to provide dis-
posal facilities for waste material
from their own jurisdiction. For many
years, Denver's refuse was deposited
in an open, burning dump which is
surrounded by fine residential areas.
Fortunately, the practice of open burn-
ing by the city and county of Denver
at this site was terminated earlier
this year. Consequently, the problem
of disposing of solid wastes is serious
in my district and has placed an over-
whelming burden upon its people and
local governments.
The local governments of the Second
District are not standing by and wait-
ing for someone to solve this problem
for them. Instead they are beginning
the long, slow, tedious, and costly
process of developing better and less
expensive methods of collecting and
disposing of garbage and refuse. They
look to us today to help them by au-
thorizing a nationwide research and
demonstration program in this field, a
program which will bring the atten-
tion of sanitation experts across the
country to bear on a situation which
will have all of us inundated with
waste materials if more adequate
methods are not discovered. I believe
the programs which have been started
by local governments in my district,
when coupled with other local pro-
grams around the country, will fulfill
the purpose of this important legisla-
tion.
With your permission, Mr. Chair-
man, I would like to take a few mo-
ments to
[p. 25056]
describe a solid waste disposal pro-
gram which has just been started
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
455
on a cooperative basis by the city of
Boulder and the county of Boulder.
As you know, Boulder County is
one of the most beautiful in our
Nation, and the city of Boulder, the
county seat and home of the Uni-
versity of Colorado, with a population
of approximately 50,000, is located at
the foot of the Rocky Mountains be-
low the picturesque red sandstone flat-
irons about 30 miles northwest of Den-
ver.
As early as 1954, the surrounding
property owners sued the city of
Boulder and asked that the practice
of open burning be stopped. Late in
1962, the city was named defendant
in a lawsuit in which the plaintiffs
asked $750,000 in property damages.
As a result of the program which the
city has undertaken to correct the
hazardous operation of the modified
sanitary landfill, the case was recently
settled out of court for only $4,000.
In 1962, the Public Health Service,
in conjunction with the Boulder City-
County Department of Health, con-
ducted an environmental health survey
for Boulder County. PHS reported,
at the conclusion of the man survey,
that the modified sanitary landfill op-
erated by the city of Boulder in an
unincorporated portion of Boulder
County posed a serious health hazard
for the entire county. The refuse de-
posited at the site was burned in an
open pit before being buried, and rats,
other rodents, and insects thrived at
the dump. Smoke from the burning
dump posed a nuisance to surround-
ing property owners and residents,
and rodents and insects invaded sur-
rounding property and homes.
In an effort to provide a sanitary
method of disposing of solid wastes
in Boulder County, the city and county
jointly undertook a comprehensive
study of the matter with the assistance
of the Federal Government which was
provided through the Housing and
Home Finance Agency's 701 planning
program. As a result of this study, it
was discovered that the soil conditions
and high water table in Boulder
County prevented the successful use of
sanitary landfill methods. The high
ground water in almost every area of
the county led to the conclusion that
landfill operations would result in the
serious problem of polluting part of
the water supply for the county. The
poor soil conditions were brought
about by shale beds underlying most
of the county at very high levels.
Consequently, sufficient quantities of
desirable cover materials were not
available for successful sanitary land-
fill operations.
These problems were further magni-
fied by the fact that land, the primary
ingredient for a successful sanitary
landfill operation, is not available in
sufficient quantity on an economical
basis. Boulder is a growing com-
munity, and land values have soared
beyond the point where it is economical
for the city or the county to acquire
land close to concentrated areas of
population to devote to this use. To go
farther away from the community
where the solid waste is produced,
would present other problems. The
planning study indicated that the cost
of hauling refuse to a sanitary land-
fill which the city or the county could
afford to purchase would range from
25 cents to 40 cents per mile. These
hauling costs would unreasonably in-
crease the cost of service for the home
and business owner. These facts led
city and county officials to search for
another, less expensive means of solid
waste disposal.
In an effort to overcome the health
hazards existing as a result of the
several open, burning dumps in the
county, the board of county commis-
sioners established minimum stand-
ards for sanitary landfill operations,
and, to date, all of the cities and
private operators have made their dis-
posal facilities conform. The county
then entered into a contract with a
private firm for the operation of a.
526-701 O - 73 - 31
-------
456
LEGAL COMPILATION—Ant
composting facility at the county-
designated disposal site. The city of
Boulder has designated this disposal
site as the only place where the pri-
vate haulers licensed by the city may
deposit refuse they collect. The city
of Lafayette has taken similar action,
and it is hoped that other cities will
also abandon their present dump sites
and designate the new county dis-
posal area.
The change in Boulder County's ap-
pearance has been dramatic since all
of this has taken place. The new
county disposal site is operated under
the close supervision of the Boulder
City-County Department of Health,
and is a vast improvement over the old
sites in terms of public health stand-
ards and esthetics. The county, the
cities, and the private operator realize
that the value of a composting opera-
tion in the field of solid waste dis-
posal lies in finding a market for the
finished product. Consequently, they
have approached Colorado State Uni-
versity with the idea of developing
a research and demonstration project
at this site for the purpose of illustrat-
ing how new ideas of composting can
reduce the cost of the final product.
I understand that this is just the sort
of thing that this legislation is de-
signed to encourage.
We are not authorizing another
Federal-aid program by enacting S.
306. Instead, we are recognizing that
our Nation is faced with a very serious
problem, a problem which will require
the imagination and hard work of
people at all levels of government if
the solution is to be found in time to
save the Nation from its devastating
effects. Local governments are simply
not equipped financially to find this
solution by themselves. But their ef-
forts, based on financial and technical
assistance from the Federal Govern-
ment and coordination on a nationwide
basis, will be productive.
Gentlemen, there is no single, simple
satisfactory solution to the problem of
solid waste disposal, as in indicated
by the study which the local govern-
ments in my district have undertaken.
What may work in Boulder County
might not be successful in other areas
of the country. But enactment of this
legislation will permit the exchange of
Boulder's ideas with those from other
parts of the country, to the end that
all parts of the Nation will receive
the benefits of this important legisla-
tion. Mayor Paul Crouch; his city
council; Boulder County Commission-
ers Joe Smith, W. D. "Ted" McCaslin,
and G. B. Akins, Jr.; Robert Turner
and Robert Quinlin, the former and
present city managers in Boulder;
James Kean, assistant city'manager
in Boulder; and Archie Twitchel,
Boulder's assistant director of plan-
ning, should be complimented for their
devotion to searching for a solution
to the solid waste disposal problems
of Boulder County, Colo.
Their research and action demon-
strates the importance of this prob-
lem to local governments of all sizes,
and it illustrates to me the importance
of our favorable action on S. 306 to-
day.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I am
pleased to yield to the gentleman from
New York [Mr. BINGHAM] such time
as he may consume.
Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in support of S. 306, the Clean
Air Act of 1965. I know of no piece
of legislation which has come before
this Congress which has wider sup-
port among the people of my district.
In June of this year, I polled the vot-
ers of the 23d Congressional District
of New York and asked them whether
they favored requiring devices on auto-
mobiles to reduce air pollution, even
if it resulted in increase of the retail
price of cars. Among the 8,000 who
responded, 93 percent were in favor of
such action, only 4 percent in opposi-
tion, and 3 percent were undecided.
This was the greatest degree of una-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
457
nimity expressed on any of the dozen
queries in my questionnaire.
Mr. Chairman, I believe this demon-
strates the fact that the country, at
least as far as my district in New York
City is concerned, is enthusiastically
behind such legislation as this and I
join in complimenting the chairman
and the members of the committee
for bringing forth this worthwhile
legislation.
Our concern about air pollution is
based on both the increased poisoning
of the very air we breathe and our
increased awareness of the dangers
posed by air pollution. One prime of-
fender is, of course, the automobile.
An excellent study, "Air Pollution
in New York City," was issued on
June 22, 1965, based on an investiga-
tion led by Councilman Robert A. Low.
The study concluded:
There can be no doubt that emissions from
automobile engines and diesel engines are a
major contributing factor to the increasingly
undesirable atmospheric conditions existing in
New York City and in every city throughout
the country.
It has been estimated that 50 per-
cent of our air pollution is caused by
the 85 million motor vehicles now be-
ing operated in the United States. In
view of predictions made this week
that automobile sales next year would
exceed sales of the 1965 models and
the projection for future sales, we can
anticipate that the hazards posed by
automobile exhaust fumes will in-
crease markedly unless legislation such
as S. 306 is adopted and implemented.
Mr. Chairman, this problem is in-
tense in cities such as New York
where we have a high concentration
of population and an ever-increasing
reliance on automobiles. The problem
is especially acute for i
[p. 25057]
our older citizens who are more prone
to respiratory disorders.
Passage of this legislation is vital
to the people I am privileged to repre-
sent, but I must confess that I am not
satisfied that the bill goes far enough,
so far as the Federal Government's
obligation is concerned.
I think it unfortunate that there is
no statutory prohibition against Fed-
eral Government purchase of vehicles
which do not conform to minimum
health standards. There is no provi-
sion for controlling pollutants from
Federal buildings and installations.
There is no provision for changes in
the Internal Revenue Code to give tax
incentive for expenditures and in-
creased investment for the acquisition,
construction, or installation of air pol-
lution devices.
I heartily support the pending bill
because I regard it as an excellent
start in the effort to reduce and con-
trol air pollution, but additional legis-
lation will be needed to accelerate the
program.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chair-
man, I yield such time as he may con-
sume to the gentleman from Washing-
ton [Mr. PELLY]. "
Mr. PELLY. Mr. Chairman, as I
have listened, and I might say I
listened with great interest, to the ex-
tended discussion, explanation, and de-
bate on this so-called Clean Air Act,
I have felt impelled to express my ap-
preciation to the committee and its
chairman for reporting out this leg-
islation.
I do not believe there is any ques-
tion about the fact that one of the
most serious problems facing our
society today is the increasing con-
tamination of our environment and air
pollution, especially that emanating
from motor vehicles which certainly
represents a threat to public health.
Mr. Chairman, I have been particu-
larly interested in the fact that title
II was added to this bill, having to do
with the disposal of solid waste.
Mr. Chairman, the congressional
district which it is my honor to repre-
sent, the city of Seattle, has been
struggling for months seeking to ar-
-------
458
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
rive at the most efficient and effective
way to dispose of its garbage and
waste.
Mr. Chairman, I was particularly
gratified to have the chairman of the
committee, the distinguished gentle-
man from Arkansas [Mr. HARRIS],
state that this bill basically was a bill
to develop research and help the local
communities with this problem, but
not tell them what to do.
Mr. Chairman, I realize that this
is a very difficult problem and that
each community should study different
ways of meeting it.
I repeat I am very gratified to have
the chairman of the committee state
that this is basically a research bill
and not one of the Federal Govern-
ment dictating to local communities
as to how best to meet this problem.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chair-
man, I yield 5 minutes to the gentle-
man from Missouri [Mr. CURTIS].
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chairman, I think
I ought to make the observation I am
just as anxious to be home and not in
Washington on this Friday afternoon
as anyone here. Obviously, most of our
colleagues have chosen not to be here.
Like the rest of us present, I have
canceled various speaking engage-
ments. Yet this bill is a serious one.
It involves in part II, $90 million.
Before I go to the critical aspect, let
me say I am very much impressed
with the work done by the committee,
the clean air part of the bill, part I.
I think there have been some dif-
ficult problems here, and the com-
mittee, along with the other body, has
done an excellent job. I say that on
the basis of the debate on the bill, and
also the hearings on the Clean Air Act
amendments. What disturbs me is the
statement in the minority report,
found on page 66. I presume this is a
fair statement:
Section 202 of title II—solid waste disposal-
is a long introduction which attempts to
rationalize and justify the whole scheme. This
language was not in the bill passed by the
other body or in any House bill, but was sug-
gested to the committee by the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare after the
hearings.
I presume, therefore, that the com-
mittee did not hold hearings on sec-
tion 202 and, looking at the com-
mittee hearings, I find about the ex-
tent of the comment on the solid waste
proposition consists of letters put in
the record, but no cross-examination
of any of the witnesses which, in my
judgment, is required if there is to
be a study.
I originally was attracted to the
problems by the language on page 7
of the committee report itself, where
this statement was made—and I am
going to read it. Frankly, I would
like to know its verification, referring
to the problems of solid waste dis-
posal :
This is a challenge which State and local
governments cannot meet without assistance
from the Federal Government. The handling
and disposal of solid wastes are costly opera-
tions that strain the resources of State and
local agencies.
That is the issue and there has been
no substantiation for the statement.
I must say to the Members of the
House it is the Federal income tax
that is under great pressure as far as
strain is concerned. It is the Federal
Government that is not meeting its
bills, and we have to continue to in-
crease the debt ceiling. There cer-
tainly has been a great strain on local
and State governments with their re-
sources, but they have been meeting
their obligations. I was curious to
know how the committee could have
reached this conclusion that the State
and local governments cannot meet
this problem without assistance from
the Federal Government.
Then, going on, the following state-
ment is made:
Approximately $3 billion a year Is being
spent today for refuse collection and disposal
through services provided by local governments
and private entrepreneurs.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
459
I suspect it is probably about that
amount of money.
The next statement is the one I want
to point up:
In contrast, teas than $500,000 annually is
being spent to improve methods of solid waste
disposal.
That is something that is surely be-
ing pulled out of the air, because there
are some companies that spend that
amount of money themselves in trying
to figure out improved methods of solid
waste disposal. I can tell you that the
$500,000 figure is inaccurate, that it
is closer to hundreds of millions a
year spent trying to improve the meth-
ods of solid waste disposal.
I have introduced bills to give tax
credits to private enterprise that will
put money into the kind of capital in-
vestment necessary to take care of dis-
posing of waste that goes into streams
and I might say the disposition of solid
wastes. Although a great deal of money
is being spent in this area, a great
deal of it I will say is on research and
development, but a great deal more
needs to be spent. In my judgment it
would be spent if we would enact leg-
islation similar to the 1962 tax in-
centive act to encourage our private
corporations to invest in modern
machinery and get rid of obsolescence.
This act gave them an extra tax
credit—a tax credit I might say be-
yond normal depreciation schedules.
If this is a good policy, I argue that
it would be a better policy to move
forward in this area of solid waste dis-
posal in the same fashion.
I do note in the committee report in
the letter of the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare which ap-
pears on page 20, there is reference
to some bills that have been intro-
duced in the tax incentive area—but
they just go ahead and dismiss it by
saying:
However, we defer to the views of the
Treasury Department as to the consistency of
the proposed amendments with national tax
policy as well as the technical adequacy of
these provisions.
Well, there are many ways to skin
a rabbit; if we want to move forward
in our society, and we all do, to solve
this great problem of solid waste dis-
posal, I think the committee has ac-
curately described it, as an increas-
ingly great problem. This needs to be
thought of from many angles. We need
to develop what really is being done
in the private sector and what is be-
ing done by our local and State gov-
ernments rather than simply beg the
question as is done in the committee
report by saying this is a challenge
which State and local governments
cannot meet without assistance from
the Federal Government.
I again want to call attention to
what is increasingly proving to be
true, the Curtis corollary to Gresham's
law—Gresham's law saying that bad
money draws out good money. The
Curtis corollary simply says that
Government money drives out private
money. It does not have to do this but
if we are not careful, and we have not
been careful, when we move forward
with Federal programs instead of en-
couraging and benefiting the private
sector and local and State govern-
ments, we will bring about a situation
that will lead to the deterioration of
the private sector and local and State
governments. There will be a substitu-
tion of the Federal Government for
the local and State governments and
private initiative.
[p. 25058]
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I
yield myself such time as I may re-
quire. I do so because I think it is im-
portant to comment on some of the
statements made by the gentleman
from Missouri.
Let me say I appreciate the gentle-
man's bringing these points to the at-
tention of the committee. First I
would refer to the tax credit matter.
It is true that the statement which
-------
460
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
was included in the Department's re-
port deferred to the Treasury. I would
remind the gentleman that the Treas-
ury has also given us a letter which
is included in the report on pages 50
and 51 and I think it would be impor-
tant to take note of that.
In the second place, with reference
to tax credits, that is a matter that is
with another committee and with
which we cannot deal in connection
with this program. Like the Depart-
ment when it deferred to the Treas-
ury, we of the Interstate and Foreign
Commerce Committee, defer to the
Committee on Ways and Means that
has jurisdiction over these problems.
Next, the gentleman from Missouri,
I believe, did give the impression,
though not intentionally, in reading
the language in the report about the
challenge which the State and local
governments cannot meet, that this
has reference to the entire problem
of waste disposal.
The gentleman did not include in
the statement the first sentence of
the paragraph, occurring immediately
prior to the sentence he started off
reading. The gentleman referred to
the challenge and its importance. The
first sentence states:
In the opinion of the committee, immediate
action must be taken to initiate a national
program directed toward finding and applying
new solutions to the waste disposal problem.
That is the challenge which the
State and local governments are un-
able to meet. It is not the actual dis-
posal program itself. It is finding new
methods and techniques dealing with
the problem.
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HARRIS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Missouri.
Mr. CURTIS. The gentleman is
making a proper point. Indeed that
is so. But you then go on, in the final
sentence, to say:
In contrast, less than $500,000 annually is
being spent to improve methods of solid waste
disposal.,
That is the point I was contesting.
Mr. HARRIS. The gentleman did
make that very appropriate point. We
did not intend to convey the impres-
sion that that amount was all of the
funds being spent in that field. We
had in mind that this amount is what
the Government is spending in the
field.
Mr. CURTIS. I see.
Mr. HARRIS. What we had refer-
ence to was that in the 1965 budget
the total of all solid waste research
would include 12 grants amounting to
$393,747. We did not include or at-
tempt to include what was being spent
in the private sector.
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. HARRIS. I yield.
Mr. CURTIS. I thank the gentle-
man. In other words, that is what the
Federal Government has been spend-
ing.
Mr. HARRIS. Yes. That is the in-
formation we intended to convey.
Mr. CURTIS. I think the gentleman
acted properly in directing attention
to that sentence I did not read. I was
not trying to confuse the matter. The
gentleman has clarified it.
Mr. HARRIS. Yes; I understand
thoroughly. I thank the gentleman for
calling the point to the attention of
Members, particularly the reference
to the total amount of the research
expenditure, which is included in the
report. We intended to mean the
amount of Government funds going
into that field.
[p. 25059]
Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Chairman,
I wish to express my support for
S. 306 on behalf of the smaller and
medium-sized cities and counties of
my district. The municipal and county
officials of my district are confronted
with the overwhelming problem of dis-
posing of solid wastes, and they are,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
461
therefore, extremely interested in our
action on what is known as the Solid
Waste Disposal Act portion of this
legislation.
During my travels throughout my
district, I have noted that there are
far too many open, burning dumps
scarring the countryside. However, I
recognize fully that the local govern-
ments of such communities as Provo,
Salt Lake City, and Orem lack the fi-
nancial resources to research the dis-
posal of this waste material by more
suitable methods. This legislation, if
acted upon favorably, will authorize
the expenditure of funds for the de-
velopment and demonstration of new
and less expensive solid waste disposal
techniques. Even if the cities and
counties of my district do not actively
participate in the program, this legis-
lation will help develop and make
available new techniques which will be
available to all cities. The new tech-
niques should make solid waste dis-
posal less expensive and more effec-
tive for all. For these reasons I urge
the adoption of S. 306 as reported by
the Committee on Interstate and For-
eign Commerce.
Mr. HELSTOSKI. Mr. Chairman,
the Clean Air Act of 1963, Public Law
206 of the 88th Congress was signed
by President Johnson on December
17, 1963, and set into motion a proc-
ess of stimulating our national efforts
to control and abate the pollution of
our Nation's air.
Although this act was far reaching
in its effects, such as financial aid for
control programs, expanded research
into the sources and control of air
pollution from the gaseous emissions
of automobiles and fuel consumption
of industrial plants, it was only the
beginning of a program which re-
quires the attention of Congress to
further enhance the effectiveness of
the present law.
The legislation which we have be-
fore us today would help meet the ob-
jectives as proposed by President
Johnson that we end "the poisoning of
the air we breathe" and called upon us
to "prevent the pollution of our air
before it happens."
The millions of motor vehicles which
jam the highways and expressways
of this country are the main culprits
in the pollution of our air and some
efforts should be taken to reduce these
pollutants.
While our national air pollution, at
the present time, is due chiefly to
automobile exhausts, smoke discharges
from industrial plants, and disposal of
solid wastes contribute much to the
overall picture of air pollution. Our
increasing population, the expansion
of urban and suburban areas, the ad-
ditional consumption of energy-pro-
ducing fuels and industrial develop-
ment and expansion have all added
to the creation of solid wastes which
are disposed of by burning in open
dumps or land fills. These methods
are a prime factor in creating a pol-
luted atmosphere for miles around
such a disposal facility.
With the rise of cities, human be-
ings have been forced to think of air
as a resource, for air pollution is a
sickness of the cities. It comes about
almost entirely through the burning
of fuels and wastes. The cure for the
worst kinds of air pollution is to pre-
vent noxious combustion products
from entering the air. But the laws
of physics make it virtually impos-
sible to keep carbon dioxide, which
is the principal product of combus-
tion, out of the air.
It has been predicted that by the
year 2000, the amount of atmospheric
carbon dioxide may have increased by
about 50 percent; and many believe
that this will have a considerable ef-
fect on the world's climate, but nobody
has been able to make a convincing
guess about just what that effect will
be.
The effects of air pollution on the
lives and well-being of our pollution
are numerous and burdensome. Air
-------
462
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
pollution endangers public health,
damages and destroys property, of-
fends the senses, and frustrates the
universal desire for clean and com-
fortable surroundings.
The past decade has seen a change
in the public's attitude toward air
pollution. Formerly the tendency was
to deplore the contamination of the
air but to regard it as one of the in-
escapable adjuncts of urban life. Now
there is a growing realization that our
polluted air is more than a nuisance,
and presents hazards to health, and
that in any case the pollution of the
air will grow worse unless something
is done about it.
The legislation before us today will
provide for the necessary programs
to combat air pollution and aid in the
proper disposal of solid wastes, which
contribute greatly to contamination of
the air.
Another problem which we must
face and make every effort to correct
is the emission of fumes and smoke
from industrial plants. This is a ma-
jor factor in the pollution of air in
the communities in which such indus-
try is located and very costly to the
residents of these areas because of
the corrosion effect on buildings and
paints.
The soot, ash, and chemical compo-
nents of the smoke and fumes emitted
by the smokestacks of industrial con-
cerns cause many respiratory ail-
ments. We must take action to make
sure that these industrial concerns
will be the beneficiaries of some in-
centive to install devices which will
lessen or completely eliminate this
particular source of air pollution.
In my own district, the Ninth of
New Jersey, there are 39 separate
communities. Each of them has the
same common problem of combating
air pollution, which constitutes a sub-
stantial everyday experience. Any as-
sistance which the Federal Govern-
ment can give these communities will
be a great step forward in the devel-
opment of systems which will curtail
or greatly diminish the air pollution
created by harmful emission of vari-
ous types of pollutants.
Any money which the Government
will spend for research of this topic
is money well spent and can be justi-
fied when the research is for the bene-
fit of all the citizens of this country.
Polluted air combined with stagnant
air is not only costly, but hazardous.
Such a combination, by reducing visi-
bility, creates a very real danger to
air and land transportation.
As an example, the New Jersey
Turnpike Authority is compelled to
close that superhighway at least 20
times a year when smog aggravates
conditions already made bad by
weather situations. Where the turn-
pike continues through
[p. 25061]
the highly industrialized northeast
section of the State, smog causes many
motorists to miss their desired exits.
Last November, a two-car collision
on the turnpike was blamed directly
on poor visibility because of smog.
And, there were many incidents where
car pileups occurred because the visi-
bility was reduced to zero. And who
was the villain in these accidents?
Smog—a combination of smoke and
fog.
Aircraft operations out of Newark
were also hampered by reduced visi-
bility. As far back as 1946, a survey
was conducted on this matter and it
showed that smoke, alone or in com-
bination with fog, lowered the visi-
bility to less than 6 miles every sec-
ond day of the year.
Aggravation of poor weather con-
ditions by pollution results in delays
in landings and takeoffs at busy air-
ports. At times entire flights are can-
celled because of the difficulty of mak-
ing a safe takeoff due to poor visi-
bility. This is an inconvenience to the
traveler and very costly to the carrier.
The average individual, on the
streets of any community in these
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
463
United States does not care to take
up the fight for the principle of clean
air. We are surrounded not only by
dirty air but by public apathy. Be-
cause of this, we as Members of Con-
gress, representing the people of the
entire United States should take the
initiative and provide for legislation
which will clean up the air we breathe
at the rate of 15,000 gallons per day.
For a richer and healthier life, un-
der clean skies, we should take a
three-step approach to this problem.
First. Impress upon the automo-
bile manufacturers to install antipol-
lutant devices upon every motor ve-
hicle leaving the factory. If this can-
not be done on a voluntary basis then
this Congress should enact legislation
to make such installations mandatory.
Second. Take steps to find a method
to reduce the sulfur content in fuels
used by industry which contribute so
much to the pollution of the air
around these industrial centers.
Third. Waste disposal problems
should be solved in such a way so as
to end the overburdening of our cities'
incinerators and the open burning of
rubbish.
If we do anything less than this we
are neglect in our duty to the people
of our Nation. I am sure that the
legislation before us at this time will
be far reaching toward finding a solu-
tion to this problem to provide a
healthier climate around us.
Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, to-
day this House has an opportunity to
take a significant step forward in the
battle to eliminate air pollution.
The great 89th Congress can add
another major accomplishment for the
good of the American people to its
already lengthy list. For today, we
deal with the most basic ingredient
there is—the very air we breathe and
its pollution which causes untold hu-
man suffering and the loss of millions
of dollars each year in property and
crop loss.
Today, we have before us for con-
sideration, S. 306, which would direct
the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare to prescribe a set of
standards requiring all cars manu-
factured or imported into the United
States, to be equipped with exhaust-
control devices which will limit the
amount of pollutants emitted into the
atmosphere.
There is an obvious national need
for this legislation. For there is a
mountain of scientific evidence linking
air pollution to the aggravation of
heart conditions, and increases in sus-
ceptibility to chronic respiratory dis-
eases, particularly among older per-
sons, eye irritation, and even rickets.
More recently, there is growing evi-
dence that air pollution may play an
important role in the growth of can-
cer among the American people.
This bill, reported out by the House
Interstate and Foreign Commerce
Committee, last month, would empow-
er the Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare to establish these
standards for control of air pollution
caused by gasoline and diesel engine
exhaust. No time limit was set in the
bill reported by the committee, but
the standards are to be established as
soon as practicable.
After establishment, manufacturers
of automobiles must apply to the Sec-
retary of HEW for certification to see
if their products conform to the stand-
ards. The standards must be met,
either by redesign of engines, or ap-
plication of devices. The bill, as re-
ported, sets penalties if these stand-
ards are not met.
Mr. Chairman, air pollution is a ma-
jor national problem. It is a curse,
affecting the lives and the fortunes of
untold millions of our fellow Ameri-
cans. Air knows no State lines or city
limits. Economic damage from air pol-
lution amounts to as much as $11 bil-
lion annually. That is more than 10
percent of the entire money we spend
in 1 year to run the Federal Govern-
ment.
-------
464
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
The State of California, to its great
credit, through legislation, has had
the foresight to establish such stand-
ards for all cars manufactured or im-
ported in that State with the 1966
model year. The question which I
should like to pose is this: Why, if
the American auto industry is re-
quired by one State to implement such
standards, should not the entire coun-
try have the benefit of them also?
Cars take us everywhere today.
They criss-cross State lines in hours
or even minutes. Here in the vast com-
plex centered about the Nation's Cap-
ital, with the help of our wonderful
Federal Interstate System, an indi-
vidual can cross into three different
jurisdictions, Virginia, the District of
Columbia, and Maryland in mere sec-
onds.
We have wasted far too much time
as it is. I, for one, do not believe we
can afford to waste any more. Far too
much of far too great a value depends
upon this course of action. The Amer-
ican auto industry has the technical
know-how to do the job. They have
had to do it in the State of California.
Why should not all the American
people have the benefit of this knowl-
edge?
Earlier this week, this House took
action for more effective prevention of
pollution of our Nation's waterways.
Today, we have a great opportunity
to go on record as firmly committed
to fighting the pollution of our most
precious ingredient for life itself, the
very air we breathe.
Mr. Chairman, I look upon this
legislation, not as Federal interfer-
ence. Rather, I look upon it as a sane,
national policy approach to a problem
of national scope.
As author of legislation similar in
nature to S. 306, I strongly urge my
colleagues to support this bill's pas-
sage. Poisonous air threatens to choke
this Nation. Let us fight back. Let us
overcome this problem.
Mr. HOWAKD. Mr. Chairman, to-
day we are being given the oppor-
tunity to pass one of the most impor-
tant pieces of legislation in the history
of this body, the Clean Air and Solid
Waste Disposal Act.
This Congress has made great
strides in such areas as medical care
for the aged, water pollution control,
and civil rights. Yet, there can be no
pride in our past achievements unless
we meet one of the most serious chal-
lenges which faces this country to-
day—air pollution.
On June 28 of this year I intro-
duced H.R. 9479 which would make it
mandatory that a number of new de-
vices, including an air-pollution con-
trol unit, be included on all new cars.
Passage of this bill today will not sat-
isfy all of the provisions of my legis-
lation but it will force compliance
with the air pollution control section.
I draw upon testimony taken in my
own State of New Jersey to show that
eyen the automobile manufacturers
favor such Federal legislation as we
are to vote on here today.
In May a legislative commission
concerned with air pollution control
in New Jersey heard testimony from
Karl M. Richards of the Automobile
Manufacturers Association. Mr. Rich-
ards said that chaos would result if
the automobile industry had to meet
different standards as proposed by
different States. Therefore, Mr. Chair-
man, I think this indicates that we
must handle this problem at the Fed-
eral level today.
In our society we are always con-
cerned with the living conditions of
those in this country and abroad. We
commiserate with those less fortunate.
And yet, we allow our entire Nation
to live in an open-air sewer, with some
areas of concentration worse than
others.
Today there are more than 85 mil-
lion motor vehicles in use in the
United States and each and every
year that figure increases. Pollution-
control devices on such vehicles would
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
465
not end our air pollution problem but
it would go a long way toward easing
this problem.
There are those who will not sup-
port the bill, claiming they are not
against air pollution control but mere-
ly want "more study." In my opinion
"more study" is an excuse to slow
down or to completely postpone the
legislation we need today.
Only last month, meteorologist Mor-
ris Neiburger, a University of Cali-
fornia professor, had some shocking
facts about air pollution.
He said:
All civilization will pan away, not from a
sudden cataclysm like a nuclear war, but from
gradual suffocation in its own wastes.
[P. 25062]
This professor predicted that if
mankind continues as it is filling the
atmosphere with the poisonous fumes
of automobiles, it will make the planet
uninhabitable within 100 years.
I do not quote this professor to
frighten anyone into voting in favor
of this legislation. I quote him and list
a number of other reasons to drama-
tize how serious a problem air pollu-
tion is in this great Nation today.
I urge everyone in this House to
support this bill today and all other
effective antiair pollution measures
which come before us in the future.
Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Chairman,
I rise in support of the Clean Air and
Solid Waste Disposal Acts. As my
colleagues know, I am not an engi-
neer, nor am I a specialist in the vari-
ous ways of disposing of the moun-
tains of solid waste accumulated each
day in our country. I became inter-
ested in the subject, however, because
the problem is daily becoming more
acute in California and in other States
which are experiencing rapid growth
in terms of population, agriculture,
industry, and commerce.
In statements presented to the
House of Representatives at the time
I introduced legislation on solid waste
disposal last year and again early in
this session, I described the national
solid waste situation in some detail,
based on information I had received
from conversations with, and through
reading articles by many people who
know most about this problem. I
learned that we have within our
means the technological resources to
grapple with the problem and work
toward a solution, and I am very
gratified that the bill now under con-
sideration gives recognition to the ur-
gency for immediate attention.
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Chairman, in this
country we can no longer afford to ex-
ploit our natural environment and
waste its resources, whether those re-
sources be our forests, our soil, our
water—or our air.
We have known for some time that
air pollution is a killer. It is a catalyst
for some of our most serious respira-
tory and other diseases; it is an al-
lergen; it is an irritant. The contami-
nants which pollute our air are not
only dangers to our health; they cause
economic losses amounting to nearly
$12 billion per year in damaged prop-
erty and crops. Air pollution affects
our weather, our appearance, and even
our outlook.
At first air pollution was tolerated
out of sheer ignorance. Now it is toler-
ated out of an unwillingness to spend
the money necessary to combat it.
Air pollution shortens our life span,
darkens our skies and dims our land-
scape.
We cannot afford not to combat it.
In New York City there is no such
thing as a breath of fresh air. We
have the dirtiest air of any major
city in America. Sixty tons of large
particles fall on every square mile
every month in our city. We breathe
50 percent more sulphur dioxide, a
potential killer, than residents of any
other major city.
Every day 500,000 automobiles come
into New York, spewing hydrocar-
bons, nitrogen oxides, and aldehydes
-------
466
LEGAL COMPILATION—Ant
into our air. These automobiles cause
between a third and a half of our
air pollution. Many of these automo-
biles are from out of State, and New
York needs help in controlling the
exhaust from these motor vehicles.
We are not alone. All major cities
have this problem. With a burgeoning
and mobile population, air pollution
cannot be adequately controlled or
finally eliminated by sporadic local ac-
tion.
Mr. Chairman, the bill before us to-
day to amend the Clean Air Act of
1963 is a necessary adjunct to the pro-
gram to arrest and eliminate air pol-
lution.
This bill will enable us to begin the
elimination of pollution from motor
vehicles by the encouragement of re-
search and the establishment of stand-
ards for minimum pollution. It will
authorize the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare to accomplish
that task and to assist in the institu-
tion and conduct of research toward
better methods of disposing of solid
wastes from industry and domestic
living.
Large metropolitan areas like New
York are having increasing difficulty
finding ways of disposing of vast
quantities of waste materials from
home and industry. Our yellow-green
rivers and brown skies are adequate
testament to that difficulty.
In addition to the ordinary 5 mil-
lion tons of refuse which New York
must dispose of every year, the city
has to find ways of disposing of an-
other million tons of construction
wastes. Large timbers and concrete
blocks, and other materials do not
lend themselves to use as land fill.
Shredding, breaking and burning, the
current methods, add cinders and pul-
ver to the air and refuse to the sea.
There is an urgent need for new
solutions.
Earlier this session, the President
sent to the Congress a persuasive mes-
sage on the need for water and air
pollution control and other conserva-
tion programs. He stated:
The increasing tempo of urbanization and
growth is already depriving? many Americans
of the right to live in decent surroundings.
The modern technology which has added much
to our lives, can also have a darker side. Its
uncontrolled waste products are menacing the
world we live in, our enjoyment, and our
health.
I have spoken on this subject many
times, dealing with the acute problems
of New York in particular. It is es-
sential to control pollution from motor
vehicles. This bill will help to control
it. We need research for good eco-
nomic methods for effecting that con-
trol. This bill will provide assistance
for this research.
We need solutions to our solid waste
disposal problems. This bill will pro-
vide the assistance for that research.
At last Congress has recognized
this problem and begun to deal with
it. The problem becomes more com-
plex, difficult and expensive with
every day that passes. This legisla-
tion will begin to cope with the dis-
posal of wastes that cause 50 percent
of our air pollution.
Mr. Chairman, it is time we stopped
killing ourselves.
Mr. TUPPER. Mr. Chairman, it is
most satisfying to have the privilege
of voting for legislation that will im-
prove the purity of the air we breathe.
For far too long we have allowed our
atmosphere to be polluted and the
health of our citizens endangered. For
too many years we have permitted
automobile manufacturers to sell a
product that emitted the most harm-
ful agents into the air.
There is no subject that deserves
more attention than the matter of en-
vironmental pollution. The hour is
getting late and Congress must do
much more to attack this serious prob-
lem. This legislation, S. 306, is des-
perately needed, and we owe it to
those we represent to support it
wholeheartedly.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
467
Mr. REUSS. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in support of S. 306, the Clean Air
and Solid Waste Disposal Acts, I par-
ticularly want to stress the importance
of those sections of title 1 of the bill,
which amends the Clean Air Act of
1963, authorizing the Secretary of the
Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare to establish standards for
controlling the emission of air pollut-
ing substances from the engines of
automotive vehicles.
Polluted air in metropolitan areas is
a health hazard which cannot be ig-
nored any longer. Most frequently it
is the automobile which is the pre-
dominant contaminator. As the auto-
mobile population grows the problem
becomes more acute.
The immediate problem is serious.
One substance from automobile ex-
haust that becomes a part of the air
is a hydrocarbon known as benz-
pyrene, which tends to induce cancer.
Carbon monoxide and oxides of nitro-
gen, both of which have varying de-
grees of ill effect on health, are also
emitted into the air by automobiles.
Breathing New York City air, for in-
stance, is like smoking two packs of
cigarettes a day. Furthermore, lead
poisoning can result from the breath-
ing of air polluted by the exhaust of
automobiles burning leaded gasoline.
The long-term consequences could
also be serious. Prof. Morris Nei-
burger, of the University of Cali-
fornia, at Los Angeles, an expert on
air pollution, has predicted that pol-
luted air could, over a long period of
time, smother civilization to death un-
less the problem is brought under con-
trol.
Therefore, the bill before us today
is extremely important to the health
and welfare of Americans. Air pollu-
tion by automobiles needs to be re-
duced as much as possible. This can
only be accomplished if the Federal
Government sets standards applicable
throughout the country. The bill
should be enacted promptly.
PROPOSAL WILL NOT ELIMINATE
THE PROBLEM
However, we would be deluding our-
selves if we believed that the enact-
ment of this legislation will complete-
ly eliminate automotive air pollution.
No device is currently available, nor
is one anticipated, which will totally
eliminate the emission from automo-
biles of substances which pollute the
air.
In a paper presented at a panel dis-
cussion on air pollution at the board
of directors meeting, National Petro-
leum
[p. 25063]
Refiners Association, Washington,
D.C., on September 20, V. G. Mac-
Kenzie, Assistant Surgeon General,
Chief of the Division of Air Pollution,
Public Health Service, Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, de-
scribed the problem. He said:
A limited technical capability has been de-
veloped for the reduction of certain emissions
(hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide) from
automobiles but for certain otber pollutants no
such capability is yet available. As we look
into the future two elements of the problem
demand action and planning:
(a) As the automobile population rises in
the future there is justifiable reason for tech-
nical concern that the problems inherent in
controlling hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide
from the current type of spark ignition engine
may necessitate the development of propulsion
systems for automobiles radically different
from those which are currently in use. Some
estimates have been made which show that the
application of carbon monoxide and hydro-
carbon controls to the type of engine currently
may be expected to hold the line until about
1980, after which time the increased number of
motor vehicles on our streets and highways
would result in a worsening of the situation.
(b) We cannot be complacent either about
certain of those pollutants from motor vehicles
for which we do not now have technical means
of control. Prominent among these are oxides
of nitrogen and lead contamination. As the
great increase in the use of fossil fuels fore-
cast for the next half century materializes,
oxides of nitrogen emissions will have to be
controlled; these are ubiquitous pollutants
which arise from all combustion proceues and
-------
468
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
are already of concern in some jurisdictions of
this country.
With respect to lead contamination, studies
indicate that the margin of safety against
physiologic damage among some elements of
our population is relatively narrow; indeed.
there are those who claim that this margin is
already too small. In any event when we con-
sider the increase in the use of motor vehicles
forecast for the future, simple arithmetic sug-
gests that if we continue on our present path
this margin of safety inevitably will disappear.
Maintenance of emission control de-
vices is an additional problem. Even
if the device is 100 percent effective
when new, it will, like all other parts
of the automobile, deteriorate with
use. The device will have to be proper-
ly serviced and periodically replaced
in order to insure that it is operating
to maximum effectiveness. Periodic
inspections by local officials could pro-
vide some control over this problem,
but that would not be sufficient. The
truth is that the automotive air pollu-
tion problem cannot be eliminated en-
tirely through the approach prescribed
in this legislation; it can only be
alleviated.
The problem is compounded by the
fact that the automobile population is
growing at a rapid rate. In 1963 there
were 80 million automobiles in the
country. By 1980 there will be an esti-
mated 120 million, an increase of 50
percent. The combination of these two
factors—the lack of complete effective-
ness on the part of the automotive
devices and the rapid rise in the num-
ber of automobiles—will probably
leave us no better off in 1980 than we
are today. And the situation today
simply is not good enough.
NEW MODES OF URBAN TRANSPORT
NEEDED
The major reason that polluted air
hangs so heavily over our cities is that
the automobile is the principal mode
of intraurban transportation. If cities
had better systems of public trans-
portation, systems that were more at-
automobile, he would leave his automo-
tractive to the urban traveler than the
bile at home and take the public trans-
port system.
Unfortunately, the public transpor-
tation systems available today are not
more desirable than the automobile
because they do not offer the same
convenience. What people want in a
transport system is an individual ve-
hicle which is ready to leave when
they are and will take them directly
to their destination without the need
of transferring. Until such a system,
with vehicles powered other than by
the internal combustion engine, is de-
veloped, the urban traveler will con-
tinue to breathe air that is damaging
to our health.
RESEARCH COULD DEVELOP NEW
TRANSPORT SYSTEMS
There are on the drawing boards
today plans for new modes of urban
transport which could meet the prob-
lem. The commucar designed by a
group at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, the starrcar proposed
by the Alden Self Transit Corp. in
Westboro, Mass., and the teletrans
system conceived by the Teletrans
Corp., of Detroit, could possibly sat-
isfy the requirements for good urban
transport. But much more work needs
to be done on them before they can
be fully developed, or made opera-
tional. Because of the expense in-
volved in this undertaking, it is
virtually impossible for private cor-
porations to complete this task with-
out financial assistance from the
Federal Government, but none is
forthcoming under existing programs.
In order to make it possible for the
Federal Government to assist in the
research and development of these sys-
tems, I recently introduced legisla-
tion—H.R. 9200—authorizing a 2-
year, $20 million program to achieve
a technological breakthrough in the
development of new modes of urban
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
469
transport. The bill would amend the
Mass Transportation Act of 1964, the
only Federal program directed at al-
leviating the urban transport prob-
lem, and make it mandatory that the
research be undertaken. The program
contains a mandate to develop new
systems which can carry people quick-
ly, safely, and economically from place
to place within urban areas, without
polluting the air, and in such a way
as to meet the needs of the people for
individual transport, while at the
same time contributing to good city
planning.
To date 21 other Members have in-
troduced identical legislation: the gen-
tleman from Ohio [Mr. ASHLEY], the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. CABELL],
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
FARBSTEIN], the gentleman from Min-
nesota [Mr. FRASER], the gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. GILLIGAN], the gen-
tlewoman from Michigan [Mrs. GRIF-
FITHS], the gentleman from New York
[Mr. HALPERN], the gentleman from
New Jersey [Mr. JOELSON], the gen-
tleman from Maryland [Mr. LONG],
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
MCCARTHY], the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. MINISH], the gentleman
from Pennsylvania [Mr. MOORHEAD],
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
MULTER], the gentleman from Illinois
[Mr. RONAN], the gentleman from
California [Mr. ROOSEVELT], the gen-
tleman from New York [Mr. ROSEN-
THAL], the gentleman from Wisconsin
[Mr. STALBAUM], the gentlewoman
from Missouri [Mrs. SULLIVAN], the
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. VANIK],
the gentleman from Georgia [Mr.
WELTNER], and the gentleman from
Illinois [Mr. YATES].
The administration this year has
committed itself to the development
of new high-speed ground transporta-
tion systems for between-city travel
at an estimated cost of $90 million
over a 3-year period. It has also re-
cently earmarked an additional $140
million in Federal funds for the re-
search and development of a super-
sonic transport. It is time it took the
same initiative in supporting a pro-
gram for improvement of transporta-
tion within cities, the most critical
transportation problem that confronts
us today.
Mrs. DWYER. Mr. Chairman, there
are many and compelling reasons for
supporting the pending bill, S. 306,
the Clean Air Act amendments.
Air pollution has become in recent
years perhaps the most serious threat
to the health, welfare, and comfort of
the American people which faces us
today. The contamination of the at-
mosphere on which we depend for life-
giving air comes from a variety of
sources—auto exhaust, waste disposal,
industrial powerplants, manufactur-
ing facilities, and many others—and
the damage it does to property of all
kinds has reached an estimated $18
billion a year. More important, med-
ical authorities now consider air pol-
lution to be a cause or major con-
tributing factor in such killing and
crippling diseases as cancer, heart
and lung disease, and respiratory
problems generally.
In the context of the danger, rela-
tively little has been done to control
and eliminate air pollution and to
conserve clean, fresh air. Consequent-
ly, the problem has greatly outpaced
our meager efforts to solve it. Pollu-
tion levels, in fact, have exceeded the
rate of growth of our population,
which means that the average Ameri-
can is putting a greater volume of
poisons into his and his neighbor's air
than ever before.
The principal means by which this
dubious record has been reached has
been automotive exhaust—the source,
according to almost all authorities, of
approximately 50 percent of the na-
tional air pollution problem. We have
today about 83 million automobiles,
trucks and buses in use in the United
-------
470
LEGAL COMPILATION—Ant
States, and the ratio of motor ve-
hicles to human beings has been grow-
ing rapidly. Any place inhabited by
50,000 or more people has an auto-
matically serious air pollution prob-
lem. And no area of the country, ur-
ban, suburban or rural, is free from
the hazard.
Close behind the motor vehicle are
the powerplants, incinerators, and
smoke-
[p. 25064]
stacks of industry which contribute
nearly an equal proportion of the
fumes and filth which clog our air
and choke our throats.
The present bill would deal with
both sources of pollution, auto ex-
haust, and solid waste disposal. It will
help bring closer the mandatory in-
stallation on new cars of devices to
reduce the volume of harmful hydro-
carbons and carbon monoxide which
have poured unimpeded from the ex-
hausts of tens of millions of cars. It
will also help prevent new air pollu-
tion before it gets out of hand, im-
prove research and development facil-
ities, and initiate an attempt to find
new, safer, and more sanitary ways
of disposing of solid wastes like
garbage, rubbish, refuse, debris, and
so forth, which pollute both the air
and water.
This is not a very radical bill, Mr.
Chairman, nor does it go as far as
many of us—alarmed at the speed
with which air pollution is endanger-
ing the total environment—believe we
should go in simple self-defense. It is
a welcome step forward, albeit a mod-
est one, and if it is backed by ade-
quate funds and effective enforcement
it can make a substantial difference
in the battle against pollution.
We who live in the intensely popu-
lated and heavily industrialized areas
of the Nation—and New Jersey is
first on both counts—are especially
sensitive, not to say vulnerable, to air
pollution. We produce on a daily basis
an enormous volume of pollutants and
when air inversions trap the pollut-
ants under layers of warm air, the
entire area becomes a vast aerial gar-
bage heap. In New Jersey, this hap-
pens about 40 times a year.
The nature of the danger has been
dramatically and tragically illustrated
in the smog attacks of recent years in
Donora, Pa., London, and New York
City, where hundreds of people have
died and thousands more were serious-
ly ill as a direct result of prolonged
exposure to concentrated poisons in
the air. Less than 3 years ago, much
of our east coast was caught in a
giant air inversion situation which,
had it lasted just a few more days,
would have resulted in mass death
and sickness. Older people and those
suffering from respiratory weaknesses
of one kind or another are the first
victims. But air pollution knows no
boundaries and its impact on the
young and healthy can be just as de-
structive, just as disabling on a long-
term basis even at low concentrations.
Faced with such dangers, Mr. Chair-
man, our efforts to date have been
paltry indeed. Today's legislation will
help, but much more needs to be done
at all levels of government, Federal,
State, and local. The threat is great
and it is growing. Air pollution is an
enemy to all and it must be fought by
all.
[p.25065]
The question was taken; and there
were—yeas 294, nays 4, answered
"present" 1, not voting 133 * * *.
* * * *
So the bill was passed.
[p. 25072]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
471
l.lf(3)(d) Oct. 1: Senate concurred in House amendments, pp
25847; 25850-25851
AMENDMENT OF CLEAN AIR
ACT
The PRESIDING OFFICER laid
before the Senate the amendments
of the House of Representatives to
the bill (S. 306) to amend the Clean
Air Act to require standards for con-
trolling the emission of pollutants
from gasoline-powered or diesel-pow-
ered vehicles, to establish a Federal
Air Pollution Control Laboratory, and
for other purposes, * * *.
[p. 25847]
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, Mr.
Cohen's letter provides answers on
three specific questions I raised with
Secretary Gardner. I shall refer to
these in the course of my remarks.
The first major difference between
the two versions of the bill is in the
section dealing with restrictions on
automotive exhaust emissions from
new cars. The bill, as passed by the
Senate, required that these restric-
tions be applied by September 1,
1967—in other words, on the 1968
model year cars. The House version
dropped the date, leaving the time of
application to the discretion of the
Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare.
I have been assured by Chairman
HARRIS that it was not the intention of
the House that the application date of
the standards for automobiles go be-
yond the date specified in the Senate
bill. Secretary Gardner reassured me
on this point. Acting Secretary
Cohen's letter says:
Testimony from the automobile industry in-
dicated that control systems could be applied
on the 1968 models, and we see no reason to
delay the application of standards beyond that
period. It is our intention to promulgate our
initial regulations in time for application to
the 1968 model year.
I have been advised by the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare that the regulations can be pro-
mulgated within the next couple of
months and that the automobile in-
dustry has assured the Department
that under those circumstances it can
meet the deadline. The members of
the Subcommittee on Air and Water
Pollution expect that date to be kept
and will watch developments under
this section closely.
The House version dropped a Sen-
ate provision calling for the develop-
ment of criteria on diesel exhausts
and incorporated new diesel engines
under the general authority to estab-
lish standards on automotive exhausts.
The Senate subcommittee was con-
cerned because, as of the time of our
hearings and since, we have received
no information to indicate sufficient
technological knowledge to control
diesel emissions through engine modi-
fications or devices. The Department
shares this concern and has advised
us in Acting Secretary Cohen's letter
that—
Although the House amendment would per-
mit the application of exhaust standards to
diesel-powered vehicles as well, we do not in-
tend to apply standards until we are satisfied
that the technology of diesel exhaust control is
sufficiently developed.
The House made changes in the in-
spection provisions of S. 306, but the
committee is satisfied that the differ-
ences will not reduce the effectiveness
of the Department's surveillance and
control over compliance with stand-
ards established under the act.
There is a minor change in the con-
trol over cars destined for export. The
Sen-
[p. 25850]
ate version required that such cars
comply with standards in the country
of destination. The House version
-------
472
LEGAL COMPILATION—Are
leaves such controls to the importing
country. We have no objection to this
change.
The House places ceilings on the au-
thorizations for administrative funds.
We do not consider these as limiting
the effectiveness of the program.
Both versions of S. 306 contain
amendments to the Clean Air Act au-
thorizing enforcement procedures in
cases where pollution from the United
States endangers the health or wel-
fare of persons in another country.
The House amended the Senate ver-
sion to make this provision applicable
only in those cases where there is a
reciprocal agreement with the affected
country. The subcommittee does not
object to this change.
The House added an amendment to
the Clean Air Act which permits the
Secretary to call a conference where
there is a potential interstate pollu-
tion problem of substantial signifi-
cance. The subcommittee was con-
cerned that this provision not be used
as an excuse to avoid enforcement in
existing cases and that it not be used
to interfere in those States where
there are established air pollution
control enforcement programs.
The Department has reassured us
on both points in Mr. Cohen's letter:
We do not intend to administer this provi-
sion as a substitute for the abatement pro-
cedures now contained in the Clear Air Act.
Moreover, we do not intend to apply this pro-
vision in situations where the affected States
have established their own air pollution control
enforcement programs.
Mr. President, these are the differ-
ences between the two versions of S.
306 which concerned us. We are satis-
fied that the Senate can accept the
House version, knowing that we will
have improved the Clean Air Act,
taken a major step toward the control
of automotive exhausts, and started
a new program for the control of solid
waste disposal. I urge that the Sen-
ate concur in the House amendments.
In closing, Mr. President, I want to
express my appreciation to my col-
leagues on the Subcommittee on Air
and Water Pollution and to the staffs
of the Public Works Committee and
the committee members for their con-
tribution to the bill. I want to com-
mend the members of the House com-
mittee, and particularly Chairman
HARRIS, for the contribution they have
made to the improved Federal pro-
gram for the control and abatement
of air pollution.
Mr. President, I move that the Sen-
ate concur in the House amendments
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion
of the Senator from Maine.
The motion was agreed to.
[p.25851]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 473
l.lg CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1966
October 15, 1966, P.L. 89-675, 80 Stat. 954
An Act To amend the Clean Air Act so as ot authorize grants to air pollu-
tion control agencies for maintenance of air pollution control programs in
addition to present authority for grants to develop, establish, or improve
such programs; make the use of appropriations under the Act more flexibel
by consolidating the appropriation authorizations under the Act and de-
leting the provision limiting the total of grants for support of air pollution
control programs to 20 per centum of the total appropriation for any year;
extend the duration of the programs authorized by the Act; and for other
purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this
Act may be cited as the "Clean Air Act Amendments of 1966."
CONSOLIDATION OF APPROPRIATION CEILINGS
SEC. 2. (a) Section 306 of the Clean Air Act is amended to
read as follows:
"SEC. 306. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this Act, $46,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1967, $66,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968, and
$74,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969."
(b) Section 209 of such Act is hereby repealed.
AUTHORIZATION OP MAINTENANCE GRANTS FOR AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL PROGRAMS AND REMOVAL OF 20 PER CENTUM CEILING
SEC. 3. (a) (1) Subsection (a) of section 104 of the Clean Air
Act (42 U.S.C. 1857c(a)) is amended to read as follows:
"SEC. 104. (a) The Secretary is authorized to make grants to
air pollution control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the
cost of developing, establishing, or improving, and grants to such
agencies in an amount up to one-half of the cost of maintaining
programs for the prevention and control of air pollution: Provided,
That the Secretary is authorized to make grants to intermunicipal
or interstate air pollution control agencies (described in section
302(b) (2) and (4) in an amount up to three-fourths of the cost
of developing, establishing, or improving, and up to three-fifths of
the cost of maintaining, regional air pollution control programs.
As used in this subsection, the term 'regional air pollution control
program' means a program for the prevention and control of air
-------
474 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
pollution in an area that includes the areas of two or more mu-
nicipalities, whether in the same or different States."
(2) Subsection (b) of such section 104 is amended by striking
out "under" in the first sentence and inserting in lieu thereof
"for the purposes of", and in the next to the last sentence by
inserting a comma after the word "funds" and adding "for other
than non-recurrent expenditures," and in the same sentence after
the wOrd "pollution", the word "control." Such next to the last
sentence is further amended by inserting immediately before the
period at the end thereof the following: "; and no agency shall
receive any grant under this section with respect to the main-
tenance of a program for the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion unless the Secretary is satisfied that such grant will be so
used as to supplement and, to the extent practicable, increase the
level of State, local, and other non-Federal funds that would in
the absence of such grant be made available for the maintenance
of such program, and will in no event supplant such State, local,
and other non-Federal funds".
(b) Subsection (c) of such section 104 is amended to read as
follows:
"(c) Not more than 12% per centum of the total of funds appro-
pri-
[p. 954]
ated or allocated for the purposes of subsection (a) of this sec-
tion shall be granted for air pollution control programs in any
one State. In the case of a grant for a program in an area
crossing State boundaries, the Secretary shall determine the por-
tion of such grant that is chargeable to the percentage limitation
under this subsection for each State into which such area extends."
Approved October 15, 1966.
[p. 955]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY ' 475
l.lg(l) SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
S. REP. No. 1361, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966)
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS
JULY 7,1966.—Ordered to be printed
Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of June 30,1966
Mr. MUSKIE, from the Committee on Public Works, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 3112]
The Committee on Public Works to which was referred the bill
(S. 3112) to amend the Clean Air Act so as to authorize grants
to air pollution control agencies for maintenance of air pollution
control programs in addition to present authority for grants to
develop, establish, or improve such programs; make the use of
appropriations under the act more flexible by consolidating the
appropriation authorizations under the act and deleting the pro-
vision limiting the total of grants for support of air pollution
control programs to 20 percent of the total appropriation for any
year; extend the duration of the programs authorized by the act;
and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favor-
ably thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill as
amended do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 3112 is to—
(1) Consolidate into one section appropriation authoriza-
tions to carry out the Clean Air Act, as amended, and to
authorize appropriations of $46 million for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1967, $70 million for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1968, and $80 million for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1969.
(2) Authorize the Secretary to make grants to air pollu-
tion control agencies in an amount up to one-half of the cost
of maintaining programs for the prevention and control of
air pollution.
-------
476 LEGAL COMPILATION — Am
(3) Authorize the Secretary to make grants to intermunic-
ipal or interstate air pollution control agencies in an amount
up to
three-fifths of the cost of maintaining regional air pollution
control programs.
(4) Remove the limitation that no more than 20 percent
of the sums appropriated annually under the act may be used
to make grants for support of air pollution control programs.
(5) Provide that in determining eligibility for a program
grant the Secretary shall not consider nonrecurrent expendi-
tures of the participating agency in the preceding year.
(6) Provide that in the case of a grant for a program in
an area crossing State boundaries the Secretary will deter-
mine the portion of such grant that is chargeable to the
1214-percent limitation imposed by the act for air pollution
control program grants in any one State.
HEARINGS
Public hearings on S. 3112, S. 3400, and other matters, were
held by the committee on June 7, 8, 9, 14, and 15, 1966. Officials
of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the Bureau
of Mines, State and local governments, conservation organizations,
industry, and other groups testified at these hearings or presented
their views for the record.
GENERAL STATEMENT
The Clean Air Act, as amended, now provides for two separate
appropriation authorizations. Section 209 authorizes appropria-
tions to carry out the purposes of title II of the act, relating to
motor vehicle air pollution control, not to exceed specified amounts
for each fiscal year through 1969. Section 306 of the act author-
izes annual appropriations to carry out all other purposes of the
act as provided in title I in amounts not to be exceeded for each
fiscal year through 1967.
The committee amended S. 3112 to provide for specific authori-
zation for fiscal years 1968 and 1969, rather than the "open
ended" authorization proposed through 1973. In addition to the
$46 million for fiscal year 1967 requested by the administration
the committee has authorized $70 million for fiscal year 1968 and
million for fiscal year 1969.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 477
The $46 million figure represents an increase of $10 million
over existing authorization. This increase is, in part, necessitated
by an expanded program of research into control of sulfur
emissions and automobile exhaust emissions and the added cost of
the maintenance grant program.
The authorizations for 1968 and 1969 represent similar in-
creases in the activities of the Division and $10 and $13 million
respectively to carry out the maintenance grant program.
Both Congress and the President have recognized that enact-
ment of the Clean Air Act was not in itself an end, but rather
a fresh beginning. President Johnson, in his message, "Preserving
Our Natural Heritage," transmitted to Congress on February 23,
1966, referred to the problem of air pollution as follows:
The Clean Air Act of 1963 and its 1965 amendments have
given us new tools to help attack the pollution that fouls the
air we breathe.
[p. 2]
We have begun to counter air pollution by increasing the
tempo of effort at all levels of government.
In less than 2 years Federal financial assistance has stimu-
lated a 50-percent increase in the air pollution budgets of
States and local governments. Federal standards for the con-
trol of automobile exhausts will apply to the 1968 models.
The Federal interstate abatement program will significantly
supplement State and local efforts to deal with air pollution.
I am heartened by the progress we are making. But I am
mindful that we have only begun our work. I am forwarding
to the Congress proposals to improve and increase Federal
research, financing, and technical assistance to help States
and local governments take the measures needed to control
air pollution.
Conference Eeport No. 1003 of December 5, 1963, accompany-
ing the bill, H.R. 6518, subsequently enacted as the Clean Air Act
(Public Law 88-206), states that "limiting the program to 3 fiscal
years will permit legislative committees in both Houses of Con-
gress to reexamine this program within a relatively short period
of time and, assuming the expectations for the program are
realized, will permit the Congress to provide necessary increases
in authorizations for future fiscal years." It was further recog-
nized in this report that "as our population grows and as urbani-
zation expands this may require increased fiscal support of air
-------
478 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
pollution programs." The committee concurs with this statement
by the House and feels that reexamination of the program should
continue on a 3-year basis.
With the signing by President Johnson on October 20, 1965, of
Public Law 89-272, the Federal Government assumed major new
responsibilities for the prevention and control of air pollution.
This legislation amended the Clean Air Act by giving the Secre-
tary authority to control air pollution from new motor vehicles,
to take action to abate international air pollution problems caused
by sources located in the United States; to hold public conferences
directed toward the prevention of new or more aggravated air
pollution problems; to accelerate research concerning methods for
controlling pollution from motor vehicles and emissions of oxides
of sulfur; and to construct, staff, and equip facilities needed by
the Department to carry out its responsibilities under the act.
As a byproduct of industrialization, urbanization, and increas-
ing standards of living, air pollution continues to be a widespread
and growing hazard to the health and welfare of the United States.
Although important progress has been made in the brief period
since enactment of the act in 1963, a sustained and accelerated
effort is needed if the promise of that act to prevent and control
air pollution is to be fulfilled.
In addition to extending the time of the appropriation authority,
S. 3112 would consolidate the appropriation authorizations con-
tained in sections 209 and 306 of the Clean Air Act to provide for
sustained effort necessary while giving the Division necessary
flexibility.
Where activities under title II are provided for in the same
authorization as other program activities, any such unexpected
increase in cost might be absorbed by appropriate program adjust-
ments. Such flexibility is of considerable importance because the
Clean Air Act
[p. 3]
prohibits the sale of vehicles not determined by the Secretary as
being in conformance with applicable regulations; any undue
delay in testing vehicles for conformance would work an intoler-
able hardship and dislocation upon the automobile industry and
the economy in general.
A further reason for consolidation of the appropriation authori-
ty and the flexibility afforded thereby lies in the fact that the
Congress, during its consideration last year of the title II legisla-
tion, added a provision whereby the Secretary, upon application
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 479
from a motor vehicle manufacturer, is required to issue a certifi-
cate of compliance, applicable to a production run and valid for
not less than 1 year, if after appropriate tests, a vehicle is found
to be in conformity with the prescribed standards; at the time
this option was added to the legislation, no corresponding change
was made in the title II appropriation authorization to reflect the
added burden of vehicle or engine testing which would be required
thereby.
The proposed revised language consolidates the appropriation
authorizations by deleting section 209 of the Clean Air Act which
contains the appropriation authorizations to carry out title II of
the act.
In enacting the Clean Air Act, the Congress established impor-
tant policy through its findings, as contained in section 101, "that
the prevention and control of air pollution at its source is the
primary responsibility of States and local government; and * * *
that Federal financial assistance and leadership is essential for
the development of cooperative Federal, State, regional, and local
programs to prevent and control air pollution."
Section 104 of the act authorizes grants to air pollution control
agencies in support of the cost of developing, establishing, or
improving programs for the prevention and control of air pollu-
tion. The amounts authorized to be allocated for such grants may
not exceed 20 percent of the total appropriations for all purposes
under the act. Grants are authorized to be made, under such
terms and conditions as the Secretary finds necessary, in amounts
up to two-thirds of the eligible program costs, except that in the
case of grants to intermunicipal or interstate agencies, the grants
may be up to three-fourths of eligible program costs. This ap-
proach authorizes a Federal role limited to providing an initial
stimulation of program improvements and subsequent withdrawal
of support on the assumption or hope that non-Federal funds will
be available to substitute for the Federal share.
Experience under this provision indicates that certain areas,
where strengthened programs are needed, are ineligible for Fed-
eral assistance which would otherwise be warranted, because very
little or no "new" non-Federal funds were made available in the
current fiscal year. Increased local funds and the strengthening
of local programs may have occurred in prior fiscal years; as a
result, the present provisions tend to penalize those areas which
acted on their own initiative to control air pollution prior to the
availability of Federal grant funds. The maintenance and con-
tinuation of expanded efforts by State and local air pollution con-
-------
480 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
trol agencies will require in the future not only stimulatory grant
assistance but sustaining grants as well. Sustaining grants will
more adequately reflect the strong Federal interest and respon-
sibility in air pollution control and should significantly improve
the effectiveness of programs in giving impetus to greater State
and local action.
[p. 4]
Although the existing program grants have had a beneficial
effect, it is clear that Federal financial assistance, limited to short-
term, stimulating grants, is not adequate to meet the need for
effective and sustained State and local control efforts necessary to
cope with the problem. Therefore, the committee considers the
provision of S. 3112 authorizing the Secretary to make grants for
maintaining air pollution control programs to be essential.
Subsection (b) of section 104 of the Clean Air Act provides
that no agency may receive a grant during any fiscal year if its
expenditures of non-Federal funds for air pollution programs will
be less than such expenditures in the preceding fiscal year. Such
a provision is logical and desirable when applied to the existing
grant program whose primary purpose is to stimulate increased
program effort through the support of development and improve-
ment projects. The objective of the maintenance grants, however,
is to provide a basis for sustained Federal sharing and support,
over a period of years, of State and local programs at a level
necessary for the prevention and control of air pollution.
Many factors may justifiably cause the level of expenditures
necessary to maintain such a program to fluctuate, such as, for
example, nonrecurring costs of equipment of facilities acquisition,
or the conduct of special studies concerning air quality, special
types of sources, or other matters. Where the overall workability
of the program is not impaired, fluctuations in expenditures
should not make agencies ineligible for Federal matching grant
support. The committee therefore recommends that such non-
recurrent expenditures not be considered in determining eligibility
for a grant. The committee does not, however, believe that this
provision should be misinterpreted or overly used to justify con-
tinuation of programs wherein States do not demonstrate inten-
tion of continuing a fully adequate program.
Air pollution is increasing and control is just beginning—it is
therefore anticipated that State programs, with rare exception,
will require increasing funds just for maintenance, nonrecurrent
expenditures notwithstanding.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY ' 481
The committee further suggests that the Secretary, at the com-
mittee's request, report on such expenditures which are exempted
due to their "nonrecurrent" nature.
S. 3112 would also amend section 104 of the Clean Air Act to
delete the provision limiting the total for grants in support of air
pollution control programs to 20 percent of the total appropriation
for any year.
The existing provision imposes a fixed relationship between
grant funds to the total appropriations for all Federal air pollu-
tion activities. Air pollution and the possibilities for control
action are subject to rapid change. Over a period of time, the
pattern of needs and desirable program balance with respect to
research, technical assistance, training, Federal abatement activi-
ties, grants to State and local control agencies, and other activi-
ties may vary considerably. The committee believes it would be
wise to leave the determination of the relative emphasis to be
given to each of these activities to the annual budgetary and
appropriation process so that judgments may be based upon the
overall requirements existing at the time.
A continuing and growing problem of air pollution which the
committee believes has not received adequate attention from the
Division
[p. 5]
of Air Pollution of the U.S. Public Health Service, and other offi-
cials, is that emanating from uncontrolled apartment house and
office building incinerators, especially in the highly urbanized
areas. With some 15,000 such incinerators in New York City,
the magnitude of their contribution to air pollution is apparent.
The committee is informed that prototype models of a hydro-
precipitator with a capacity of 3,000 cubic feet per minute have
been developed by a private firm which has been seeking assistance
in demonstrating the device in several major cities. According to
authoritative information received by the committee, this precipi-
tator offers a significant potential for controlling a substantial
source of air pollution and can be manufactured in quantity at a
reasonable price. The committee, therefore, urges Federal air
pollution control and solid waste disposal officials to exert greater
effort to develop a demonstration program of such devices in
cooperation with private research and development organizations
and interested municipal authorities.
-------
482 LEGAL COMPILATION—Ant
AIR POLLUTION FROM LEAD AND OTHER SUBSTANCES
During the hearings on S. 3112, the subcommittee heard testi-
mony of an exploratory nature on the question of contamination
of the atmosphere from lead and other substances. At these hear-
ings information was presented regarding the questions of atmos-
pheric contamination from beryllium and lead.
Dr. Harriet L. Hardy, assistant medical director, Occupational
Health Service of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, an
expert on beryllium toxicology, testified that the general popula-
tion may be in great danger of poisoning from beryllium released
by the firing of rockets.
She stated, "The use of beryllium in large quantities in rocket
firing is in my opinion unwise. My opinion is based on the
impossibility of control of weather and likelihood of technical
accident."
Since beryllium has been shown to be incurably damaging to
individuals exposed to only small airborne amounts, the Federal
Government has a critical responsibility in minimizing exposure
to the population from its facilities and programs, including rocket
firing. The committee recommends that the Public Health Service
consider the standards developed by the National Academy of
Sciences, and early adopt and promulgate such guidelines as might
be necessary to insure the protection of public health and safety
against the adverse effects of beryllium dispersed in the area of
rocket firings.
The committee heard a good deal of expert testimony about
classical or clinical lead poisoning, derived primarily from occu-
pational experience, and about the safe body levels of lead with
respect to concentrations in blood, urine, etc.
The hearings, however, did not provide definite answers to the
question of whether present or foreseeable concentrations of lead
in the air are dangerous to the general population at levels sub-
stantially lower than those associated with clinical lead poisoning.
Representatives of the lead industries and gasoline producers
and Dr. Robert A. Kehoe of the Kettering Laboratories contended
that levels of lead in the atmosphere have not increased in recent
years (from 5 to 30 years); that present or foreseeable levels are
not dangerous to the population as a whole, and that workers who
are occupationally exposed to lead already receive adequate pro-
tection.
[p. 6]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 483
Officials of the Public Health Service displayed more concern
about the potential dangers of adverse subclinical effects and less
certainty about current findings, but were divided as to whether
the situation demanded immediate legislative action.
One witness expressed extreme alarm. Dr. Clair C. Patterson,
a geophysicist at the California Institute of Technology, sug-
gested that any level of lead in the atmosphere represents an
inestimably dangerous increment over values which prevailed
during the evolution of the human physiology. Analyses of ice
deposits and inference from contemporary data indicate the con-
centration of lead in the atmosphere has increased tremendously
since the introduction of lead antiknock compounds in gasoline
in the early 1920's, according to Dr. Patterson. His data indicated
that this increase has been a hundredfold.
The Survey of Lead in the Atmosphere of Three Urban Com-
munities (known as the Tri-City study), published by the U.S.
Public Health Service and cited by several witnesses, states that
concentrations vary in relation to the amount of auto exhausts in
the area, a function of volume of traffic and speed of travel. This
involves a range from 1 to 3 micrograms of lead per cubic meter
of air in rural and residential areas to over 50 micrograms per
cubic meter of air near and on Los Angeles freeways.
Dr. Robert A. Kehoe, professor emeritus of occupational medi-
cine, Kettering Laboratory, University of Cincinnati College of
Medicine, and others, presented information about various safe
levels of lead in the body, gained through long experimentation
in occupational health laboratories. Some of these levels have
been developed as indicators of danger, so that when a worker
has 0.06 mg. of lead per 100 gms. of blood, or 0.10 mg. of lead
per liter of urine, he is removed from exposure to lead. These
levels are only with respect to the possibility of clinical lead
poisoning. Dr. Kehoe had earlier stated at the Lead Symposium
sponsored by the Public Health Service in December 1965, that
the above levels are the points below which clinical poisoning can
safely be assumed not to occur, and do not represent a point above
which lead poisoning will necessarily occur.
This knowledge may not be adequate to assess the threat of
general atmospheric lead levels to the population as a whole. The
population is not faced with the immediate threat of concentra-
tions of lead approaching the levels of industrial exposure which
are judged marginal with regard to clinical poisoning, but there
is a gap in existing knowledge as to whether clinical lead poison-
ing is the only manifestation of the deleterious effects of lead and
-------
484 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
whether lead's toxicity is a function only of concentrations com-
monly thought to be associated with classical poisoning.
There is some evidence that pregnant women and younger
children retain a proportionately greater amount of lead which
they ingest from the environment and are more susceptible to its
toxic effects. Also evidence indicates that relatively small (com-
pared to industrial standards) concentrations of lead are capable
of producing intellectual disabilities and retardation in children,
and that some types of diseases including kidney, liver, blood and
bone problems render the body more susceptible to lead toxicity.
This evidence is, at present, only fragmentary and controversial.
However, it is important to note that the standards of safety
developed for health of male adults working in lead industries are
[p. 7]
not necessarily relevant to problems of long-term, low levels of
exposure, particularly for those who retain higher than normal
amounts of lead and who are more vulnerable to toxic effects of
lead.
The committee notes from other information that there are
suggestions in the work of scientists in this country, Russia and
Great Britain, that lead in amounts and concentrations much less
than levels traditionally connected with lead poisoning are capable
to producing serious effects on the central nervous system and
particularly the production and maintenance of red blood cells.
Dr. Patterson stated in his article, "Contaminated and Natural
Lead Environments of Man" (September 1965, Archives of Envi-
ronmental Health):
It has recently been maintained, on the basis of experimen-
tal evidence from animals, that pathologic and histologic
changes of the brain and spinal cord together with functional
shifts in the higher nervous activity are induced by exposures
to atmospheric lead concentrations corresponding to those
exposures now experienced by dwellers in most large Ameri-
can cities.
Some evidence suggests that lead competes with other metals
for positions in the vital enzyme systems, and may either disrupt
the systems directly or produce other substances which then have
toxic effects. Further, the biochemistry of clinical lead poisoning
is not yet known and much research must be done (and sup-
ported) on the effects of lead on normal and abnormal cell metab-
olism and its action in neurochemistry.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 485
Even well-developed industrial safety standards have been un-
able to prevent an occasional acute overexposure to lead. It may
be difficult also to set standards which provide realistic levels and
at the same time avoid incidents of overexposure. For example, an
individual may be exposed to what has been established as a safe
level of atmospheric lead, and then eat apples contaminated with
lead insecticide to a high but similarly permissible level, and be
poisoned in a clinical sense.
The committee recognizes that conflicts exist as to the scope and
extent of the problem. Mr. Felix E. Wormser, consultant and for-
mer president, Lead Industries Association, Inc., of New York,
and Mr. P. N. Gammelgard, director, Committee for Air and
Water Conservation, American Petroleum Institute, stated that in
their opinion no danger exists from lead in the atmosphere. Dr.
Patterson stated that in his opinion there is extreme danger from
present levels. Dr. William H. Stewart, Surgeon General of the
United States, Dr. Richard Prindle, Chief of Bureau of State
Services, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare, and other officials from the Public Health
Service suggested that danger is minimal now, but extant, and
research and surveillance must expand.
Dr. Patterson contended that levels are increasing at danger-
ous rates, and noted the differences between concentrations in
rural and urban atmosphere and rural and urban dwellers. He
cited the Tri-City study statistics. Both Mr. Wormser and Mr.
Gammelgard testified that, on the basis of their interpretation
of the Tri-City study, they found present levels of lead contami-
nation to be low and not a hazard, and that there is no evidence
of an increase of lead in the atmosphere
[p. 8]
in the last 5 years. Mr. Wormser stated under questioning from
Senator Muskie that although the Tri-City study did not expressly
draw this conclusion, he concluded from its evidence that present
levels of lead in the atmosphere did not constitute a hazard to
the public health.
In reviewing testimony and material on the problem of lead
contamination the committee finds several basic questions which
demand answers:
(1) What are the cumulative effects of subclinical exposure
over long and short periods of time?
(2) What dangerous effects of abnormal storage in the
bones are likely to result from the normal course of events
-------
486 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
and from accidents with massive bleeding and dissolution of
bone tissues ?
(3) What synergistic effects can be anticipated with sub-
clinical concentrations of lead combined with other environ-
mental and somatic agents, either those present in significant
quantities now or projected for the future?
(4) Are present levels dangerous either clinically or sub-
clinically in the ways suggested?
(5) Are levels in danger of increasing to hazardous levels?
(6) Are levels unnaturally high (though safe) to the point
where unpredictable incidents of a lead or nonlead nature can
cause toxicity?
LEADED GASOLINE
An associated problem which the committee feels deserves fur-
ther investigation is the feasibility or desirability of eliminating
lead in gasoline as a means of diminishing environmental lead
contamination. There is controversy over the cost and economic
effect of elminating lead compounds from gasoline. The majority
of atmospheric lead is held to come from lead compounds in auto
exhausts. Further hearings should concentrate on this aspect of
the problem before any legislative or administrative control action
can be taken.
The Surgeon General, Dr. Stewart, said that he would want the
lead in gasoline eliminated immediately if there were a nontoxic
substitute available, and further, agreed that economic necessity
inhibits immediate elimination of lead. Even more, Dr. Prindle
said that it is vitally important to hold levels of lead constant
until studies have been carried out and hazards are adequately
assessed. In fact, he agreed with Senator Muskie that in the face
of current evidence regarding the relationship between atmos-
pheric lead and health hazards, a safe substitute for lead in
gasoline should be sought as quickly as possible.
Mr. Vernon MacKenzie, Chief of the Division of Air Pollution,
Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, said in his testimony, "dramatic changes will be needed
to effect dramatic improvements in the quality of the air, and
present controls are producing only gradual change."
Hearings would be justified to explore further information about
subclinical effects of moderate lead concentrations, to evaluate
proposals to eliminate lead from gasoline both for technical feasi-
bility and economics, to hear testimony on alternatives to internal
combustion and, especially, to determine whether any existing
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 487
governmental body presently has the authority, mechanism, and
financing to control the lead in the atmosphere from auto exhausts.
[P-9]
SEEKING ALTERNATIVES TO INTERNAL COMBUSTION
New advanced approaches and techniques are required if we
are to meet the pollution problems of combustion engine vehicles.
With 90 million cars, trucks, and buses operating on the Nation's
roads, crossing political boundaries without restriction, and dis-
charging pollutants in all parts of the country, the need for na-
tional solutions is self-evident. This was the conclusion of the
1965 report of the Environmental Pollution Panel of the Presi-
dent's Science Advisory Committee, which declared:
We recommend that the Federal Government exert every
effort to stimulate industry to develop and demonstrate means
of powering automobiles and trucks that will not produce
noxious effluents. Less complete steps to reduce pollution
from automobile exhausts will certainly play an important
role. We must strive for more acceptable mass transporta-
tion. We must follow carefully the results of California's
imposition of special regulations, and be prepared to extend
those that prove effective to other smog-ridden localities.
But we must also be prepared, as soon as reasonably may be,
to take more drastic action, if, as, and when necessary. The
development of alternative means of mobile energy, conver-
sion, suitable for powering automotive transport of all kinds,
is not a matter of 1 year or a few years. Thus, if fuel cells, or
rechargeable batteries, or other devices are to be developed
in time to meet the increased threat, we need to begin now.
Gasoline and diesel engines of motor vehicles are major con-
tributors to air pollution. Policy decisions on accommodating
greater traffic in cities have important impact on the degree of
pollution in urban areas. Some estimates have been made which
show that the application of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon
controls to the type of engine currently employed may be expected
to hold the line until about 1980, after which time the increased
number of motor vehicles on our streets and highways will result
in a worsening of the situation. Testimony was received suggest-
ing that in Los Angeles the growth of freeways and auto traffic is
canceling out gains made in controlling other sources of air pollu-
tion.
The Environmental Pollution Panel pointed out that the energy
526-701 O - 73 - 33
-------
488 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
loss through incomplete combustion is about 15 percent of the
fuel heat value and is equivalent to 1 million gallons of gasoline
daily for Los Angeles. For the Nation, this amounts to a loss of
energy corresponding to 10 billion gallons of gasoline per year.
"Not only air pollution control but also conservation and wise use
of our natural resources demand careful attention to the reduction
of this detrimental waste," the panel stated.
Gasoline consumption in the United States rose from 40 billion
gallons per year in 1950 to an estimated 70 billion in 1964. It is
estimated that by 1980 the use of gasoline in the Los Angeles area
will have increased by a factor of four since smog was first noticed
around 1945. Parallel with the increase of fuel is the emission of
pollutants. "The partial control of emission predicted for the
coming years cannot keep up with this increase," the panel de-
clared. "Research and development directed toward improve-
ment in combustion and
[p. 10]
greatly reduced emissions should be promoted at universities and
government laboratories. These studies should include radical
changes in engine design and the development of, for example,
the fuel cell for practical use."
In view of the interrelationship between air pollution caused by
motor vehicles and overall urban planning, the committee urges
that the administration form an interdepartmental task force to
investigate means of reducing air pollution by use of new methods
of transportation not involving the internal combustion engine.
A variety of projects deserve more detailed security and study.
Electrification of mass transit, use of battery-operated delivery
vehicles and autos, and prospects for fuel cells to run individual
passenger cars, all suggest research possibilities. The Federal
Government should insure that research, development, and demon-
stration work in this area is carried on at maximum levels con-
sistent with orderly progress.
Coordination and interchange of ideas should be encouraged.
The subcommittee received testimony that 15 Federal agencies are
presently funding a total of 86 projects in battery research; the
objectives and results of this work as it relates to transportation
should be evaluated and the most efficient method of arriving at
desired goals determined. Advisory committees formed from
industry and trade groups might assist in this process. Foreign
experience should be tapped. (The Electricity Council of Great
Britain predicts that within the next 10 years 1 million battery-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 489
driven automobiles will be in operation in Great Britain.)
Urban planning, public works, zoning, and licensing questions
are inexorably intertwined with pollution problems. Perhaps
nowhere is this more evident than in the area of transportation.
The aim should be to combine the best thinking on air pollution,
urban development, and transportation to deal with a problem
which could literally smother cities in smog and smoke unless new
approaches are developed and utilized.
The task force should provide Congress and the country with
suggested guidelines for rational planning of future transporta-
tion as it relates to air pollution.
Burgeoning population, increasing number of vehicles, growing
air pollution—all these factors indicate that to continue to solve
this problem with piecemeal measures is unacceptable. Plans for
new federally supported freeways should not be allowed to cancel
out Federal efforts to halt air pollution. Dumping thousands of
cars off the end of an eight-lane highway into an urban complex
is not the answer to either transportation or air pollution problems.
The committee therefore recommends that the task force develop
a plan for a "model environment" including such proposals as will
both meet the economic needs of a rapidly expanding nation and
adequately protect the public from the hazards associated with
polluted air.
RESEARCH BY BUREAU OF MINES FOR AMERICAN
PETROLEUM INSTITUTE
Also during its hearings, the committee heard representatives
of the Bureau of Mines, Department of the Interior, and the
American Petroleum Institute discuss a contract pursuant to
which the Bureau would conduct a research program for API,
at API's expense.
[p. 11]
The committee's attention was directed to this subject by a
Department of Interior press release which noted that "lead is
toxic, and because increasingly large amounts of it are released
into the atmosphere from auto exhausts, considerable interest has
been aroused in research on possible new types of unleaded motor
fuel to reduce air pollution."
The toxicity of lead and the potential poisoning of the atmos-
phere from lead have been discussed earlier in this report. The
fact that an agency of the Federal Government was apparently
performing research on this subject for a private group when the
-------
490 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
results of the research might have an adverse effect on the spon-
soring group concerned the committee.
In testimony from Dr. Walter Hibbard, Director of the Bureau
of Mines, the committee learned that "it should be emphasized
that the Bureau of Mines neither professes competence nor con-
siders as part of its research mission the health effects of auto-
motive emissions as air pollutants. This properly is a responsi-
bility of the Public Health Service. The Bureau's research on
fuels combustion is organized to (1) identify and measure the
effluents that are generated in fuel use, and (2) study the inter-
dependence of factors in the vehicle and combustion system."
However, the committee was extremely concerned by a clause
in the contract between the Bureau and API which prohibited
release of any information prior to the completion of the study
"without prior written approval of the other party." The com-
mittee feels that in a matter such as the question of lead in gaso-
line, the primary contributor to lead in the atmosphere; the find-
ings of Federal research should not be bound by potential private
economic-based decisions.
The committee does not object to the performance of research
by Federal agencies on behalf of private organizations in areas
where questions of the general welfare are not involved. However,
the potential health hazard from lead in the atmosphere is of
sufficient concern that the committee feels this type of research
program to be potentially adverse to the public interest.
The committee recommends—
(1) That agreements between Federal agencies and private
organizations not include restrictive contractual provisions
relating to the release of such information as may be devel-
oped during the period of research;
(2) That the research program in this particular instance
be constantly reviewed by the Division of Air Pollution in
order that that agency may have early access to any infor-
mation developed relative to public health; and
(3) That in the future, the Bureau of Mines specifically,
and other agencies in general, inform the Congress of the
purpose, intent, cost, contractual limitation of, and partici-
pants in any study by any Federal agency, financed by a pri-
vate organization, at least 90 days prior to signing any agree-
ment to carry out such a study.
Finally, the committee recommends that Federal agencies not
enter into research contracts on behalf of private agencies wherein
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 491
a question of private economic interest as versus the general wel-
fare are involved.
[p. 12]
S. 3400
Hearings were also held by the committee on S. 3400, introduced
by Senator Paul Douglas of Illinois, which would amend the Solid
Waste Disposal Act relative to the disposition of junked automo-
biles. In addition to hearing Senator Douglas, the committee also
heard witnesses from the Division of Solid Waste and the scrap
industry.
The committee was impressed by Senator Douglas' proposal and
testimony, and believes the purpose of ridding the Nation of the
blight created by junked automobiles, while preserving the valu-
able resources associated with the junked automobile, is a goal
worthy of achievement.
However, S. 3400 presents the committee with complex problems
and the testimony received emphasized these complexities. In the
interest of early reporting of the Clean Air Act amendments, the
committee decided to delay action on S. 3400 until further infor-
mation could be received and the necessary study of the legislation
could be performed.
[p. 13]
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with subsection (4) of the rule XXIX of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the
bill as reported are shown as follows (existing law proposed to
be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in
italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in
roman):
PUBLIC LAW 88-206, AS AMENDED BY PUBLIC LAW 89-272
APPROPRIATIONS
SEC. 306. [There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out title I not to exceed $25,000,000 for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30, 1965, not to exceed $30,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1966, and not to exceed $35,000,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1967.] There are hereby authorized to be
appropriated to carry out this Act, $46,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1967, $70,000,000 for fiscal year ending June 30,
1968, and $80,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969."
-------
492 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
[APPROPRIATIONS
[SEC. 209. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this title II, not to exceed $470,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1966, not to exceed $845,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1967, not to exceed $1,195,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1968, and not to exceed $1,470,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30,1969.]
GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
SEC. 104. (a) [From the sums appropriated annually for the
purposes of this Act but not to exceed 20 per centum of any such
appropriation, the Secretary is authorized to make grants to air
pollution control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the
cost of developing, establishing, or improving programs for the
prevention and control of air pollution: Provided, That the Secre-
tary is authorized to make grants to intermunicipal or interstate
air pollution control agencies (described in section 302 (b) (2)
and (4)) in an amount up to three-fourths of the cost of devel-
oping, establishing, or improving, regional air pollution programs.
As used in this subsection, the term "regional air pollution control
program" means a program for the prevention and control of
air pollution in an area that includes the areas of two or more
municipalities, whether in the same or different States.] The
Secretary is authorized to make grants to air pollution control
agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost of developing,
establishing, or improving, and grants to such agencies up to
one-half of the cost of maintaining, programs for the prevention
and control of air pollution: Provided, That the Secretary is
authorized to make grants to inter-
[p. 14]
municipal or interstate air pollution control agencies (described
in section 302 (b) (2) and (4)) in an amount up to three-fourths
of the cost of developing, establishing, or improving, and up to
three-fifths of the cost of maintaining, regional air pollution con-
trol programs. As used in this subsection, the term "regional air
pollution control program" means a program for the prevention
and control of air pollution in an area that includes the areas of
two or more municipalities, whether in the same or different
States.
(b) From the sums available [under] for the purposes of sub-
section (a) of this section for any fiscal year, the Secretary shall
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 493
from time to time make grants to air pollution control agencies
upon such terms and conditions as the Secretary may find neces-
sary to carry out the purpose of this section. In establishing reg-
ulations for the granting of such funds the Secretary shall, so
far as practicable, give due consideration to (1) the population,
(2) the extent of the actual or potential air pollution problem,
and (3) the financial need of the respective agencies. No agency
shall receive any grant under this section during any fiscal year
when its expenditures of non-Federal [funds] funds, for other
than non-recurrent expenditures, for air pollution control pro-
grams will be less than its expenditures were for such programs
during the preceding fiscal year. No grant shall be made under
this section until the Secretary has consulted with the appropriate
official as designated by the Governor or Governors of the State
or States affected.
(c) [Not more than 121/2 per centum of the grant funds avail-
able under subsection (a) of this section shall be expended in any
one State.] Not more than 12\^ per centum of the total of funds
appropriated or allocated for the purposes of subsection (a) of
this section shall be granted for air pollution control programs in
any one State. In the case of a grant for a program in an area
crossing State boundaries, the Secretary shall determine the por-
tion of such grant that is chargeable to the percentage limitation
under this subsection for each State into which such area extends.
[p. 15]
l.lg(2) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND
FOREIGN COMMERCE
H.R. REP. No. 2170, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966)
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1966
OCTOBER 1,1966.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. STAGGERS, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign
Commerce, submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 3112]
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom
was referred the bill (S. 3112) to amend the Clean Air Act so as
-------
494 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
to authorize grants to air pollution control agencies for main-
tenance of air pollution control programs in addition to present
authority for grants to develop, establish, or improve such pro-
grams; make the use of appropriations under the Act more flex-
ible by consolidating the appropriation authorizations under the
Act and delegating the provision limiting the total of grants for
support of air pollution control programs to 20 percent of the
total appropriation for any year; extend the duration of the pro-
grams authorized by the act; and for other purposes, having con-
sidered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and
recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows:
Page 2, line 5, strike out "$46,000,000" and insert "$39,000,000".
Page 2, line 6, strike out "$70,000,000" and insert "$62,000,000".
Page 2, line 7, strike out "$80,000,000" and insert "$71,000,000".
Page 2, line 19, immediately after "agencies" insert "in an
amount".
Page 3, line 13, after the period insert the following:
Such next to the last sentence is further amended by insert-
ing immediately before the period at the end thereof the
following: "; and no agency shall receive any grant under
this section with respect to the maintenance of a program
for the prevention and control of air pollution unless the
Secretary is satisfied that such grant will be so used as to
supplement and, to the extent practicable, increase the level
of State, local, and other non-Federal funds that would in
the absence of such grant be made available for the mainte-
[p. 1]
nance of such program, and will in no event supplant such
State, local, and other non-Federal funds".
PURPOSES OF LEGISLATION
The amended bill would broaden the present authority of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare by authorizing
grants to air pollution control agencies for program maintenance.
The amended bill would make the use of appropriations more
flexible by consolidating the appropriation authorities in the Clean
Air Act.
In addition, the amended bill would amend the Clean Air Act to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 495
delete the provision limiting grants for air pollution control pro-
grams to 20 percent of total appropriation.
Finally, the amended bill would extend the duration of pro-
grams authorized by the Clean Air Act.
APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZED
Appropriations for these programs are authorized for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1967, and the 2 succeeding fiscal years in
the following amounts:
Appropriations authorized
[In thousands]
Fiscal year: Authorisation
1967 $39,000
1968 62,000
1969 71,000
This represents a reduction of $24,000,000 of the authorizations
contained in the bill as passed by the Senate.
HEARINGS
Hearings were held on this and related bills on September 20,
1966. In addition to the reported bill S. 3112, there have been
referred to the committee the following additional related bills
dealing with air pollution which were considered: H.R. 10124
(Mr. Ryan of New York); H.R. 13199 (Mr. Staggers of West
Virginia); H.R. 13699 (Mr. Halpern of New York); H.R. 15481
(Mr. Staggers of West Virginia); H.R. 16368 (Mr. Vivian of
Michigan); H.R. 16876 (Mr. Murphy of New York); and H.R.
17101 (Mr. Roybal of California).
NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
In the preamble to the Clean Air Act, as amended, the Congress
declared that the prevention and control of air pollution at its
source are a primary responsibility of State and local govern-
ments. This policy lies at the heart of the Federal Government's
efforts to deal with the growing and worsening problem of air
pollution; indeed, the central purpose of the Clean Air Act was to
make this policy workable—that is, to insure that people in all
parts of the country have an opportunity to share in the benefits
of improved control of air pollution. To this end, the Congress
provided new tools for the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare to employ in exercising
[p. 2]
-------
496 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
leadership of the national effort to control air pollution and in
assisting local, State, and regional governmental agencies in cre-
ating and improving community air pollution control programs.
Among the most important of these new tools was authority for
the Department to provide financial assistance for control efforts
at the local, State, and regional levels. In particular, this author-
ity was for awarding of grants for any of three purposes—the
development of new air pollution control programs, the establish-
ment of programs already authorized by State or local law, or the
improvement of existing programs.
The objective of this program of grants-in-aid was not merely
to distribute Federal funds among the air pollution control pro-
grams then in operation in States and cities. The fact is that at
the time the Clean Air Act was adopted, there were relatively few
such programs in operation, and not even a handful of those were
equipped to deal with community air pollution problems in an
effective way. It was precisely this situation that motivated the
Congress to adopt the Clean Air Act. The provisions relating to
Federal grants-in-aid were designed specifically to make certain
that this assistance would stimulate new and increased control
activities by local, State, and regional agencies. In short, it was
not the intention of the Congress to reward the relatively few
agencies that were already carrying on air pollution control pro-
grams, but rather to provide an opportunity for all Americans to
be served by such programs.
In this connection, section 104 (a) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended, authorized awarding of grants to air pollution control
agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost of developing,
establishing, or improving programs for the prevention and con-
trol of air pollution, or up to three-fourths of the cost in the case
of regional programs. And section 104 (b) stipulated that—
No agency shall receive any grant under this section during
any fiscal year when its expenditures of non-Federal funds
for air pollution programs will be less than its expenditures
were for such programs during the preceding fiscal year.
Thus, the use of Federal grant funds merely to pay a portion of
the costs of an ongoing program was ruled out.
The results of this grants-in-aid program have indeed been en-
couraging. Officials of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare testified before the Subcommittee on Public Health and
Welfare that there has been a substantial expansion of local, State,
and regional control efforts since December 1963, when the Clean
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 497
Air Act became law. In terms of expenditures, the funds avail-
able for State and local air pollution control programs have in-
creased by about 65 percent. A total of 120 awards have been
made. Of the agencies to which they were made, 57 are using the
funds to develop new programs. Another 23 are establishing pro-
grams which had already been legally authorized but had not been
activated. Thus, with less than 3 years of Federal grant stimula-
tion, the way has been paved for the creation of as many as 80
new air pollution control programs. In addition, 40 agencies have
received grants to assist in the improvement of existing programs.
In short, a remarkable and very heartening improvement seems
to be taking place in local, State, and regional efforts to deal with
air
[P. 3]
pollution. But there can be no doubt that an even greater im-
provement is still needed. A great many cities and States are still
without the services of truly effective control programs. And even
where there are programs in existence, many of them are still a
long way from being adequately equipped to enforce regulations
for the prevention and control of air pollution. In view of these
facts, a continuation of the present program of Federal grants-in-
aid to stimulate greater efforts at the local, State, and regional
levels is clearly needed.
But it is important to recognize that such grants provide what
is essentially short-term assistance for specific projects. This is
not enough. A problem of such magnitude and complexity cannot
be solved overnight. Air pollution is a serious problem now; more-
over, it threatens to grow and worsen in direct proportion to up-
ward trends of urban and economic growth and technological
progress. To deal with it in a truly effective way will require
sustained and comprehensive efforts at all levels of government.
For most State and local governments, the burden of sustaining
such efforts will be too great for them to carry without assistance
from the Federal Government. The pending legislation is de-
signed to meet this need by authorizing the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare to award grants to local, State, and re-
gional agencies to assist them in maintaining effective control
programs.
In its consideration of the bill, the committee has taken steps to
rule out the use of Federal maintenance grant funds as a substi-
tute for investment of State and local funds. It is not the intent of
the committee to encourage or sanction the use of Federal funds in
-------
498 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
this way. This matter was explored at some length during the
hearing held on September 20, 1966. The bill being reported in-
cludes language to insure that awarding of maintenance grants by
the Federal Government will not result in a lessening of expendi-
tures by State and local governments.
A second major purpose of the legislation is to extend the au-
thorization for air pollution activities by the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, revise the ceiling on authorized
appropriations for the 1967 fiscal year, and set ceilings for the
succeeding 2 fiscal years. The need for continuation and expansion
of the Federal effort is quite apparent. In years to come, needs
for Federal support of control activity at State and local levels
will be even greater than they are now. Also, many aspects of the
air pollution problem are—and will remain—inherently beyond
the reach of State and local agencies. Under the provisions of the
Clean Air Act, as amended, the Federal Government already has
a substantial responsibility for dealing with such problems.
Among them are interstate air pollution and motor vehicle pollu-
tion, as well as the various research and development problems
that still remain to be solved. The Federal Government must be
prepared to meet these increasing needs for assistance to State
and local governments and action at the Federal level. Enactment
of the pending legislation, as reported by the committee, is a nec-
essary step toward equipping the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare to provide the leadership that the Congress and
the American people have a right to expect from it.
[p. 4]
SECTION-BY-SECTION SUMMARY
Section 1 of the bill provides that this act may be cited as the
"Clean Air Act Amendments of 1966."
Section 2 of the bill amends section 306 of the Clean Air Act to
authorize appropriations to carry out the purposes of the act. The
bill authorizes $39 million for fiscal year 1967, $62 million for
fiscal year 1968 and $71 million for fiscal year 1969. In addition
section 2 repeals section 209 of the Clean Air Act which provides
separate appropriation authority for title II concerning motor
vehicle pollution control activities.
Section 3 (a) of the bill amends section 104 (a) of the Clean Air
Act to delete the provision limiting program grants to 20 percent
of the annual appropriation. This section also amends the Clean
Air Act to authorize the Secretary to make grants to air pollu-
tion control agencies in an amount up to one-half of the cost of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 499
maintaining programs for the provision and control of air pollu-
tion and in any amount up to three-fifths of the cost of maintain-
ing regional air pollution control programs.
The provision in section 104 (b) of the Clean Air Act that "no
agency shall receive any grant under this section during any fiscal
year when its expenditures of non-Federal funds for air pollution
programs will be less than its expenditures were for such pro-
grams during the preceding fiscal year" is amended to permit a
grantee to reduce annual expenditures to the extent that non-
recurrent costs are involved. The committee has further amended
this subsection by adding language which will insure that Federal
funds will in no event be used to supplant State or local govern-
ment funds in maintaining air pollution control programs.
Section 3(b) of the bill amends section 104 (c) of the Clean Air
Act to authorize the Secretary to determine the portion of grants
to interstate agencies to be charged against the 12i/2-percent limi-
tation of grant funds to any one State.
AGENCY REPORTS
The reported bill, as initially introduced in the Senate, was
identical to H.R. 13199, introduced by the chairman of the com-
mittee at the request of the administration. Thp reports of the
Department on H.R. 13199 are set forth below; it will be noted
that the reports of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare and the Bureau of the Budget are directed to both H.R.
13199 and the bill reported herewith, and express a preference for
the Senate-passed bill.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
September 27,1966.
Hon. HARLEY O. STAGGERS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in response to your request
for a report on H.R. 13199, to amend the Clean Air Act so as to
authorize grants to air pollution control agencies for maintenance
of air pollution control programs in addition to present authority
for grants to develop, establish, or improve such programs; make
[p. 5]
the use of appropriations under the act more flexible by consoli-
dating the appropriation authorizations under the act and delet-
-------
500 ' LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
ing the provision limiting the total of grants for support of air
pollution control programs to 20 percent of the total appropriation
for any year; extend the duration of the programs authorized by
the act; and for other purposes. The bill would carry the short
title "Clean Air Act Amendments of 1966".
This report is also addressed to a similar companion bill, S.
3112, which (as amended in the Senate) is pending before your
committee.
These bills are intended to carry out proposals announced by the
President in his message of February 23, 1966, on "Preserving
Our Natural Heritage."
We strongly recommend the enactment of this legislation. For
the reasons stated below, we recommend that this be done in the
version passed by the Senate, with one additional amendment.
1. Consolidation, extension, and increase of appropriation au-
thorization,—The Clean Air Act now authorizes appropriations,
except for title II, only through the current fiscal year (1967) for
which it authorizes $35 million; for carrying out title II relating
to control of air pollution from motor vehicles, enacted last year,
it authorizes appropriations through fiscal year 1969 for which
$1,470,000 is authorized. H.R. 13199 is designed to amend section
306 of the Clean Air Act to consolidate the appropriation authori-
zations for the entire act and extend them through fiscal year
1972. To this end, the bill would authorize for such purposes ap-
propriations of $46 million for the fiscal year 1967 and such sums
as may be necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.
Through inadvertence, the repeal of the separate authorizations
(in sec. 209 of the act) was omitted from the House bill; the omis-
sion is supplied in the Senate version. In the Senate-passed bill,
the appropriation authorization has been amended to extend only
through fiscal year 1969, and the Senate bill authorizes $70 million
for fiscal year 1968 and $80 million for fiscal year 1969 in place
of open-end authorizations.
The figures contained in the Senate bill are based on estimates
furnished by this Department at the request of the Public Works
Committee. However, neither the estimates underlying the appro-
priation ceiling in section 306 of the present act nor the estimates
furnished to the Senate committee in connection with S. 3112 in-
clude any amounts for construction (and initial equipment) of fa-
cilities for which authority was conferred on us by section 103 (d)
of the act enacted last year, nor would the inclusion of this item in
annual appropriation ceilings be a suitable approach. We there-
fore recommend that the following sentence be added at the end of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 501
the proposed revision of section 306 of the act: "The foregoing
limitations shall be exclusive of such sums as may be required for
construction (including initial equipment) of facilities pursuant
to section 103 (d)."
As a byproduct of industrialization and urbanization, air pollu-
tion continues to be a widespread and growing hazard to the
health and welfare of the United States. Although important
progress has been made in the brief period since enactment of the
act in 1963, a sustained and accelerated effort is needed if the
promise of that act to prevent and control air pollution is to be
fulfilled. We therefore urge favorable consideration of the pro-
posed extension and consolidation of,
[p. 6]
and increase in, appropriation authorization, with the modifica-
tion as to construction above recommended.
In our judgment such consolidation is highly desirable in order
to insure that the administration of the regulatory program to
control pollution from motor vehicles, required under title II of
the act, will not be impaired by circumstances that could not be
anticipated nor provided for under the present separate authori-
zation. If activities under title II were provided for in the same
authorization as other program activities, any unexpected in-
crease or decrease in cost might be absorbed by appropriate pro-
gram adjustments. Such flexibility is of considerable importance,
especially because title II of the Clean Air Act prohibits the sale
of motor vehicles not in conformance with applicable regulations
and the industry will of necessity, in order to protect itself, need
a certificate of conformity from the Secretary with respect to a
representative test vehicle before marketing vehicles of that class;
an undue delay on our part in testing vehicles for conformance,
caused by lack of leeway to adjust funds, would work an intoler-
able hardship and dislocation upon the automobile industry and
the economy generally.
Another example which points out the need for consolidation of
appropriation authority to achieve flexibility arises from the ac-
tion of Congress during its consideration last year of the title II
legislation. A provision was added in committee whereby the Sec-
retary, upon application from a motor vehicle manufacturer, is re-
quired to issue a certificate of compliance, applicable to a produc-
tion run, if after appropriate tests a new vehicle is found to meet
the prescribed standards. But our cost estimates were furnished
to the committee before this provision was added, yet no corre-
-------
502 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
spending change was made in the title II appropriation authoriza-
tion to reflect the added cost of vehicle or engine testing which
would be required under this provision. Consolidation of appro-
priation authorization would permit such problems to be dealt
with administratively within the scope of the whole act.
2. Grants for maintenance of air pollution control programs.—
The bills would amend section 104 (a) of the Clean Air Act to add
—to the present authority for grants to develop, establish, or im-
prove air pollution control programs—an authorization for the
Secretary to make grants to air pollution control agencies in an
amount up to one-half of the cost of maintaining programs for the
prevention and control of air pollution, and to make grants to
intermunicipal or interstate air pollution control agencies in an
amount up to three-fifths of the cost of maintaining regional air
pollution control programs. (The United States Code citation for
sec. 104 of the act should be 42 U.S.C. 1857c(a), as in the Senate
bill, rather than 33 U.S.C. 1857c(a).) The bills would also change
section 104 (a) of the act to remove the limitation that no more
than 20 percent of the sums appropriated annually under the act
may be used to make grants under that section. The bills would
also provide technical amendments to section 104 (b) of the Clean
Air Act for clarification purposes. The Senate bill (as passed by
the Senate) would in addition amend section 104 (b) by providing
that in order to maintain eligibility for grants an agency need no
longer meet its total level of expenditures of non-Federal funds
for the prior fiscal year for air pollution control; the agency would
only have to match its level of recurrent expenditures.
[p. 7]
Additionally, both bills would amend section 104 (c) of the Clean
Air Act to provide that in the case of a grant for a program in
an area crossing State boundaries, the Secretary would determine
the portion of such grant that is chargeable to the 12i/£-percent
limitation imposed by the act for air pollution control program
grants in any one State.
Section 104 of the act at present authorizes grants to air pollu-
tion control agencies only in support of the cost of developing, es-
tablishing, or improving programs for the prevention and control
of air pollution. This approach authorizes a Federal role limited to
providing an initial stimulation of program improvement and sub-
sequent withdrawal of support on the assumption or hope that
non-Federal funds will be available to substitute for the Federal
share. We believe that this limited role is not adequate for deal-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 503
ing with the problem nationally, nor appropriate for full imple-
mentation of the declared Federal policy. In enacting the Clean
Air Act, the Congress established this policy through its finding,
as contained in section 101, "that the prevention and control of air
pollution at its source is the primary responsibility of States and
local government; and * * * that Federal financial assistance and
leadership is essential for the development of cooperative Federal,
State, regional, and local programs to prevent and control air pol-
lution." The maintenance and continuation of expanded efforts by
State and local air pollution control agencies will require in the
future not only stimulatory grant assistance but sustaining grants
as well. Sustaining grants, as proposed by these bills, will more
adequately reflect the strong Federal interest and responsibility in
air pollution control and should significantly improve the effec-
tiveness of programs in giving impetus to greater State and local
action.
The above-mentioned modification, contained in the Senate bill,
of the maintenance-of-effort requirement of section 104 (b) of the
Clean Air Act—which would apply to both the new maintenance
grants and the establishment and improvement grants under ex-
isting law—is substantially as suggested by us in testimony before
the Senate committee. The present law (the third sentence of sec.
104 (b)) provides that no agency may receive a grant during any
fiscal year if its expenditures of non-Federal funds for air pollu-
tion programs will be less than such expenditures in the preceding
fiscal year. Over a period of years, many factors may justifiably
cause the level of expenditures necessary to maintain an effective
program to fluctuate, such as, for example, nonrecurring costs of
equipment or facilities acquisition, or the conduct of special studies
concerning air quality, special types of sources, or other matters.
S. 3112 was therefore amended to modify section 104 of the act
by excluding nonrscurring expenditures from the requirement of
matching the prior year's expenditures. This is practical. Where
the overall workability of the program is not impaired, fluctua-
tions in expenditures resulting from changes in nonrecurring
costs should not make agencies ineligible for Federal matching
grant support.
The bills, as above stated, would also amend section 104 of the
Clean Air Act to delete the provision limiting the total for grants
in support of air pollution control programs to 20 percent of the
total appropriation under the act for any year. The existing limi-
tation is undesirable, we believe, in imposing a fixed relationship
526-701 O - 73 - 34
-------
504 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
between such grant funds and the total appropriations for all
Federal air pollution
[p. 8]
activities. Air pollution and the possibilities for control action are
subject to rapid change. Over a period of time, the pattern of
needs and desirable program balance with respect to research,
technical assistance, training, Federal abatement activities, grants
to State and local control agencies, and other activities may vary
considerably. We therefore believe it would be wise to leave the
determination of the relative emphasis to be given to each of
these activities to judgments based upon overall requirements
existing at any given time.
In conclusion, for the reasons stated above, we urge the prompt
enactment of this legislation, with the improvements and correc-
tions contained in the Senate-passed version and the additional
amendment (relating to construction and initial equipment) above
recommended.
We are advised by the Bureau of the Budget that the enactment
of legislation as above proposed would be in accord with the pro-
gram of the President.
Sincerely,
JOHN W. GARDNER,
Secretary
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., September 27, 1966.
Hon. HARLEY O. STAGGERS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : Your letter of March 7, 1966, requested
the views of the Bureau of the Budget on H.R. 13199, to amend
the Clean Air Act so as to authorize grants in air pollution con-
trol agencies for maintenance of grants to develop, establish or
improve such programs; make the use of appropriations under
the act more flexible by consolidating the appropriation authoriza-
tions under the act and deleting the provision limiting the total of
grants for support of air pollution control programs to 20 per-
cent of the total appropriation for any year; extend the duration
of the programs authorized by the act; and for other purposes.
This bill carries out proposals contained in the President's Mes-
sage of February 23, 1966, "Preserving Our Natural Heritage."
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 505
We are therefore in full accord with the intent of the legislation.
However, for the technical reasons outlined in the report of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare on H.R. 13199 and
S. 3112, we prefer enactment of the Senate version of the bill (S.
3112) with the amendment noted in the report of the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare.
The HEW amendment concerns the need to provide for the con-
struction of facilities within the authorization ceilings proposed in
the Senate version of the bill. HEW has suggested language to
deal with this matter. We would suggest that the committee con-
sider as a possible alternative to the HEW language the language
contained in section 2 of H.R. 13199 authorizing "such sums as
may be necessary."
[p. 9]
Subject to the above comment, we favor the enactment of the
Senate version of H.R. 13199 (S. 3112) as being part of the
President's legislative program.
Sincerely yours,
WILFRED H. ROMMEL,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION,
Washington, D.C., August 26, 1966.
Hon. HARLEY O. STAGGERS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In response to your request of March 7,
1966, we enclose three copies of the report of the Federal Power
Commission on the subject bill.
We contemplate release of this report by the Commission to the
public within 3 working days from the date of this letter unless
there is a request that its release be withheld.
The Bureau of the Budget advises us that there would be no
objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of
the program of the President.
Sincerely,
LEE C. WHITE, Chairman
REPORT ON H.R. 13199, 89TH CONGRESS
A BILL To amend the Clean Air Act so as to authorize grants to air pollution
control agencies for maintenance of air pollution control programs in
addition to present authority for grants to develop, establish, or improve
-------
506 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
such programs: make the use of appropriations under the act more flexible
by consolidating the appropriation authorizations under the act and de-
leting the provision limiting the total of grants for support of air pollution
control programs to 20 percent of the total appropriation for any year;
extend the duration of the programs authorized by the act; and for other
purposes
The proposed amendments in this bill, which relate principally
to the authorization and financing of Federal grants, would ex-
tend the duration of the air pollution control programs under the
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857-18570 until July 1, 1973; author-
ize grants for maintenance as well as development, establishment,
or improvement of such programs; and make the use of appro-
priations for direct research and abatement activities under the
act more flexible by consolidating the appropriation authoriza-
tions, increased to $46 million for fiscal 1966-67, and by deleting
the provision which limited the total of grants for the support of
air pollution control programs to 20 percent of the total appro-
priation for any year.
The congressional concern for control of air pollution is mani-
fested in ways which affect the electric utility industry by the
Clean Air Act of 1963; the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1965;
and the further amendments now pending to expand the existing
program. The act now provides Federal grants of technical and
financial assistance to State and local agencies to help them devel-
op air pollution control and prevention programs. Thus Congress
is encouraging local regulation of stack emissions and other pollu-
tion sources. It is now proposed also to provide grants toward
maintenance of these
[p. 10]
regulatory programs once initiated. The Clean Air Act also pro-
vides for Federal regulation of automotive pollutants and for
Federal contribution for research and development.
The Federal Power Commission does not administer research
programs or pollution control and abatement programs under the
Clean Air Act, nor is it responsible for any grants or financial
assistance programs thereunder. This Commission's interest in
air pollution problems stems from the use of fossil fuels in the
generation of electric energy. The Commission's National Power
Survey Report, issued in 1964, gives prominent recognition to the
problems of air and water pollution and their significance in rela-
tion to the design, location, and operation of large thermal-electric
plants and the report points up the possibilities for combating air
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 507
pollution through mine-mouth generation and greater interconnec-
tion of utility systems. The air pollution issue has been presented
to us in a number of gas certificate matters under the Natural
Gas Act involving boiler fuel uses of gas in metropolitan areas.
Increasing use of large nuclear plants for baseloading also will
alleviate air pollution in many areas. Unlike plants operated with
fossil fuels, nuclear plants do not emit organic wastes or carbon
dioxide.
Because it is more difficult to control emissions from multiple
sources like automobiles than to control single sources like power-
plants, the possibility of electric-powered cars is of particular
interest to air pollution officials, as well as the electric power in-
dustry. The automobile is the chief source of the air pollution
problems plaguing a number of large metropolitan areas. Some
engineering research has been going on with respect to such mat-
ters as the amount, character, and control of automotive exhaust
and crankcase emissions, but with less than complete success, so
far as we are able to determine. We believe that a balanced re-
search program will continue to devote funds to such conventional
research.
In order to maintain a balanced research program with respect
to auto exhaust emissions, substantial funds should be provided
for research and development of cleaner burning fuels, and reduc-
tion or elimination of pollutants emitted from conventional in-
ternal combustion engines. We believe such research will have an
immediate as well as significant long-term effect on the air pollu-
tion problem without producing the corresponding adverse finan-
cial impact on State and Federal tax revenues.
Electric-powered automobiles, however, are a new way of at-
tacking the air pollution problem and if successful, could contrib-
ute greatly to its solution. Although there has been a revival of
interest and some progress in vehicles of this type in recent years,
some important technological breakthroughs are still required be-
fore they can compete successfully with the gasoline-powered
automobile. Presently available battery-operated vehicles have a
maximum range of approximately 75 miles between charges. If
such cars can be produced and operated at sufficiently low cost
and the range limitation overcome, they might achieve consider-
able popularity as the second or third car in a household, to be
used for relatively short errands. Much progress remains to be
made in this field, as well as in the development of the fuel cell as
a practical and economical source of power for this purpose. (See
-------
508 LEGAL COMPILATION — Am
Report of the Surgeon General, "Motor Vehicles, Air Pollution,
and Health," H. Doc. 489, 87th Cong., 2d sess., p. 29.)
[p.
The Federal air pollution program offers great opportunity for
the electric utility industry, particularly in the research sphere.
In commenting last year to the Senate Public Works Committee
on the clean air amendment bill (S. 3112, 89th Cong.), the Fed-
eral Power Commission urged that Federal air pollution control
research be directed in part to revolutionary advancements, such
as rechargeable batteries for motor vehicles and electrified mass
transportation, to handle at least part of the traffic now driven by
internal combustion engines. The Commission noted that energy
conversions in modern electric powerplants are far more efficient
than those in internal combustion auto engines, so that the total
pollutant potential would decrease, and the combustion refuse
would be concentrated where it could be better controlled. The
batteries would normally be charged during the night, when power
system loads are at a minimum, thus further improving the effi-
ciencies of the electric power system operations. The Commission
recognized the electric battery research support by Edison Elec-
tric Institute, but concluded that the present scale of the effort is
not likely to result in rapid progress. Since enactment of the 1965
clean air amendment (Public Law 89-272, 79 Stat. 992), the ad-
ministration has proposed a modest initial appropriation for 1967
to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare of $100,000
for planning research to explore alternatives to the internal com-
bustion gasoline engine, particularly in the area of fuel cells and
battery-operated vehicles. See the President's 1967 budget mes-
sage (H. Doc. No. 335), volume 112, Congressional Record (Janu-
ary 24, 1966), pages 857, 862; House Appropriations Subcommit-
tee Hearings, 89th Congress, 2d Session, part 3, pages 559-560. We
strongly urge that any further plans for undertaking and financ-
ing air pollution research programs provide for intensified re-
search and development of rechargeable storage batteries and fuel
cells suitable for widespread use in motor vehicles as an appropri-
ate measure for aiding in the solution of the acute automotive air
pollution problems now confronting our large metropolitan areas.
More active Federal support and leadership in this important field,
in our opinion, would tend to stimulate nongovernmental re-
search efforts and give added incentive to the industries con-
cerned to carry forward developmental work along these lines.
While the Commission recognizes the importance of appropri-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 509
ate measures to further air pollution control, we offer no com-
ments on the merits of the amendments proposed in H.R. 13199
and their fiscal aspects, except to suggest that serious considera-
tion be given to the adequacy of authorizations for research and
development of electrified mass transportation media and of re-
chargeable storage batteries and fuel cells for motor vehicular
use, in addition to the funding of traditional air pollution research
areas.
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION,
LEE C. WHITE, Chairman
[p. 12]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
Washington, D.C., September 27, 1966.
Hon. HARLEY O. STAGGERS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. STAGGERS: Your committee has requested this Depart-
ment's report on H.R. 13199, a bill to amend the Clean Air Act so
as to authorize grants to air pollution control agencies for mainte-
nance of air pollution control programs in addition to present au-
thority for grants to develop, establish, or improve such pro-
grams; make the use of appropriations under the act more flexible
by consolidating the appropriation authorizations under the act
and deleting the provision limiting the total of grants for support
of air pollution control programs to 20 percent of the total appro-
priation for any year; extend the duration of the programs au-
thorized by the act; and for other purposes.
The bill is intended to extend and increase the appropriation
authorization for title I of the Clean Air Act, as amended. It ex-
tends the program to June 30, 1973, and authorizes an annual
appropriation of $46 million for the fiscal years beginning June
30, 1967, through June 30, 1973. It also removes the percentage
limitation on the amount of appropriations available for grants
for air pollution control programs.
This program is administered by the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, and we defer to its views.
-------
510 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection
to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the ad-
ministration's program.
Sincerely yours,
CHARLES F. LUCE,
Acting Secretary of the Interior
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
Washington, D.C., April 16, 1966.
Hon. HARLEY 0. STAGGERS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Your letter of March 7, 1966, requested
such comments as the General Services Administration may desire
to make on H.R. 13199, 89th Congress, a bill to amend the Clean
Air Act so as to authorize grants to air pollution control agencies
for maintenance of air pollution control programs in addition to
present authority for grants to develop, establish, or improve such
programs; make the use of appropriations under the act more flex-
ible by consolidating the appropriation authorizations under the
act and deleting the provision limiting the total of grants for sup-
port of air pollution control programs to 20 percent of the total
appropriation for any year; extend the duration of the programs
authorized by the act; and for other purposes.
The purpose of the bill is stated in the title.
Inasmuch as the proposed legislation would not affect the func-
tions and responsibilities of GSA, we have no comment to make
as to the desirability of the enactment of H.R. 13199.
[p. 13]
The Bureau of the Budget has advised that, from the stand-
point of the administration's program, there is no objection to the
submission of this report to your committee.
Sincerely yours,
LAWSON B. KNOTT, Jr.,
Administrator
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 511
COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, D.C., April 5, 1966.
B-135945.
Hon. HARLEY 0. STAGGERS,
Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reference to your letter of
March 7, 1966, requesting our comments on H.R. 13199, a bill to
amend the Clean Air Act.
We have no special information concerning the subject matter
of the bill and therefore have no recommendations as to the mer-
its of the proposal.
It is noted that section 3 (a) (1) of the bill has an erroneous ci-
tation. The reference to "33 U.S.C. 1857c(a)" should be "42
U.S.C. 1857c(a)."
Sincerely yours,
FRANK H. WEITZEL,
Assistant Comptroller General of the United States
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to
be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in
italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in
roman) :
CLEAN AIR ACT
GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS
[SEC. 104. (a) From the sums appropriated annually for the
purposes of this Act but not to exceed 20 per centum of any such
appropriation, the Secretary is authorized to make grants to air
pollution control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the
cost of developing, establishing, or improving programs for the
prevention and control of air pollution: Provided, That the Secre-
tary is authorized to make grants to intermunicipal or interstate
air pollution control agencies (described in section 302 (b) (2)
and (4)) in an amount up to three-fourths of the cost of develop-
ing, establishing, or improving, regional air pollution programs.
As used in this subsection, the term 'regional air pollution con-
-------
512 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
trol program' means a program for the prevention and control of
air pollution in an area that includes the areas of two or more
municipalities, whether in the same or different States.]
[p. 14]
Sec. 104- (a) The Secretary is authorized to make grants to air
pollution control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds of the
cost of developing, establishing, or improving, and grants to such
agencies in an amount up to one-half of the cost of maintaining,
programs for the prevention and control of air pollution: Pro-
vided, That the Secretary is authorized to make grants to inter-
municipal or interstate air pollution control agencies (described
in section 302 (b) (2) and (4)) in an amount up to three-fourths
of the cost of developing, establishing, or improving, and up to
three-fifths of the cost of maintaining, regional air pollution con~
trol programs. As used in this subsection, the term "regional air
pollution control program" means a program for the prevention
and control of air pollution in an area that includes the areas of
two or more municipalities, whether in the same or different
States.
(b) From the sums available [under] for the purposes of sub-
section (a) of this section for any fiscal year, the Secretary shall
from time to time make grants to air pollution control agencies
upon such terms and conditions as the Secretary may find neces-
sary to carry out the purpose of this section. In establishing regu-
lations for the granting of such funds the Secretary shall, so far
as practicable, give due consideration to (1) the population, (2)
the extent of the actual or potential air pollution problem, and (3)
the financial need of the respective agencies. No agency shall re-
ceive any grant under this section during any fiscal year when its
expenditures of non-Federal funds, for other than non-recurrent
expenditures, for air pollution control programs will be less than
its expenditures were for such programs during the preceding
fiscal year. No grant shall be made under this section until the
Secretary has consulted with the appropriate official as designated
by the Governor or Governors of the State or States affected; and
no agency shall receive any grant under this section with respect
to the maintenance of a program for the prevention and control of
air pollution unless the Secretary is satisfied that such grant will
be so used as to supplement and, to the extent practicable, increase
the level of State, local, and other non-Federal funds that would in
the absence of such grant be made available for the maintenance
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 513
of such 'program, and will in no event supplant such State, local,
and other non-Federal funds.
[ (c) Not more than 12i/£ per centum of the grant funds avail-
able under subsection (a) of this section shall be expended in any
one State. ]
(c) Not more than 12% per centum of the total of funds appro-
priated or allocated for the purposes of subsection (a) of this sec-
tion shall be granted for air pollution control programs in any one
State. In the case of a grant for a program in an area crossing
State boundaries, the Secretary shall determine the portion of
such grant that is chargeable to the percentage limitation under
this subsection for each State into which such area extends.
APPROPRIATIONS
[SEC. 209. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this title II, not to exceed $470,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1966, not to exceed $845,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1967, not to exceed $1,195,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1968, and not to exceed $1,470,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1969.]
*******
[p. 15]
[APPROPRIATIONS
[SEC. 306. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out title I not to exceed $25,000,000 for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30, 1965, not to exceed $30,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1966, and not to exceed $35,000,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1967.]
Sec. 306. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this Act, $39,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1967, $62,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968, and
$71,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1969.
[P- 16]
-------
514 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
l.lg(3) COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
H.R. REP. No. 2256, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966)
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1966
OCTOBER 12,1966.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. STAGGERS, from the committee of conference, submitted the
following
CONFERENCE REPORT
[To accompany S. 3112]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
houses on the amendment of the House to the bill (S. 3112) to
amend the Clean Air Act so as to authorize grants to air pollution
control agencies for maintenance of air pollution control programs
in addition to present authority for grants to develop, establish,
or improve such programs; make the use of appropriations under
the act more flexible by consolidating the appropriation authoriza-
tions under the act and deleting the provision limiting the total of
grants for support of air pollution control programs to 20 per-
cent of the total appropriation for any year; extend the duration
of the programs authorized by the act, and for other purposes,
having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recom-
mend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
That the House recede from its amendment numbered 1.
That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amend-
ments of the House numbered 4 and 5, and agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 2:
That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the House numbered 2, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
Strike out the matter proposed to be stricken out by the House
amendment, and in lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by
the House amendment insert the following: $66,000,000
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 515
Amendment numbered 3:
That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the House numbered 3, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
Strike out the matter proposed to be stricken out by the House
amendment, and in lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by
the House amendment insert the following: $74,000,000
And the House agree to the same.
HARLEY 0. STAGGERS,
JOHN JARMAN,
LEO W. O'BRIEN,
PAUL G. ROGERS,
WILLIAM L. SPRINGER,
ANCHER NELSEN,
Managers on the Part of the House.
JENNINGS RANDOLPH,
EDMUND S. MUSKIE,
FRANK E. Moss,
FRED R. HARRIS,
J. CALEB BOGGS,
GEORGE L. MURPHY,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
[P-2]
STATEMENT OF THE MANAGERS ON THE PART OF THE
HOUSE
The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the
House to the bill (S. 3112) to amend the Clean Air Act so as to
authorize grants to air pollution control agencies for maintenance
of air pollution control programs in addition to present authority
for grants to develop, establish, or improve such programs; make
the use of appropriations under the act more flexible by consoli-
dating the appropriation authorizations under the act and deleting
the provision limiting the total of grants for support of air pollu-
tion control programs to 20 percent of the total appropriation for
any year; extend the duration of the programs authorized by the
act, and for other purposes, submit the following statement in
explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the con-
ferees and recommended in the accompanying conference report:
Amendment No. 1: Section 2 of the Senate bill amends section
306 of the Clean Air Act to authorize $46,000,000 for fiscal year
-------
516 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
1967. The House amendments reduce that authorization to $39,-
000,000.
The House recedes.
Amendment No. 2: Section 2 of the Senate bill amends section
306 of the Clean Air Act to authorize $70,000,000 for fiscal year
1968. The House amendments reduce this authorization to $62,-
000,000.
The Senate recedes with amendments which provide an authori-
zation of $66,000,000 for fiscal year 1968.
Amendment No. 3: Section 2 of the Senate bill amends section
306 of the Clean Air Act to authorize $80,000,000 for fiscal year
1969. The House amendments reduce this amount to $71,000,000.
The Senate recedes with amendments which authorize $74,000,-
000 for fiscal year 1969.
Amendment No. 4: This is a clarifying amendment. The Senate
recedes.
Amendment No. 5: Section 3 (a) (2) of the Senate bill amends
section 104 (b) of the Clean Air Act which provides that "no
agency shall receive any grant under this section during any
fiscal year when its expenditures of non-Federal funds for air
pollution programs will be less than its expenditures were for such
programs during the preceding fiscal year" to permit a grantee
to reduce annual expenditures to the extent that nonrecurrent
costs are involved. The House amendments provide that no grant
shall be made for maintenance of an air pollution program unless
the Secretary is satisfied that it will not be used to supplant non-
Federal funds, and to the extent practicable, will be
[p. 3]
used to increase the level of State, local, and other non-Federal
funds available for the maintenance of such program.
The Senate recedes.
HARLEY 0. STAGGERS,
JOHN JARMAN,
LEO W. O'BRIEN^
PAUL G. ROGERS,
WILLIAM L. SPRINGER,
ANCHER NELSEN,
Managers on the Part of the House.
[P. 4]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
517
l.lg(4) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 112 (1966)
(a) July 11: Considered in Senate, p. 15169
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS
OF 1966
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the Sen-
ate proceed to the consideration of
Calendar No. 1326, S. 3112. I do this
so that the bill will become the pend-
ing business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill will be read by title.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (S.
3112) to amend the Clean Air Act so
as to authorize grants to air pollution
control agencies for maintenance of
air pollution control programs in ad-
dition to present authority for grants
to develop, establish, or improve such
programs; make the use of appropria-
tions under the act more flexible by
consolidating the appropriations un-
der the act and deleting the provision
limiting the total of grants for sup-
port of air pollution control programs
to 20 percent of the total appropria-
tion for any year; extend the duration
of the programs authorized by the
act; and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there objection to the present consid-
eration of the bill?
There being no objection, the Sen-
ate proceeded to consider the bill,
which had been reported from the
Committee on Public Works, with
amendments on page 2, line 8, after
"1967", to strike out "and such sums
as may be necessary for each succeed-
ing fiscal year ending prior to July
1, 1973" and insert "$70,000,000 for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968,
and $80,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1969", and on page 3,
line 13, after the word "and", to strike
out "by inserting in the third sentence
the word 'control' after 'air pollu-
tion' " and insert "in the next to the
last sentence by inserting a comma
after the word 'funds' and adding 'for
other than nonrecurrent expenditures,'
and in the same sentence after the
word 'pollution', the word 'control'";
so as to make the bill read:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of Ameri-
ca in Congress assembled. That this Act may
be cited as the "Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1966".
CONSOLIDATION OF APPROPRIATION CEILINGS
SEC. 2. (a) Section 306 of the Clean Air Act
is amended to read as follows:
"SEC, 306. There are hereby authorized to
be appropriated to carry out this Act, $46,000,-
000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967,
$70,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1968, and $80,000,000 for the fiscal year ending
June 30. 1969."
(b) Section 209 of such Act is hereby re-
pealed.
AUTHORIZATION OP MAINTENANCE GRANTS FOR
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS AND RE-
MOVAL OF 20 PER CENTUM CEILING
SEX!. 3. (a)(l) Subsection (a) of section
104 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 1857c(a))
is amended to read as follows:
"SEC, 104 (a) The Secretary is authorized
to make grants to air pollution control agen-
cies in an amount up to two-thirds of the cost
of developing, establishing, or improving, and
grants to such agencies up to one-half of the
cost of maintaining, programs for the preven-
tion and control of air pollution: Provided,
That the Secretary is authorized to make
grants to intermunicipal or interstate air pol-
lution control agencies (described in section
302(b) (2) and (4)) in an amount up to
three-fourths of the cost of developing, estab-
lishing, or improving, and up to three-fifths
of the cost of maintaining, regional air pol-
lution control programs. As used in this sub-
section, the term 'regional air pollution control
program' means a program for the prevention
and control of air pollution in an area that
includes the areas of two or more municipal-
ities, whether in the same or different States."
(2) Subsection (b) of such section 104 is
amended by striking out "under" in the first
sentence and inserting in lieu thereof "for the
purposes of", and in the next to the last sen-
tence by inserting a comma after the word
-------
518
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"funds" and adding; "for other than nonrecur-
rent expenditures," and in the same sentence
after the word "pollution", the word "control".
(b) Subsection (c) of such section 10
is amended to read as follows:
"(c) Not more than 12% per centum the
total funds appropriated or allocated for the
purposes of subsection (a) of this section
shall be granted for air pollution control pro-
grams in any one State. In the case of a
grant for a program in an area crossing State
boundaries, the Secretary shall determine the
portion of such grant that is chargeable to
the percentage limitation under this subsection
for each State into which such area extends."
[P. 15169]
l.lg(4)(b) July 12: Considered and passed Senate, pp. 15248-15262
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENT
OF 1966
Mr. MANSFIELD. I ask unanimous
consent that the Senate proceed to the
consideration of the unfinished busi-
ness.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill will be stated by title.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. Calendar
No. 1326 (S. 3112) a bill to amend
the Clean Air Act so as to authorize
grants to air pollution control agen-
cies for maintenance of air pollution
control programs in addition to pres-
ent authority for grants to develop,
establish, or improve such programs;
make the use of appropriations under
the act more flexible by consolidating
the appropriation authorizations un-
der the act and deleting the provision
limiting- the total of grants for sup-
port of air pollution control programs
to 20 percent of the total appropria-
tion for any year; extend the dura-
tion of the programs authorized by
the act; and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there objection to the present consid-
eration of the bill?
There being no objection, the Sen-
ate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the dis-
tinguished Senator from West Vir-
ginia [Mr. BYRD] may have 15 min-
utes to speak, regardless of the rule
of germaneness.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
[P. 15248]
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS
OF 1966
The Senate resumed the considera-
tion of the bill (S. 3112) to amend
the Clean Air Act so as to authorize
grants to air pollution control agen-
cies for maintenance of air pollution
control programs in addition to pres-
ent authority for grants to develop,
establish, or improve such programs;
make the use of appropriations un-
der the act more flexible by consoli-
dating the appropriation authoriza-
tions under the act and deleting the
provision limiting the total of grants
for support of air pollution control
programs to 20 percent of the total
appropriation for any year; extend
the duration of the programs author-
ized by the act; and for other pur-
poses.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, some-
time shortly before 2 o'clock p.m., I
hope to suggest the absence of a quo-
rum so that members of the Public
Works Committee may proceed to re-
quest a yea-and-nay vote on Calendar
No. 1326, S. 3112, the pending busi-
ness. It has been agreed with the lead-
er of the majority that at 2 o'clock
p.m. we will proceed to vote, on the
assumption that a yea-and-nay vote
will be ordered.
UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent, therefore, that the Senate pro-
ceed to vote at 2 o'clock p.m. on the
pending business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
519
there objection? The Chair hears none,
and it is so ordered.
Does the Senator from California
ask also that rule XII be waived?
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that rule XII be
waived in connection with my request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I sug-
gest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, a lit-
tle less than 3 ^ years ago, the late
Senator McNamara, of Michigan,
then chairman of the Senate Commit-
tee on Public Works, created the Spe-
cial Subcommittee on Air and Water
Pollution. Our first major legislation
from that subcommittee was the Clean
Air Act of 1963. That legislation
launched a vigorous Federal program
to aid the States and local govern-
ments to combat the ever-increasing
threat of polluted air. Last year, we
amended the Clean Air Act to initiate
controls on harmful automobile ex-
haust emissions, and we added the
Solid Waste Disposal Act to our ar-
senal of weapons in the fight for an
improved environment.
Today, we bring to the Senate ad-
ditional amendments to the Clean Air
Act. These amendments have the vig-
orous backing of the members of the
Public Works Committee, on both
sides of the aisle. They are evidence
of the continued concern of our com-
mittee with the problems of air pol-
lution and of the determination of
our chairman, the distinguished Sen-
ator from West Virginia [Mr. RAN-
DOLPH], to maintain our. search for
improved ways of reducing the haz-
ards of air pollution.
Today's legislation is a step for-
ward, but it is not the end of our ef-
forts. We cannot rest until we have
removed the threats to man's health,
well-being and economic advancement
which man himself creates in a mod-
ern, technological society.
S. 3112 amends the Clean Air Act
in order to provide for a stronger,
more effective air pollution control ef-
fort at the Federal, State, and local
level.
S. 3112, as reported, is based on
legislation proposed by the adminis-
tration. The primary purposes of the
bill are to consolidate appropriation
authorizations in the Clean Air Act
and to authorize funds to continue the
program through 1969.
S. 3112 institutes a new grant pro-
gram to allow air pollution control
agencies up to one-half of the cost of
maintaining programs for the preven-
tion and control of air pollution, and
authorizes the Secretary to make
grants to intermunicipal or interstate
air pollution control agencies in an
amount up to three-fifths of the cost
of maintaining regional air pollution
control programs.
S. 3112 removes the limitation in
existing law that no more than 20 per-
cent of the sums appropriated annual-
ly under the act may be used for sup-
port of air pollution control programs,
and provides that in determining the
eligibility for a program grant nonre-
current expenditures of the partici-
pating agencies in the preceding year
shall not be considered.
Finally, S. 3112 provides that
grants for interstate programs, sub-
ject to the 12%-percent limitation,
shall be allocated by the Secretary ac-
cording to the portion of such grant
that is chargeable to any one State.
Mr. President, last year the Con-
gress enacted major legislation deal-
ing with the specific problem of pollu-
tion emanating from automobiles.
That legislation has resulted in pro-
mulgation, by the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare, of regula-
526-701 O - 73 - 35
-------
520
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
tions relating to the control of harm-
ful motor vehicle exhausts. Those reg-
ulations will require installation of
automobile exhaust control devices on
all 1968 model automobiles.
Last year's amendments also pro-
vided a mechanism for abatement of
international air pollution; for ac-
celeration of research concerning
methods of control of pollution from
motor vehicles and the emission of
oxides of sulfur; for public confer-
ences directed toward the prevention
of new or more aggravated interstate
air pollution problems; and for con-
struction, staffing, and equipping fa-
cilities needed by the Department to
carry out its responsibilities under
the act.
The additional requirements im-
posed by last year's legislative action
require additional funds if the pro-
grams authorized are to be adequate-
ly and effectively pursued.
The committee bill has, therefore,
authorized the requested $46 million
for 1967 and provided $70 million for
1968, and $80 million for 1969. These
authorizations will provide adequate
funds to carry out the new mainte-
tenance grant program authorized by
this act and give the Division of Air
Pollution sufficient funds to support
essential research programs. The $46
million authorized for 1967 represents
a $10 million increase over existing
authorization. This increase is, in
part, required by the expanded pro-
gram of research into the control of
sulfur emissions and automobile emis-
sions and includes $7 million as the
added cost of maintenance grant pro-
gram.
The authorizations for 1968 and
1969 represent similar increases in the
activities of the division and $10 and
$13 million, respectively, to carry out
the maintenance grant program.
On the latter point, the committee
is convinced of the desirability of pro-
viding Federal aid to continuation of
air pollution control programs. Exist-
ing program grants have stimulated
State and local activity by providing
Federal matching funds for new or
improved programs. They were not
designed for sustained State and local
control efforts necessary to cope with
a continuing air pollution problem.
This has discriminated against States
and localities who initiated their own
excellent programs prior to the Clean
Air Act and it has worked a hardship
on other States and localities.
Therefore, the committee considers
the provision of S. 3112, authorizing
the Secretary to make grants for
maintaining air pollution control pro-
grams, to be essential. The 50-percent
matching grant program to state and
local agencies and the three-fifths
matching grant program to regional
agencies should
[p. 15249]
provide adequate incentive for main-
tenance of this effort.
The committee has further provided
that nonrecurrent expenditures of pol-
lution control agencies will not be
considered in determining the eligi-
bility for a grant. Many factors may
justifiably cause the level of expendi-
tures by a pollution control agency to
fluctuate, including, for example, non-
recurrent costs of equipment, of fa-
cilities, acquisition of property, or the
initiation of studies concerning air
quality or other matters. Where the
overall workability of the air pollu-
tion control program is not impaired,
fluctuations in expenditures should not
make local agencies ineligible for Fed-
eral matching grants support.
S. 3112 deletes the provision in the
Clean Air Act which limits the total
for grants in support of air pollution
control programs to 20 percent of the
total appropriation for any fiscal year.
The existing act imposes a fixed re-
lationship between grant funds to the
total appropriations for all Federal
air pollution activities. Air pollution
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
521
and the possibilities for control action
are subject to rapid change. Over a
period of time, the pattern of needs
and desirable program balance with
respect to research, technical assist-
ance, training, Federal abatement ac-
tivities, grants to State and local con-
trol agencies, and other activities may
vary considerably. The committee be-
lieves it would be wise to leave the
determination of the relative emphasis
to be given to each of these activities
to the annual budgetary and appro-
priation process so that judgments
may be based upon the overall re-
quirements existing at the time.
Mr. President, these are the major
provisions of the legislation pending
before the Senate. However, there are
two other matters which the commit-
tee examined during its hearings on
S. 3112 which I would like to bring
to the attention of my colleagues.
Mr. President, it is the philosophy
of the Subcommittee on Air and
Water Pollution and its chairman that
discussions limited to pending legisla-
tion are not sufficient when dealing
with pollution of our air and water
environment. The subcommittee has
tried to develop as much informa-
tion as is available on potential prob-
lems in order to inform the public of
existing or potential threats to our
environment which may require ad-
ditional administrative or legislative
action.
An example of this is the question
of contamination of the atmosphere
from lead and beryllium. The subcom-
mittee learned in its hearings that
there is a potential danger to the pub-
lic health from the use of beryllium
in large quantities in rocket firing.
On the basis of the information re-
ceived relative to this subject, the
committee, in its report, has recom-
mended that the Public Health Serv-
ice develop such guidelines as may be
necessary to insure the protection of
public health and safety against the
adverse effects of beryllium dispersed
into the atmosphere by rocket firings.
The subcommittee's hearings on en-
vironmental lead contamination raised
many unanswered questions. It is well
known that lead is a toxic substance;
that it is an element not natural to
the human body, and that, absorbed in
large quantities, it can have toxic re-
sults. These facts have been common
knowledge in lead industries for many
years and have resulted in strict pro-
cedures for the protection of workers
in those industries. The results of
that program have been impressive.
However, the problem of adverse
effects of lead contamination goes far
beyond the clinical injuries of workers
in lead using industries. We are con-
cerned with the subclinical effects of
long-term low levels of exposure.
Lead in the atmosphere, attributable
to automobile exhaust emissions, has
greatly increased over the past three
decades. There is no unanimity among
the experts as to the danger or lack
of danger from this increase.
There is some evidence that preg-
nant women and younger children re-
tain a proportionately greater amount
of lead which they ingest from the en-
vironment and are more susceptible to
its toxic effects. Other evidence indi-
cates that relatively small—compared
with industrial standards—concentra-
tions of lead are capable of produc-
ing intellectual disabilities and re-
tardation in children, and that some
types of diseases including kidney,
liver, blood, and bone problems, ren-
der the body more susceptible to lead
toxicity.
The committee notes suggestions in
the work of scientists in this country,
Russia and Great Britain, the lead in
amounts and concentrations much less
than levels traditionally connected
with lead poisoning are capable of
producing serious effects on the cen-
tral nervous system and particularly
the production and maintenance of
red blood cells.
This evidence is, at present, only
-------
522
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
fragmentary and controversial. How-
ever, it is important to note that the
standards of safety developed for
health of male adults working in lead
industries are not necessarily relevant
to problems of long-term, low levels
of exposure, particularly for those
who retain higher than normal
amounts of lead and who are more
vulnerable to toxic effects of lead.
This information, developed during
the course of the hearings, suggests
that both the committee and those
agencies charged with protection of
the public health should further in-
vestigate the following questions re-
garding lead in the atmosphere:
First. What are the cumulative ef-
fects of subclinical exposure over long
and short periods of time?
Second. What dangerous effects of
abnormal storage in the bones are
likely to result from the normal
course of events and from accidents
resulting in massive bleeding and dis-
solution of bone tissues?
Third. What synergistic effects can
be anticipated with subclinical con-
centrations of lead combined with
other environmental and somatic
agents, either those present in sig-
nificant quantities now or projected
for the future?
Fourth. Are present levels danger-
ous either clinically or subclinically in
the ways suggested?
Fifth. Are levels in danger of in-
creasing to hazardous levels?
Sixth. Are levels reaching a point
where unpredictable incidents of a
lead or nonlead nature can cause
toxicity?
Because the majority of atmospheric
lead is held to come from lead com-
pounds in auto exhaust, there is a
need to concentrate on this aspect of
the problem—to develop further in-
formation about subclinical effects of
moderate lead concentrations — to
evaluate proposals to eliminate lead
from gasoline both from technical
feasibility as well as the economic
aspect—to hear testimony on alterna-
tives to internal combustion—and espe-
cially to determine whether any exist-
ing governmental body presently has
the authority, mechanism, and financ-
ing to control the lead in the atmos-
phere from auto exhausts.
Mr. President, it is not enough that
the Federal Government should stimu-
late industry to develop and demon-
strate means of control from auto-
mobile exhausts.
Because competition is the watch-
word of American enterprise, the Fed-
eral Government should stimulate rea-
sonable alternatives to internal com-
bustion. Predictable increases in urban
air pollution may one day dictate
elimination of presently conceived
modes of transportation from that
urban environment. Alternatively, the
automobile industry must be en-
couraged to develop its combustion
processes so as to limit, to the max-
imum extent economically feasible,
emissions of air pollutants.
The committee report recommends
an interdepartmental task force to
investigate means of reducing air pol-
lution by use of new methods of trans-
portation not involving internal com-
bustion engines. Such a task force
should consider advanced methods of
electrified rapid transit, battery op-
erated vehicles, and the prospects of
developing the fuel cell for commercial
use.
Urbanization is not reversible.
Though many of us from nonurban
areas would like to believe that clean
air and open space are available to all
the people, this is not the case.
If we are to live in an urban society,
then efforts must be made to ade-
quately protect the public from the
hazard associated with polluted air.
This cannot be a secondary goal nor
can it be an effort which will take
place sometime in the future.
The problem confronts us now and
must be dealt with now. The Federal
Government has the opportunity and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
523
the obligation to provide the leader-
ship in this effort. Should we fail,
another Donora, Pa., is not unlikely.
There rests on the shoulders of
those of us who legislate today the re-
sponsibility to provide a healthy en-
vironment for those who will grow up
in our cities tomorrow. This will be
the pattern of future legislation and
will direct the efforts which I, as chair-
man of the Subcommittee on Air and
Water Pollution will make.
Mr. President, I wish to discuss an-
other matter which came to the at-
tention of the subcommittee, raising
serious question of public policy.
[p. 15250]
The subcommittee heard representa-
tives of the Bureau of Mines, Depart-
ment of the Interior, and the Ameri-
can Petroleum Institute, discuss a
contract pursuant to which the Bu-
reau would conduct a research pro-
gram for API at API's expense.
The committee's attention was di-
rected to this subject by a Depart-
ment of Interior press release which
noted:
Lead is toxic, and because increasingly laree
amounts of it are released into the atmosphere
from auto exhausts, considerable interest has
been aroused in research on possible new types
of unleaded motor fuel to reduce air pollution.
The toxicity of lead and the po-
tential poisoning of the atmosphere
from lead have been discussed earlier
in this report. The fact that an agen-
cy of the Federal Government was
apparently performing research on
this subject for a private group when
the results of the research might have
an adverse effect on the sponsoring
group concerned the committee.
In testimony from Dr. Walter Hib-
bard, Director of the Bureau of Mines,
the committee learned:
It should be emphasized that the Bureau of
Mines neither professes competence nor con-
siders as part of its research mission the
health effects of automotive emissions as air
pollutants. This properly is a responsibility
of the Public Health Service. The Bureau's
research on fuels combustion is organized to
(1) identify and measure the effluents that are
generated in fuel use, and (2) study the inter-
dependence of factors in the vehicle and com-
bustion system.
However, the committee was ex-
tremely concerned by a clause in the
contract between the Bureau and API
which prohibited release of any in-
formation prior to the completion of
the study "without prior written ap-
proval of the other party." The com-
mittee feels that in a matter such as
the question of lead in gasoline, the
primary contributor to lead in the
atmosphere; the findings of Federal
research should not be bound by po-
tential private economic-based deci-
sions.
The committee does not object to
the performance of research by Fed-
eral agencies on behalf of private
organizations in areas where ques-
tions of the general welfare are not
involved. However, the potential
health hazard from lead in the atmos-
phere is of sufficient concern that the
committee feels this type of research
program to be potentially adverse to
the public interest.
Mr. President, the fact that a Fed-
eral agency performs research on be-
half of a private organization is not,
by definition, contrary to public policy.
However, in this particular instance,
the potential health hazard from lead
in the atmosphere is of sufficient con-
cern that I feel this type of research
program to be potentially adverse to
the public interest. In the report, the
committee recommended:
First, that agreements between
Federal agencies and private organiza-
tions not include restrictive contrac-
ual provisions relating to the release
of such information as may be de-
veloped during the period of research;
Second, that the research program
in this particular instance be con-
stantly reviewed by the division of air
-------
524
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
pollution in order that that agency
may have early access to any informa-
tion developed relative to public health;
and
Third. That in the future, the Bu-
reau of Mines specifically, and other
agencies in general, inform the Con-
gress of the purpose, intent, cost, con-
tractual limitation of, and participants
in any study by any Federal agency,
financed by a private organization, at
least 90 days prior to signing any
agreement to carry out such a study.
If the Bureau of the Budget does
not approve a Federal research pro-
gram and if the Congress is not given
an opportunity to authorize such a re-
search program, it seems to me that
a Federal agency is going beyond its
legislative limitations in seeking out
private financing to perform any re-
search activity. Therefore, the com-
mittee has recommended that Federal
agencies not enter into research con-
tracts on behalf of private agencies
wherein a question of private economic
interest as versus the general welfare
are involved.
In closing, Mr. President, I wish to
take note of another important issue.
Hearings were held by the com-
mittee on S. 3400, introduced by Sena-
tor PAUL DOUGLAS, of Illinois, which
would amend the solid waste disposal
act relative to the disposition of
junked automobiles. In addition to
hearing Senator DOUGLAS, the com-
mittee also heard witnesses from the
division of solid waste and the scrap
industry.
The committee was impressed by
Senator DOUGLAS' proposal and testi-
mony, and believes the purpose of
ridding the Nation of the blight
created by junked automobiles, while
preserving the valuable resources as-
sociated with the junked automobile, is
a goal worthy of achievement.
However, S. 3400 presents the com-
mittee with complex problems and the
testimony received emphasized these
complexities. In the interest of early
reporting of the Clean Air Act amend-
ments, the committee decided to delay
action on S. 3400 until further infor-
mation could be received and the neces-
sary study of the legislation could be
performed.
Mr. President, I ask for the yeas
and nays on the pending legislation.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I wish
at this point to express my apprecia-
tion to the distinguished chairman of
the full Committee on Public Works
[Mr. RANDOLPH], to the distinguished
ranking member of the subcommittee,
the Senator from Delaware [Mr.
BOGGS] , and to all members of the sub-
committee and the full committee for
the dedicated cooperation and partici-
pation which they have given, over a
period of 3 years, to the consideration
of the problems of air and water pol-
lution. I think it is not inappropriate
for me to say that much creative leg-
islation in these fields has come out of
the subcommittee and the full com-
mittee, which would not have been
possible without the contributions of
my dedicated colleagues on the sub-
committee and the staffs of the com-
mittee. I take this opportunity to ex-
press my appreciation to them.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous
consent to have printed at this point
in the RECORD that portion of the com-
mittee report (No. 1361) which relates
to the lead problem.
There being no objection, the ex-
cerpt from the report was ordered to
be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
Am POLLUTION FROM LEAD AND OTHER
SUBSTANCES
During the hearings on S. 3112, the subcom-
mittee heard testimony of an exploratory na-
ture on the question of contamination of the
atmosphere from lead and other substances.
At these hearings information was presented
regarding the questions of atmospheric con-
tamination from beryllium and lead.
Dr. Harriet L. Hardy, assistant medical di-
rector, Occupational Health Service of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, an ex-
pert on beryllium toxicology, testified that the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
525
general population may be in great danger of
poisoning from beryllium released by the firing
of rockets.
She stated, "The use of beryllium in large
quantities in rocket firing is in my opinion
unwise. My opinion is based on the impossi-
bility of control of weather and likelihood of
technical accident."
Since beryllium has been shown to be in-
curably damaging to individuals exposed to
only small airborne amounts, the Federal Gov-
ernment has a critical responsibility in mini-
mizing exposure to the population from its
facilities and programs, including rocket firing.
The committee recommends that the Public
Health Service consider the standards devel-
oped by the National Academy of Sciences,
and early adopt and promulgate such guide-
lines as might be necessary to insure the pro-
tection of public health and safety against the
adverse effects of beryllium dispersed in the
area of rocket firings.
The committee heard a good deal of expert
testimony about classical or clinical lead
poisoning, derived primarily from occupational
experience, and about the safe body levels of
lead with respect to concentrations in blood,
urine, etc.
The hearings, however, did not provide defi-
nite answers to the question of whether pres-
ent or foreseeable concentrations of lead in the
air are dangerous to the general population at
levels substantially lower than those associated
with clinical lead poisoning.
Representatives of the lead industries and
gasoline producers and Dr. Robert A. Kehoe
of the Kettering Laboratories contended that
levels of lead in the atmosphere have not in-
creased in recent years (from 5 to 30 years);
that present or foreseeable levels are not
dangerous to the population as a whole; and
that workers who are occupationally exposed
to lead already receive adequate protection.
Officials of the Public Health Service dis-
played more concern about the potential dan-
gers of adverse subclinical effects and less cer-
tainty about current findings, but were divided
as to whether the situation demanded immedi-
ate legislative action.
One witness expressed extreme alarm. Dr.
Clair C. Patterson, a geophysicist at the Cali-
fornia Institute of Technology, suggested that
any level of lead in the atmosphere represents
an inestimably dangerous increment over
values which prevailed during the evolution of
the human physiology. Analyses of ice de-
posits and inference from contemporary data
indicate the concentration of lead in the at-
mosphere has increased tremendously since the
introduction of lead antiknock compounds in
gasoline in the early 1920's, according to Dr.
Patterson. His data indicated that this in-
crease has been a hundredfold.
The Survey of Lead in the Atmosphere of
Three Urban Communities (known as the
[p. 15251]
Tri-City study), published by the U.S. Public
Health Service and cited by several witnesses,
states that concentrations vary in relation to
the amount of auto exhausts in the area, a
function of volume of traffic and speed of
travel. This involves a range from 1 to 3
micrograms of lead per cubic meter of air in
rural and residential areas to over 50 micro-
grams per cubic meter of air near and on Los
Angeles freeways.
Dr. Robert A. Kehoe, professor emeritus of
occupational medicine, Kettering Laboratory,
University of Cincinnati College of Medicine,
and others, presented information about vari-
ous safe levels of lead in the body, gained
through long experimentation in occupational
health laboratories. Some of these levels have
been developed as indicators of danger, so that
when a worker has 0.06 mg. of lead per 100
gms. of blood, or 0.10 mg. of lead per liter of
urine, he is removed from exposure to lead.
These levels are only with respect to the possi-
bility of clinical lead poisoning. Dr. Kehoe
had earlier stated at the Lead Symposium
sponsored by the Public Health Service in De-
cember 1965, that the above levels are the
points below which clinical poisoning can safe-
ly be assumed not to occur, and do not repre-
sent a point above which lead poisoning will
necessarily occur.
This knowledge may not be adequate to
assess the threat of general atmospheric lead
levels to the population as a whole. The popu-
lation is not faced with the immediate threat
of concentrations of lead approaching the
levels of industrial exposure which are judged
marginal with regard to clinical poisoning, but
there is a gap in existing knowledge as to
whether clinical lead poisoning is the only
manifestation of the deleterious effects of lead
and whether lead's toxicity is a function only
of concentrations commonly thought to be as-
sociated with classical poisoning.
There is some evidence that pregnant women
and younger children retain a proportionately
greater amount of lead which they ingest from
the environment and are more susceptible to
its toxic effects. Also evidence indicates that
relatively small (compared to industrial stand-
ards ) concentrations of lead are capable of
producing intellectual disabilities and retarda-
tion in children, and that some types of dis-
eases including kidney, liver, blood and bone
problems render the body more susceptible to
lead toxicity.
This evidence is, at present, only fragmen-
tary and controversial. However, it is impor-
tant to note that the standards of safety de-
-------
526
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
veloped for health of male adults working in
lead industries are not necessarily relevant to
problems of long-term, low levels of exposure,
particularly for those who retain higher than
normal amounts of lead and who are more
vulnerable to toxic effects of lead.
The committee notes from other information
that there are suggestions in the work of sci-
entists in this country, Russia and Great
Britain, that lead in amounts and concentra-
tions much less than levels traditionally con-
nected with lead poisoning are capable of pro-
ducing serious effects on the central nervous
system and particularly the production and
maintenance of red blood cells.
Dr. Patterson stated in his article, "Con-
taminated and Natural Lead Environments of
Man" (September 1966, Archives of Environ-
mental Health):
"It has recently been maintained, on the
basis of experimental evidence from animals
that pathologic and histologic changes of the
brain and spinal cord together with functional
shifts in the higher nervous activity are in-
duced by exposures to atmospheric lead con-
centrations corresponding to those exposures
now experienced by dwellers in most large
American cities."
Some evidence suggests that lead competes
with other metals for positions in the vital
enzyme systems, and may either disrupt the
systems directly or produce other substances
which then have toxic effects. Further, the
biochemistry of clinical lead poisoning is not
yet known and much research must be done
(and supported) on the effects of lead on
normal and abnormal cell metabolism and its
action in neurochemistry.
Even well-developed industrial safety stand-
ards have been unable to prevent an occasional
acute overexposure to lead. It may be difficult
also to set standards which provide realistic
levels and at the same time avoid incidents of
overexposure. For example, an individual may
be exposed to what has been established as a
safe level of atmospheric lead, and then eat
apples contaminated with lead insecticide to a
high but similarly permissible level, and be
poisoned in a clinical sense.
The committee recognizes that conflicts exist
as to the scope and extent of the problem. Mr.
Felix E. Wormser, consultant and former
president, Lead Industries Association, Inc., of
New York, and Mr. P. N. Gamtnelgard, direc-
tor, Committee for Air and Water Conserva-
tion, American Petroleum Institute, stated that
in their opinion no danger exists from lead in
the atmosphere. Dr. Patterson stated that in
his opinion there is extreme danger from pres-
ent levels. Dr. William H. Stewart, Surgeon
General of the United States, Dr. Richard
Prindle, Chief of Bureau of State Services,
Public Health Service, U.S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, and other offi-
cials from the Public Health Service suggested
that danger is minimal now, but extant, and
research and surveillance muat expand.
Dr. Patterson contended that levels are in-
creasing at dangerous rates, and noted the
differences between concentrations in rural and
urban dwellers. He cited the Tri-City study
statistics. Both Mr. Wormser and Mr. Gam-
melgard testified that, on the basis of their in-
terpretation of the Tri-City study, they found
present levels of lead contamination to be low
and not a hazard, and that there is no evi-
dence of an increase of lead in the atmosphere
in the last 5 years. Mr. Wormser stated under
questioning from Senator MUSKIE that although
the Tri-City study did not expressly draw this
conclusion, he concluded from its evidence
that present levels of lead in the atmosphere
did not constitute a hazard to the public
health.
In reviewing testimony and material on the
problem of lead contamination the committee
finds several basic questions which demand
answers:
(1) What are the cumulative effects of sub-
clinical exposure over long and short periods
of time?
(2) What dangerous effects of abnormal
storage in the bones are likely to result from
the normal course of events and from acci-
dents with massive bleeding and dissolution of
bone tissues?
(3) What synergistic effects can be antici-
pated with subclinical concentrations of lead
combined with other environmental and so-
matic agents, either those present in signifi-
cant quantities now or projected for the
future?
(4) Are present levels dangerous either
clinically or subclinically in the ways sug-
gested?
(6) Are levels in danger of increasing to
hazardous levels?
(6) Are levels unnaturally high (though
safe) to the point where unpredictable inci-
dents of a lead or nonlead nature can cause
toxicity?
LEADED GASOLINE
An associated problem which the committee
feels deserves further investigation is the feasi-
bility or desirability of eliminating lead in
gasoline as a means of diminishing environ-
mental lead contamination. There is contro-
versy over the cost and economic effect of
eliminating lead compounds from gasoline. The
majority of atmospheric lead is held to come
from lead compounds in auto exhausts. Further
hearings should concentrate on this aspect of
the problem before any legislative or admin-
istrative control action can be taken.
The Surgeon General, Dr. Stewart, said that
he would want the lead in gasoline eliminated
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
527
immediately if there were a nontoxic substi-
tute available, and further agreed that eco-
nomic necessity inhibits immediate elimination
of lead. Even more, Dr. Prindle said that it
is vitally important to hold levels of lead con-
stant until studies have been carried out and
hazards are adequately assessed. In fact, he
agreed with Senator MUSKIE that in the face
of current evidence regarding the relationship
between atmospheric lead and health hazards,
a safe substitute for lead in gasoline should be
sought as quickly as possible.
Mr. Vernon MacKenzie, Chief of the Divi-
sion of Air Pollution, Public Health Service,
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, said in his testimony, "dramatic
change will be needed to effect dramatic im-
provements in the quality of the air, and
present controls are producing only gradual
change."
Hearings would be justified to explore fur-
ther information about subclinical effects of
moderate lead concentrations, to evaluate pro-
posals to eliminate lead from gasoline both for
technical feasibility and economics, to hear
testimony on alternatives to internal combus-
tion and, especially, to determine whether any
existing governmental body presently has the
authority, mechanism, and financing to control
the lead in the atmosphere from auto exhausts.
SEEKING ALTERNATIVES TO INTERNAL COMBUSTION
New advanced approaches and techniques
are required if we are to meet the pollution
problems of combustion engine vehicles. With
90 million cars, trucks, and buses operating on
the Nation's roads, crossing political bound-
aries without restriction, and discharging pol-
lutants in all parts of the country, the need
for national solutions is self-evident. This was
the conclusion of the 1965 report of the En-
vironmental Pollution Panel of the President's
Science Advisory Committee, which declared:
"We recommend that the Federal Govern-
ment exert every effort to stimulate industry
to develop and demonstrate means of power-
ing automobiles and trucks that will not pro-
duce noxious effluents. Less complete steps to
reduce pollution from automobile exhausts will
certainly play an important role. We must
strive for more acceptable mass transportation.
We must follow carefully the results of Cali-
fornia's imposition of special regulations, and
be prepared to extend those that prove effec-
tive to other smog-ridden localities. But we
must also be prepared, as soon as reasonably
may be, to take more drastic action, if, as,
and when necessary. The development of alter-
native means of mobile energy conversion,
suitable for powering automotive transport of
all kinds, is not a matter of 1 year or a few
years. Thus, if fuel cells, or rechargeable bat-
teries, or other devices are to be developed in
time to meet the increased threat, we need to
begin now."
Gasoline and diesel engines of motor vehicles
are major contributors to air pollution. Policy
decisions on accommodating greater traffic in
cities have important impact on the degree of
pollution in urban areas. Some estimates have
been made which show that the application of
carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon controls to
the type of engine currently employed may be
expected to hold the line until about 1980,
after which time the increased number of
motor vehicles on our streets and highways
will result in a
[p. 15252]
worsening of the situation. Testimony was
received suggesting that in Los Angeles the
growth of freeways and auto traffic is cancel-
ing out gains made in controlling other sources
of air pollution.
The Environmental Pollution Panel pointed
ou t that the energy loss through incomplete
combustion is about 15 percent of the fuel
heat value and is equivalent to 1 million gal-
lons of gasoline daily for Los Angeles. For
the Nation, this amounts to a loss of energy
corresponding to 10 billion gallons of gasoline
per year. "Not only air pollution control but
also conservation and wise use of our natural
resources demand careful attention to the re-
duction of this detrimental waste," the panel
stated.
Gasoline consumption in the United States
rose from 40 billion gallons per year in 1950
to an estimated 70 billion in 1964. It is esti-
mated that by 1980 the use of gasoline in the
Los Angeles area will have increased by a
factor of four since smog was first noticed
around 1945. Parallel with the increase of fuel
is the emission of pollutants. "The partial
control of emission predicted for the coming
years cannot keep up with this increase," the
panel declared. "Research and development
directed toward improvement in combustion
and greatly reduced emissions should be pro-
moted at universities and government labora-
tories. These studies should include radical
changes in engine design and the development
of, for example, the fuel cell for practical
use."
In view of the interrelationship between air
pollution caused by motor vehicles and overall
urban planning, the committee urges that the
administration form an interdepartmental task
force to investigate means of reducing air pol-
lution by use of new methods of transportation
not involving the internal combustion engine.
A variety of projects deserve more detailed
scrutiny and study. Electrification of mass
transit, use of battery-operated delivery ve-
hicles and autos, and prospects for fuel cells
to run individual passenger cars, all suggest
-------
528
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
research possibilities. The Federal Govern-
ment should insure that research, development,
and demonstration work in this area is car-
ried on at maximum levels consistent with
orderly progress.
Coordination and interchange of ideas should
be encouraged. The subcommittee received
testimony that 15 Federal agencies are present-
ly funding a total of 86 projects in battery
research; the objectives and results of this
work as it relates to transportation should be
evaluated and the most efficient method of
arriving at desired goals determined. Advisory
committees formed from industry and trade
groups might assist in this process. Foreign
experience should be tapped. (The Electricity
Council of Great Britain predicts that within
the next 10 years 1 million battery-driven auto-
mobiles will be in operation in Great Britain.)
Urban planning, public works, zoning, and
licensing questions are inexorably intertwined
with pollution problems. Perhaps nowhere is
this more evident than in the area of trans-
portation. The aim should be to combine the
best thinking on air pollution, urban develop-
ment, and transportation to deal with a prob-
lem which could literally smother cities in
smog and smoke unless new approaches are
developed and utilized.
The task force should provide Congress and
the country with suggested guidelines for
rational planning of future transportation as
it relates to air pollution.
Burgeoning population, increasing number
of vehicles, growing air pollution—all these
factors indicate that to continue to solve this
problem with piecemeal measures is unaccept-
able. Plans for new federally supported free-
ways should not be allowed to cancel out Fed-
eral efforts to halt air pollution. Dumping
thousands of cars off the end of an eight-lane
highway into an urban complex is not the
answer to either transportation or air pollu-
tion problems.
The committee therefore recommends that
the task force develop a plan for a "model
environment" including such proposals as will
both meet the economic needs of a rapidly
expanding nation and adequately protect the
public from the hazards associated with pol-
luted air.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am
happy to yield to the distinguished
Senator from Delaware [Mr. BOGGS].
Mr. BOGGS. Mr. President, I thank
the distinguished floor manager of the
bill for yielding to me.
Mr. President, I wish to add a few
comments to the concise report on the
pending legislation which has just
been made by the junior Senator from
Maine.
His words reflect his thorough un-
derstanding of the legislation as well
as his belief in the urgent need for
all levels of government to attack the
air pollution problem.
I know that as a result of his able
chairmanship of the Subcommittee on
Air and Water Pollution over the past
3 years, the public is now much more
aware of the seriousness of the air
pollution menace.
Yet the peril continues. Air pollu-
tion is still a widespread and growing
hazard to the health and welfare of
our citizens.
State and local governments, in co-
operation with the Federal Govern-
ment, have stepped up air pollution
control programs.
But our increasing industrializa-
tion, urbanization, and improved
standards of living, as well as our ex-
panding population, have combined to
offset these advances. The battle is
far from won.
The bill we are considering today
was introduced by the junior Senator
from Maine, and I am happy to count
myself among the 15 Senators of
both parties who cosponsored it.
It does not establish new policies in
the fight against air pollution. Its ef-
fect, however, is to reemphasize the
intent of the basic 1963 Clean Air Act
by increasing the amount of money
available for grants to air pollution
control agencies. Also, in light of ex-
perience gained since the act has been
in force, it improves standards and
procedures involved in extending
grants.
We hope these grants will be well
used. We hope they will spur quicker
and more effective action against air
pollution.
In this effort it is well to recall the
policy established by Congress in en-
acting the Clean Air Act, namely
that—
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
529
The prevention and control of air pollution
at its source is the primary responsibility of
States and local government, and * * * that
Federal financial assistance and leadership is
essential for the development of cooperative
Federal, State, regional, and local programs
to prevent and control air pollution.
The Federal Government is in the
role of a partner in combating this
nationwide peril. It must team up with
all levels of government to get the
job done.
Also involved in this effort are the
industries who, as good citizens, strive
to control air pollution. And we also
look to our universities for additional
research to help identify and control
possible new air pollutants.
We all look to a better tomorrow.
Certainly this does not include a
world of thin haze which menaces the
health of our children.
Civilization cannot advance in a
murky, unhealthy atmosphere.
The bill we are considering today
will help clear the air.
I thank the Chairman for yielding
to me.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield.
Mr. JAVITS. A number of us are
very much interested in both air and
water pollution and the process of
using some form of tax abatement to
accelerate the normal process of re-
search and development and the use
of new facilities.
I note with great interest that the
committee in its report recommends
a possible hydroprecipitator as a suit-
able subject to study.
Would the Senator tell us something
about the committee's thinking on that
subject.
Mr. MUSKIE. I think it is accurate
to say that all members of the sub-
committee, and I suppose all members
of the full committee, are •wholly in
accord with the idea of tax incentive
for purchase of water and air pollu-
tion control equipment. Indeed, the
ranking minority member, the Sen-
ator from Kentucky [Mr. COOPER],
has introduced legislation to that ef-
fect.
If this committee had jurisdiction
over that subject, that kind of legis-
lation would be on the floor. Unfortu-
nately we did not have such jurisdic-
tion, but we are wholly in accord with
the position of those Senators spon-
soring tax-incentive legislation.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, amend-
ments could be offered to the legisla-
tion. I realize that it is probably not
as choate in this bill as it would be
in water pollution control legislation.
However, the committee has not eval-
uated the consideration of what might
be done in this field because the sub-
ject was not within its jurisdiction.
Mr. MUSKIE. There was a great
deal of testimony in relation to this
matter even though it was realized
that the committee did not have juris-
diction. The subject was discussed
among ourselves. I believe that we
have a rather firm and well-defined
position on the subject and that we
may take the opportunity, in some
fashion, to communicate our position
to the appropriate committee.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, I
Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield.
agree with the distinguished Senator
from Maine. While I did not serve
on the subcommittee which considered
the bill, I attended some of the hear-
ings and I attended a good many
hearings on the water pollution con-
trol bill.
Many witnesses spoke on the neces-
sity of providing tax incentive to pri-
vate industry to construct antipollu-
tion facilities. The Senator from Con-
necticut [Mr. RIBICOFF] when testi-
fying before the committee made as
one of the main
[p.15253]
points of his testimony that the prob-
lem is two pronged.
-------
530
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
The Senator from Connecticut
pointed out correctly that assistance
by the Federal Government to com-
munities is required. But he also em-
phasized, and I concur, that tax in-
centives to industry are required, for
the problem of pollution control can-
not be met without a massive and ex-
pensive effort by private industry.
The facilities required of them do not
contribute to their earnings, but serve
a social purpose. Many are assuming
the responsibility and they should be
encouraged.
The Senator from Connecticut has
introduced a bill which would give a
faster tax writeoff for pollution con-
trol facilities constructed by industry.
I have introduced, with the chairman
of the committee, Senator RANDOLPH,
a bill which would provide an invest-
ment tax credit. In the discussion in
committee all the members of the
committee, including the chairman
and the ranking minority member of
the subcommittee, voiced their belief
that tax legislation should be enacted
to provide incentive to industry. Be-
fore closing I would like to add my
congratulations to the Senator from
Maine, and his committee for devel-
oping the reported bill. I am glad that
our full Committee on Public Works
supports the bill.
Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield.
Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President, I
introduced a bill, S. 3598, yesterday.
My bill would provide tax treatment
for expenditures incurred in the con-
struction of facilities to abate air and
water pollution.
The bill has been referred to the
Committee on Finance, and it is lying
on the desk this week for the benefit
of Senators who may wish to cospon-
sor the bill. A number of Senators
have already done so.
I assure the distinguished Senator
from Maine that we shall press for
early action in the committee, as I am
a member of the committee.
Mr. MUSKIE. I am delighted to
have my colleague on the committee.
Mr. RIBICOFF. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield.
Mr. RIBICOFF. Mr. President, I
arrived in the Chamber during the
statement of the distinguished Sen-
ator from Kentucky.
The Senator may recall that, ap-
proximately 2 years ago, I offered an
amendment to the tax bill. My amend-
ment provided for a rapid tax write-
off for air and water pollution de-
vices. The Senate agreed to the
amendment overwhelmingly. However,
the amendment was deleted in confer-
ence.
The executive branch has not yet
favored the proposal that there be a
fast tax writeoff for air and water
pollution devices. I think that they
are very shortsighted to this extent.
It seems to me that, despite all the
money we are spending for air and
water pollution control at the govern-
mental level, we will never solve the
problem of air and water pollution
unless we have the complete coopera-
tion of industry.
Our problem in this connection is
that throughout the country there are
many old plants. Many of these plants
are unproductive.
Air and water pollution control de-
vices are expensive. And thus the
State authorities are faced with a
great dilemma when they ask industry
to stop polluting the air and water
immediately.
The Governor of the State and the
State authorities find themselves un-
der great pressure. The town fathers,
the labor unions, and the chambers of
commerce are not willing to force an
old industry to make expenditures,
because they might mean the loss of
an industry that has been established
in the State for many years.
I have noted a great advance in the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
531
interest of industry in its responsi-
bility to eliminate air and water pol-
lution. If we are to achieve our goal
and eliminate air and water pollution,
we should encourage industry to in-
stall air and water pollution con-
trol devices. There is a general pub-
lic interest that goes beyond that of
the individual manufacturer who has
an old antiquated plant. The public
has a definite interest. The way in
which that interest can be shown is by
giving a fast tax writeoff to industry
for the installation of air and water
pollution control devices.
The cost to the Federal Govern-
ment, depending on what might be
contained in the bill, could range from
$25 million to $200 million a year.
When we consider that this committee
under the leadership of the senior
Senator from West Virginia [Mr.
RANDOLPH], the Senator from Maine
[Mr. MUSKIE], and the Senator from
Kentucky [Mr. COOPER] will soon
bring in a $6 billion water pollution
control bill, the small sum of money
that would be lost in tax revenue is
infinitesimal. We will never achieve
real and effective air and water pol-
lution control in America until we
have the complete cooperation of
American industry. It is most essen-
tial, as I testified before the commit-
tee.
I introduced a bill some 2 years ago
as a result of my experience as a
Governor, as a member of the Cabinet
working in this field, and as a U.S.
Senator.
I note with great interest the bill
introduced by the distinguished Sen-
ator from Kansas, who is a member
of the Committee on Finance. I be-
lieve that if the administration still
persists in opposing proposals such
as this, those interested in the pro-
posal should introduce this kind of a
bill as an amendment to some tax
legislation and have the Senate vote
on this matter again.
I am sure that the Senate will re-
peat its approval of some 2 to 3
years ago. I have a very high regard
for the distinguished Senator from
Kansas. I am sure that there may be
variations between his bill and the
bill of the Senator from Kentucky.
However, I am equally sure we will
be able to work out a satisfactory
bill and have effective air and water
pollution control.
Air pollution, as a byproduct of our
increasingly industrialized and urban-
ized Nation, is a growing threat to
the health and welfare of the Ameri-
can people. Research and study of air
pollution continues to provide evi-
dence of the insidious effects of in-
creasing contamination of the air we
breathe and in which all human ac-
tivities take place. We know that air
pollution can build up to high levels
which can cause acute illness and
death. Of even greater concern, per-
haps, is the long-range and subtle ef-
fect on human health of the lower
levels of pollution found in most of
our cities when breathed daily over a
period of months and years. Among
the diseases which have been associ-
ated with air pollution conditions
found today in many urban areas of
our country are lung cancer, emphy-
sema, chronic bronchitis, asthma, and
even the "common cold."
In addition to these threats to hu-
man health, air pollution causes bil-
lions of dollars of losses resulting
from the soiling, corrosion, and de-
terioration of buildings, clothing, rub-
ber, stonework, and other materials.
Even our precious and irreplaceable
art treasures are now recognized as
subject to destruction by this menace.
Air pollution reduces visibility and
is, thereby, a factor in ground and
air transport accidents. Recent re-
search has now indicated that air pol-
lution can even have an adverse ef-
fect on our weather, particularly in
urban areas.
That is why the first bill I intro-
-------
532
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
duced as a Senator was the Clean
Air Act of 1963.
In the brief period since the passage
of the Clean Air Act late in 1963,
considerable progress has been made
in mounting a national program for
the control of air pollution involving
the efforts of all levels of government,
public and private, research organi-
zations, and others, under the leader-
ship of the Federal air pollution pro-
gram.
The Clean Air Act substantially
modified the role of the Federal Gov-
ernment in air pollution control as
contrasted with its role under prior
legislation. New mechanisms within
the Federal Government for participa-
tion in, and stimulation of, the na-
tional effort to abate and control air
pollution, were provided. Its provi-
sions are broad and they range into
fields which the Federal effort had not
previously entered. Briefly, the Clean
Air Act authorizes continuation and
substantial augmentation of the re-
search, technical assistance, and train-
ing activities of the Federal air
pollution program carried on by the
Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare since 1955. The act, however,
went far beyond prior legislative au-
thority by assigning to the,Depart-
ment several new responsibilities in
the area of air pollution control. It
established, for the first time, a pro-
gram of_gr_ant assistance to State,
regional, and municipal air~pbllutibn
control agencies to stimulate and as-
sist~State~^nd municipal governments
tn_develop and improve control pro-
grams. It also authorizes Federal ac-
tioiTto secuFe ablTEement of interstate
problems, thereby providing some re-
course for relief from air pollution
which may be endangering the health
and welfare of a population in one
State but for which, no effective legal
remedies to correct the
[p. 15254]
alteration are otherwise available.
Other provisions of the Clean Air Act
direct the Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare to develop and
promulgate criteria of air quality for
the guidance of control agencies and
other governmental bodies desiring to
establish enforceable standards of air
quality, to conduct studies and investi-
gations leading to the development of
practical low-cost methods of remov-
ing sulfur from fuels in order to re-
duce the amount of atmospheric sul-
f urous pollution caused by the burning
of sulfur-containing coal and oil, to
develop prototype devices and proce-
dures of air pollution control and to
establish a procedure for the regula-
tion of air pollution discharged from
buildings and other facilities under
Federal jurisdiction. I was proud to
have been the coauthor of that land-
mark legislation.
Last year, the Clean Air Act was
amended and strengthened by Public
Law 89-272 to add major new respon-
sibilities for the prevention and con-
trol of air pollution. Perhaps the most
significant aspect of these amend-
ments was reflected in the decision
that the Federal Government must
take action to control the present and
increasingly growing problem of air
pollution from motor vehicles. Under
this legislation and the regulations
promulgated by the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare, be-
ginning with the 1968 model year, all
new foreign and domestic motor ve-
hicles and engines introduced into
commerce in the United States must
conform to usual standards governing
the emissions of air pollutants. Al-
though this measure represents an
iii-i-Ttant step in the control of air
pollution from motor vehicles it is
widely recognized that it is far from
a complete solution of the problem
since the percentage reductions in
emissions from the internal combus-
tion engine which can be achieved
will, in time, be overcome by the in-
creasing number of motor vehicles
which will be traveling on our high-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
533
ways and streets. The act will, how-
ever, prevent aggravation of the prob-
lem and provide some time during
which more radical and permanent
solutions to the problem can be devel-
oped.
Other provisions of the amendments
enacted last year include authority to
the Secretary to take action to abate
international air pollution problems
caused by sources located in the
United States; to hold public confer-
ences directed toward the prevention
of new or more aggravated air pollu-
tion problems; to accelerate research
concerning methods for controlling
pollution from motor vehicles and
emissions of oxides of sulfur; and to
construct, staff, and equip facilities
needed by the Department to carry
out its responsibilities under the act.
In enacting the Clean Air Act, the
Congress authorized appropriations
for a 3-year period ending fiscal year
1967. In providing this time cutoff,
it was fully recognized that our air
pollution problems will not have been
solved in that time. It was the intent
of Congress, however, to provide an
opportunity to evaluate and assess
progress made, to determine what
modifications in the Federal program
might be needed, and the necessary
financial resources which must be
made available if the objectives of the
act are to be achieved.
Within this framework, therefore,
S. 3112 extends and substantially in-
creases the appropriation authoriza-
tions for the Federal program
through fiscal year 1969. The increases
provided in S. 3112 are clearly neces-
sary if the wide range of responsi-
bilities of the Federal Government
with respect to the control of air pol-
lution is to be carried out in an ade-
quate manner and if the progress and
momentum gained under the first sev-
eral years of the Federal program is
to be sustained.
In addition to extending the appro-
priation authorizations under the act,
S. 3112 would authorize the initiation
of a new grant program which will
properly reflect the Federal interest
in providing financial support to State
and local governments in exercising
trolling air pollution at its sources.
Under the existing provisions of the
Clean Air Act, Federal grant support
is limited to short-term stimulatory
grants for projects directed toward
the development, establishment, and
improvement of programs. Although
this limited grant program has been
highly successful in stimulating great-
ly increased efforts at the State and
local level, it is clear that sustained
efforts by State and local govern-
ments over a long period of years is
necessary if adequate control of air
pollution is to be effected. S. 3112
would meet this need by authorizing
Federal grants for the maintenance
of State and local air pollution pro-
grams in an amount up to one-half
of the total cost of such programs. In-
centives for the conduct of regional
or interjurisdictional programs are in-
corporated in S. 3112 by the provision
authorizing Federal grants up to 60
percent of the cost of such programs.
In summary, in extending the Fed-
eral air pollution control program, in
increasing the amounts of Federal fi-
nancial resources committed to this
serious environmental problem, and in
providing a basis for strengthening
the abilities of State and local gov-
ernments to cope with their air pollu-
tion problems, S. 3112 should com-
mand the support of all who are con-
cerned with this growing threat to
the Nation's health and welfare.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that notwithstand-
ing the previous order, the time for
the vote be extended 5 minutes, so that
I may yield to the chairman of the
Committee on Public Works, the Sen-
ator from West Virginia [Mr. RAN-
DOLPH], and that rule XII be waived.
-------
534
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President,
I believe it is important for the record
of this debate to indicate the general
agreement of the chairman of the
Committee on Public Works with the
proposals which have been advanced
by the Senator from Kansas [Mr.
CARLSON], the Senator from Connecti-
cut [Mr. RIBICOFF], and the Senator
from Kentucky [Mr. COOPER]. The
Senator from Kentucky is the rank-
ing minority member of the Commit-
tee on Public Works.
I have joined in at least two of
these approaches, because I believe it
is important that industry have not
only the opportunity but also the in-
centive, through one or more methods,
whereby the financial burden of air
and water pollution control systems
will be lessened. In other words, give
industry the incentive to do the job.
It is popular for people to speak in
vigorous terms against private indus-
try in matters nf air and water pol-
lution abatement. We must be careful
in attacking private industry in this
instance, because in the State of West
Virginia, as in many other States,
private industry has gone forward in
this respect at considerable expense,
involving millions of dollars in non-
revenue-producing facilities. The in-
creased costs to the companies should
be borne at least in part by the peo-
ple of the United States, as a whole.
As the Senator from Connecticut
has said—we know the viewpoints of
the Senator from Kansas [Mr. CARL-
SON] and the Senator from Kentucky
[Mr. COOPER]—Congress has the re-
sponsibility, through incentives to pri-
vate industry, to bring industry into
this effort to a greater degree. In
other words, the programs and the
progress should not be stimulated by
the Government alone. The need pre-
vails for the cooperation and coor-
dinated understanding of industry
and Government. The need is for a
partnership.
I speak strongly about this matter,
as chairman of the Committee on
Public Works, not only aware of my
responsibility but also realizing that
within the committee there is strong
sentiment—almost a unanimity—that
although we do not have the jurisdic-
tion for tax incentive legislation we
realize that the Congress has a re-
sponsibility in this matter.
Mr. RIBICOFF. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. RANDOLPH. I yield.
Mr. RIBICOFF. I wish to ask the
Senator from West Virginia this ques-
tion: From his experience as chair-
man of the great committee that has
done much in the field of air and
water pollution, is there any question
in his mind that unless the complete
cooperation of American industry is
obtained, effective air and water pol-
lution control cannot be achieved
purely on a governmental level?
Mr. RANDOLPH. I am in complete
agreement with the Senator from
Connecticut.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator from West Vir-
ginia has expired.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the time of
the Senator from West Virginia be
extended 5 minutes, and that rule XII
be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President,
the concentrations of population to-
gether with the technological and eco-
nomic development of our country
caused those of us within the commit-
tee to realize that we must not dis-
parage what has been
[p. 15255]
done, but that we must attack this
problem in an all-out effort. We shall
approach it in less than a forthright
manner if we attempt to make it only
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
535
a Government-sponsored program,
without providing industry with an
incentive to move as a partner in the
program of progress.
Mr. RIBICOFF. Does the Senator
from West Virginia have in his mind
the same question that the Senator
from Connecticut has in his concern-
ing the advisability of the Govern-
ment operating in separate compart-
ments? One part of the executive
branch wants to clean the air and
the water and recommends substantial
sums, running into hundreds of mil-
lions of dollars, to do so, while yet
another branch of the Government
demurs, when a really effective job
could be done by providing tax in-
centives that would be only a frac-
tion of what the Government could
expend.
Mr. RANDOLPH. I agree with the
Senator from Connecticut. I agree
with him on the proposal for a tax
incentive for the parents of the coun-
try to offset the cost of tuition for
their sons and daughters at the col-
lege level. Our philosophy is the same
on this subject.
I shall yield further, if the Senator
desires, but I think we have a concept
of our responsibility which causes us
to believe that private industry will
cooperate. Let us not believe that pri-
vate industry is reluctant or is hold-
ing back. Private industry is ready to
move in this area, and, in fact, has
already moved.
I know of a steel company in West
Virginia which has expended $2 mil-
lion for air pollution abatement and
air control facilities. That company
actually made an expenditure which
was difficult to justify, but in a desire
to move forward and to indicate its
cooperation and its leadership, it made
that commitment of the sum which I
have mentioned.
The limitation of time causes the
chairman of the committee not to
speak longer; but I wish to express
certain conclusions which I have
reached, so that I want those conclu-
sions to be a matter of record.
As chairman of the Committee on
Public Works, I am gratified to be a
cosponsor of S. 3112. This legislation,
while it may not be the type of con-
gressional activity which receives
great public or media recognition, is
a significant step toward control of
the critical air pollution confronting
our Nation.
S. 3112 provides a needed further
stimulant to State pollution control
agencies which, having been stimu-
lated into action by previous legisla-
tion providing Federal grant funds,
need continued aid to maintain these
programs.
This is particularly significant in
my State of West Virginia, where pol-
lution of the atmosphere is a difficult
problem, but where the State, accept-
ing its primary responsibility in this
area, has attempted to cope with the
situation. Without continued Federal
support it is highly unlikely that West
Virginia or, for that matter, most of
the 33 States with pollution control
programs will be able to continue
their commitments to protection of
the public health and welfare from
contamination of our air environ-
ment.
I should like to call the attention
of the Senate to the recently released
regulations covering air pollution
from Federal facilities. I ask unani-
mous consent to have these regula-
tions printed in the RECORD following
my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President,
the order, issued on June 3 requires
that plans for new Federal facilities
and buildings in the United States in-
clude provisions for air pollution con-
trol measures necessary to comply
with the standards issued by the De-
partment of Health, Education, and
Welfare.
526-701 O - 73 - 36
-------
536
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
In addition, the President has di-
rected the head of each agency to ex-
amine installations and to present to
the Bureau of the Budget by July 1,
1967, an orderly schedule for bringing
all such installations to the required
standards.
The President has noted that a ma-
jor difficulty in writing the order was
the lack of an economically feasible
technology for controlling emissions
of sulfur. The Congress called atten-
tion to the problem in last year's
amendments to the Clean Air Act.
The President has directed the Sec-
retary of the Interior and the Secre-
tary of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare to explore with the Bureau of
the Budget the feasibility of increas-
ing still further the Federal effort to
determine a solution of the sulfur
emission problem.
However, as President Johnson also
has pointed out a major part of the
responsibility for sulfur research rests
with the utilities, the coal and oil in-
dustries, and other groups which feel
the economic efforts of the more strin-
gent air pollution regulations.
Mr. President, during the hearings
on S. 3112 I specifically requested Ver-
non Mackenzie, Chief, Division of
Air Pollution, to comment on this
order as it relates to the sulfur emis-
sion problem.
Mr. Mackenzie's comments to the
committee were of considerable signifi-
cance to those of us who represent
areas where coal performs a major
role in the economy. I ask unanimous
consent that his comments be printed
at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the com-
ments were ordered to be printed in
the RECORD, as follows:
The sulfur pollution problem in some sec-
tions of the country in our opinion has reached
virtually a critical stage.
In my view, there are areas in the country
in which I believe the sulfur pollution is
actually dangerous to human health. On this
account we have given the control of sulfurous
pollution a high priority in our overall pro-
gram, both with respect to research under-
takings, and also an evaluation of the various
steps that can be taken on an interim basis
until we have better technical answers to deal
with the problems.
There are a number of these things that
can be done now, such as substitution of fuels
having lower sulfur content, the use of very
tall stacks to improve dilution and dispersion
of the combustion gases from large sources,
and by planning new installations in areas
where the pollution problem is not as critical
as in some others.
These things we regard, however, only as
temporary expedients. We do not know cur-
rently the most effective way in which to deal
with this problem on a long-range basis.
There are attempts going forward through
research to develop procedures by which sulfur
can be removed from the fuels. Some of these
are technically feasible at the present time,
particularly with respect to petroleum fuels,
but at a cost which has not been acceptable
to many users, particularly in industry and
elsewhere.
With respect to coal, the situation is less
promising with regard to removal of the sul-
fur from the fuel. We do not have a good
technology developed for this purpose as is
the case with respect to oil, although work is
still proceeding on this aspect of the problem,
also.
Perhaps the most promising technical area
for further development, particularly as re-
lated to the emission of sulfurous compounds
by large fuel users, is concerned with the tech-
nology of removing sulfur compounds from the
combustion gases. Here there have been de-
veloped on a laboratory scale and on a small
pilot plant scale a number of processes that
we think have real technical promise of ap-
plication for removal of sulfur from the stack
gases. This development work is being prose-
cuted both by public agencies and by private
organizations. I am hopeful that, within per-
haps the next 5 years, there will be improved
tools that we will have available to deal with
the problem by this rout*.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President,
the committee report indicates that a
major part of the research effort of
the division of air pollution is de-
voted to the question of sulfur emis-
sions. This is gratifying to me and to
the people of West Virginia. I sin-
cerely hope that this research is in-
tensified and will soon result in eco-
nomically feasible methods of control.
Mr. President, the problem of air
pollution is one of the most critical in
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
537
the Nation. Though not absolutely
demonstrated, it is difficult to believe
that there is no relationship between
polluted air and the increase in such
respiratory illness as emphysema and
chronic bronchitis.
The obligation of the Congress to
meet this problem with all the facili-
ties of the Federal Government, pro-
viding maximum aid to the States, is
obvious.
Mr. President, I assure you and my
colleagues that the Committee on Pub-
lic Works, through its Subcommittee
on Air and Water Pollution, chaired
by the knowledgeable Senator [Mr.
MUSKIE], is going into these prob-
lems in a depth and scope as we have
never done before. I do not disparage
what we have already achieved, but
all that any American citizen has to
do is to travel throughout this coun-
try and to see and sense and feel
what is happening and know that we
must purify our air and clean our
water. This is a challenge which we
legislatively here must accept.
In conclusion, I wish to express not
merely a gracious pleasantry, but
genuine appreciation to the chairman
of the Subcommittee on Air and
Water Pollution for the diligence with
which he has continued the hearings,
week in and week out, month in and
month out, over a period of years.
It is important for us in Congress
to express our thanks to persons who
are knowledgeable in subjects of this
type. This is a new area in which
Congress
[p.15256]
has responsibility. I feel certain that
the knowledgeable leadership of the
distinguished Senator from Maine
[Mr. MUSKIE] will be called on
in the months and years ahead. The
Committee on Public Works shall at-
tempt to move vigorously into this
area, not bypassing industry, but with
the support of industry, so far as that
is possible, with cooperative, coordi-
nated efforts, we believe that such ef-
forts will be successful.
EXHIBIT 1
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11282—PREVENTION, CONTROL,
AND ABATEMENT OF Ant POLLUTION By FED-
ERAL ACTIVITIES
By virtue of the authority vested in me as
President of the United States and in further-
ance of the purpose and policy of the Clean
Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1867), it it
ordered as follows:
SECTION 1. Policy—The heads of the depart-
ments, agencies, and establishments of the
Executive Branch of the Government shall
provide leadership in the nationwide effort to
improve the quality of our air through the
prevention, control, and abatement of air pol-
lution from Federal Government activities in
the United States. In order to achieve these
objectives—
(1) Emissions to the atmosphere from Fed-
eral facilities and buildings shall not be per-
mitted if such emissions endanger health or
welfare, and emissions which are likely to be
injurious or hazardous to people, animals,
vegetation, or property, shall be minimized.
The procedures established in section 3 of this
Order shall be followed in minimizing pollution
from existing facilities and buildings.
(2) New Federal facilities and building will
be constructed so as to meet the objectives pre-
scribed by this Order and the standards estab-
lished pursuant to section 5 of this Order.
(3) The Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare shall, in administering the Clean
Air Act, as amended, provide technical advice
and assistance to the heads of other depart-
ments, agencies, and establishments in connec-
tion with their duties and responsibilities
under this Order. The head of each depart-
ment, agency, and establishment shall estab-
lish appropriate procedures for securing advice
from, and consulting with, the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare.
(4) The head of each department, agency,
and establishment shall ensure compliance with
section 107(a) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 1857f(a)), which declares
it to be the intent of Congress that Federal
departments and agencies shall, to the extent
practicable and consistent with the interests
of the United States and within available ap-
propriations, cooperate with the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare and with
any air pollution control agency in preventing
and controlling pollution of the air.
SEC. 2. Procedure* for new Federal facili-
tie* and buUdingt.—A request for funds to
defray the cost of designing and constructing
new facilities and buildings in the United
-------
538
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
States shall be included in the annual budget
estimates of a department, agency, or estab-
lishment only if such request includes means
to defray the costs of such measures as may be
necessary to assure that the new facility or
building will meet the objectives prescribed by
this Order and the standards established pur-
suant to section 5 of this Order. Air pollution
control needs shall be considered in the initial
stages of planning of each new installation.
SEC. 3. Procedures for existing Federal facil-
ities and buildings, (a) In order to facilitate
budgeting for corrective and preventive meas-
ures, the head of each department, agency, and
establishment shall provide for an examination
of all existing facilities and buildings under
his jurisdiction in the United States and shall
develop and present to the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget, by July 1, 1967, a
phased and orderly plan for installing such
improvements as may be needed to prevent air
pollution, or abate such air pollution as may
exist, with respect to such buildings and facil-
ities. Subsequent revisions needed to keep any
such plan up to date shall be submitted to the
Director of the Bureau of the Budget with
the annual report required by paragraph (b)
of this section. Future construction work at
each such facility and the expected future use
of the facility shall be considered in develop-
ing such a plan. Each such plan, and any
revision therein, shall be developed in consul-
tation with the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare in order to ensure that adoption
of the measures proposed thereby will result in
the prevention or abatement of air pollution
in conformity with the objectives prescribed
by this Order and the standards prescribed
pursuant to section 6 of this Order,
(b) The head of each department, agency,
and establishment who has existing facili-
ties and buildings under his jurisdiction in
the United States shall present to the Director
of the Bureau of the Budget, by July 1, 1968,
and by the first of each fiscal year thereafter,
an annual report describing progress of his
department, agency, or establishment in ac-
complishing the objectives of its air pollution
abatement plan.
SEC. 4. Objectives for Federal facilities and
buildings, (a) Except for discharges of radio-
active emissions which are regulated by the
Atomic Energy Commission, Federal facilities
buildings shall conform to the air pollution
standards prescribed by the State or com-
munity in which they are located. If State or
local standards are not prescribed for a par-
ticular location, or if the State or local stand-
ards are less stringent than the standards
established pursuant to this Order, the stand-
ards prescribed pursuant to section 5 of this
Order shall be followed.
(b) The emission of flyash and other par-
ticulate matter shall be kept to a minimum.
(c) Emission of sulfur oxides shall be mini-
mized to the extent practicable.
(d) Wherever appropriate, tall chimneys
shall be installed in order to reduce the ad-
verse effects of pollution. The determination
of chimney height shall be based on air quality
criteria, land use, and meteorological, topo-
graphical, aesthetic, and operating factors.
(e) Solid fuels and ash shall be stored and
handled so as not to release to the atmosphere
dust in significant Quantities. Gasoline or any
volatile petroleum distillate or organic liquid
shall be stored and handled so as not to release
to the atmosphere vapor emissions in signifi-
cant quantities.
(f) In urban areas refuse shall not be
burned in open fires and in rural areas it
shall be disposed of in such a manner as to
reasonably minimize pollution. Refuse shall
not be left in dumps without being covered
with inert matter within a reasonably short
time. Whenever incinerators are used they
shall be of such design as will minimize emis-
sion of pollutant dusts, fumes, or gases,
(g) Pollutant dusts, fumes, or gases (other
than those for which provision is made above)
shall not be discharged to the atmosphere in
quantities which will endanger health or wel-
fare.
(h) The head of each department, agency,
and establishment shall, with respect to each
installation in the United States under his
jurisdiction, take, or cause to be taken, such
action as may be necessary to ensure that
discharges of radioactive emissions to the at-
mosphere are in accord with the rules, regu-
lations, or requirements of the Atomic Energy
Commission and the policies and guidance of
the Federal Radiation Council as published in
the Federal Register.
(i) In extraordinary cases where it may be
required in the public interest, the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare may exempt
any Federal facility or building from the ob-
jectives of paragraphs (a) through (g) of
this section.
SEC. 5. Standards. (a) The Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare shall prescribe
standards to implement the objectives pre-
scribed by paragraphs (a) through (g) of
section 4 of this Order. Such standards may
modify these objectives whenever the Secre-
tary of Health, Education, and Welfare shall
determine that such modifications are nec-
essary in the public interest and will not sig-
nificantly conflict with the intent of this Order.
Prior to issuing any changes in such stand-
ards, the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare shall consult with appropriate Federal
agencies and shall publish the proposed changes
in the Federal Register thirty days prior to
their issuance. AH such standards prescribed
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
539
by the Secretary shall be published in the Fed-
eral Register.
(b) The permits authorized by section
107(b) of the Clean Air Act, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 1857f(b)), may be used to carry
out the purposes of this Order as the Secre-
tary of Health, Education, and Welfare may
deem appropriate.
SEC. 6. Prior Executive Order superseded.
Executive Order No. 10779 of August 20, 1958,
is hereby superseded.
LYNDON B. JOHNSON.
THE WHITE HOUSE, May S8, 1966.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank the distin-
guished chairman of the Committee
on Public Works for his remarks and
for the wholehearted cooperation and
dedicated contribution he has made to
this effort during my association with
him on the subcommittee.
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield.
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, the
colloquy which has just been going
on points up a question that I would
like to ask the distinguished chair-
man of the subcommittee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All
time has expired.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to extend the time
for 2 additional minutes, and to waive
rule XII.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MILLER. I had the privilege
of serving with the Senator on his
subcommittee a couple of years ago
and we discussed the matter of the
need for private industry to join in
such a program and the need for tax
incentives.
I joined the Senator from Connecti-
cut [Mr. RIBICOFF] in the sponsorship
of his bill. I hope that that matter
will be pursued.
However, the language of this bill
leaves open a possibility for inter-
pretation. I wish to direct to the at-
tention of the manager of the bill
section 104(a), line 20, page 2 of the
bill which says:
SEC. 104. (a) The Secretary is authorized
to make grants to air pollution control agen-
cies in an amount up to two-thirds of the
cost of developing, establishing, or improv-
ing, and grants to such agencies up to one-
half of the cost of maintaining programs for
the prevention and control of air pollution:
Suppose a program by one of the
agencies includes the reimbursement
in whole or in part to private industry
for
[p. 15257]
installing air pollution control equip-
ment. Would it be the interpretation
of the Senator that the pending bill
would permit the use of Federal funds
to go to that agency for the purpose,
in turn, of reimbursing private indus-
try under those circumstances?
Mr. MUSKIE. With respect to the
question of the Senator, I have my
own thoughts. This is a question
which he addressed to me earlier in
private.
I would say it is clearly not the in-
tent of the act to make that possible
and I do not think the effect of the
language would make it possible.
I refer to the attention of the Sen-
ator the statement made by Mr. Ver-
non G. Mackenzie, Assistant Surgeon
General, Chief, Division of Air Pol-
lution, Public Health Service, in which
he says:
As you know, Mr. Chairman, these grants
are intended to stimulate new or increased
control activity on the part of State and
local agencies. To this end, grants are made
only to agencies which increase their own
contributions to their budgets for control
activities.
The program grant provision is not
intended to underwrite or assist in-
dustrial installation of air pollution
control facilities. That is the objec-
tive of the tax features we talked
about earlier today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All
time has expired.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask
-------
540
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
unanimous consent that the time be
extended for 3 additional minutes, and
that rule XII be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, I said
a while ago that I did not sit on the
subcommittee, although I am the
ranking member of the full commit-
tee.
Great tribute has been paid and
rightfully so to the distinguished
chairman of the subcommittee, the
Senator from Maine [Mr. MUSKIE].
He has shown exceptional leadership
and initiative.
I wish to say that the distinguished
Senator from Delaware [Mr. BOGGS],
as the ranking Republican of that sub-
committee, assiduously attended all
meetings, devoted himself to the great
problems of air pollution, and worked
with the distinguished chairman of
the committee to be able to develop a
bill which will be of great value to-
day and in the future of our country.
I congratulate both of the Senators
for the work which they have done.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank the Senator.
I associate myself with the remarks
that the Senator has made with refer-
ence to the Senator from Delaware
[Mr. BOGGS].
Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I had
the privilege of serving 2 years on the
Committee on Public Works and the
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pol-
lution under the chairmanship of the
distinguished Senator from Maine
[Mr. MUSKIE].
I wish to join the chairman of the
committee [Mr. RANDOLPH] in endors-
ing the remarks he made with respect
to the chairman of the Committee on
Air and Water Pollution.
I wish to say on this issue, which
is of great concern to me, that the
Senator from Maine [Mr. MUSKIE] is
providing more distinguished and
thoughtful leadership than any other
man in Congress, or anywhere in the
United States.
I join the Senators in congratulat-
ing him for his thoughtful and fruit-
ful work.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous
consent that the committee amend-
ments be considered en bloc and that
the reading of the amendments be
waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The amendments were agreed to en
bloc.
Mr. YARBOROUGH. Mr. Presi-
dent, I urge the immediate passage of
S. 3112, the Clean Air Act Amend-
ments of 1966. The Senate and the
entire country are deeply indebted to
the junior Senator from Maine [Mr.
MUSKIE] for his outstanding leader-
ship in the field of air pollution con-
trol. It is in large measure due to his
untiring efforts that the Nation final-
ly is recognizing the significance of
this problem. The importance of the
legislation before us now cannot be
overestimated. Air pollution poses a
real threat to our national health and
welfare. This bill is the next step in
the Federal program to control air
pollution. It is an effective means to
combat that problem.
In 1963, Congress passed the Clean
Air Act which created within the
Federal Government a mechanism to
increase the national effort to abate
and control air pollution. The act au-
thorized substantial augmentation of
the Federal pollution program carried
on by the Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare since 1955. It also
established a program of grant assist-
ance to State, regional, and municipal
air pollution control agencies.
Again, in 1965, Congress, acting in
the national interest and recognizing
the increasing gravity of the air pol-
lution problem, passed S. 306 which
established a Federal Air Pollution
Control Laboratory and amended the
Clean Air Act to require standards
for controlling the emission of pollut-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
541
ants from gasoline-powered or diesel-
powered vehicles.
It is our duty to strike the next
blow in the battle against air pollu-
tion; S. 3112 offers us this opportunity
by making the use of appropriations
under the Clean Air Act more flexible
and authorizing grants to air pollu-
tion control agencies.
More than 60 percent of the popula-
tion of the United States is con-
fronted by the problem of air pollu-
tion. The movement of an ever-larger
percentage of population into urban
areas has concentrated the discharge
of waste products from combustion
into a very small proportion of the
atmosphere. A consistent relationship
between air pollution and population
has been determined. At the present
time 53 percent of our citizens live
on less than 1 percent of our land
area. As urbanization increases, the
problem of air pollution is intensified.
It is imperative that we meet the
challenge of air pollution now before
it becomes uncontrollable.
Air pollution has many insidious
effects. It harms health, reduces our
crop yield, damages property, and of-
fends our senses. There is strong evi-
dence that air pollution is associated
with a number of respiratory ail-
ments. The cost of illness, of decreased
strength, and of shortened lifespan is
incalculable. Human suffering bears
no price tag. Property damages at-
tributed to air pollution are currently
$65 per capita per year. Air pollu-
tion causes accelerated deterioration
of materials and structures and in-
creases maintenance and replacement
expenditures.
Clean, pure air is a part of our na-
tional heritage. What more valuable
gift can we leave to our descendants
than an atmosphere freed from of-
fensive and noxious gases? We must
control air pollution now while we
are able. S. 3112 will be indispensable
in combating the menace of air pollu-
tion. The bill increases the annual au-
thorization for air pollution control
and abatement programs to $46 mil-
lion a year for this fiscal year, $70
million for fiscal 1967-68, and $80
million for 1968-69. The legislation
would permit 50-50 matching grants
to air pollution control agencies and
three-fourths matching grants to in-
termunicipal and interstate agencies
for maintaining control and abate-
ment programs. It provides three-
fifths matching grants for regional
air control programs. These new
grants are in addition to the existing
matching grants to air pollution con-
trol agencies and matching grants to
intermunicipal and interstate agen-
cies for developing, establishing, or
improving such programs.
Clean air is the most vital of our
national resoures. I urge the immedi-
ate passage of S. 3112 to further com-
bat the air pollution problem.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, with-
out question, control of air quality
and pollution reduction is a great
problem, and it is a problem for
which solutions are within our power.
The technological solution to air
pollution has proved a thorny prob-
lem for engineers, but methods are
being developed to solve the prob-
lems of air pollution. Legislation
passed in the 88th Congress and
amendments made in the 1st session
of the 89th Congress have provided
considerable impetus for those al-
ready working on the problem.
The legislation passed in the 88th
Congress provided for a 3-year pro-
gram so that Congress could review
the progress made as a result of Fed-
eral activity. I concur with the com-
mittee that such review procedures
should remain in effect, as is provided
in the present legislation.
I was pleased to note in the report
the progress which has been made in
the development, by a private concern,
of apparatus which promises to con-
trol incinerator waste and which could
be used to reduce air contamination
-------
542
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
from incinerator waste emanating
from large apartment or office build-
ing complexes in cities.
The present bill, S. 3112, would pro-
vide for continuation of Government
assistance to State and local officials to
deal with this problem. Progress has
[p. 15258]
been made in controlling air qual-
ity, but additional financial resources
are necessary if we are to realize our
objectives in this area. S. 3112 has my
complete support.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I
want to again congratulate the dis-
tinguished chairman for his vision
and for the leadership he has given
this Nation in the fields of air and
water pollution.
In my judgment, the pollution prob-
lem is one of the most serious domes-
tic problems facing our country today.
But time is not on our side. It's run-
ning out. Delay will not only be costly
in terms of dollars, but even more im-
portant, will be the possible detri-
ment to human health and the inter-
ference with the general well-being of
our society.
Damage resulting from air pollu-
tion in this country has been esti-
mated at $11 billion a year. Economic
losses alone indicate the need for ac-
tion. It has been estimated that agri-
cultural losses in California alone
total approximately $132 million an-
nually. Pollution contributes to the
deterioration and corrosion of our
physical structures. The consumer
may see effects of pollution by the
need for more frequent trips to the
laundry. Even more important are the
adverse effects that pollution may
have on human health. Evidence grows
associating air pollution with certain
respiratory disorders, such as asthma,
bronchitis, emphysema, and lung can-
cer. While the evidence is not conclu-
sive, a strong suspicion is present,
and one thing is certain, air pollution
does not do us any good.
Although there has been a great
deal of activity lately in the air pol-
lution field, probably due in no small
part to the Clean Air Act, it appears
to me that the Nation has not fully
grasped the seriousness of the air pol-
lution problem. This is true despite
the fact that polluted air is daily
gasped by all too many Americans.
For some reason the American pub-
lic has the impression that the air
pollution problem only exists in Los
Angeles and a handful of other cities.
Over the years, I have had the pleas-
ure of flying across this Nation and
seeing much of the country. In so do-
ing, I can say that contrary to this
popular notion, Los Angeles is not the
only area with a major pollution
problem. While it may have been true
at one time that Los Angeles alone
had a pollution problem, one can clear-
ly see that today air pollution is a
national problem and a growing one.
Take the Nation's Capital, Wash-
ington, D.C., for example. Our Cap-
ital City truly is a beautiful one. The
millions of tourists who flock to Wash-
ington yearly cannot help but return
to their respective States with a bet-
ter understanding and a better ap-
preciation of what America is all
about. Washington continues to be a
great source of inspiration to me per-
sonally. This is why I view with great
concern the inadequate pollution pro-
grams in the District of Columbia
area. For Washington, although a
great inspirational and beautiful city,
is also from an air pollution stand-
point, a dirty city. Experts say, it is
many times dirtier than the city of
Los Angeles. That such is the case
saddens me as it should all Ameri-
cans, for it should not be. For Wash-
ington has no substantial industry
and far better meteorological condi-
tions than Los Angeles. Such pollution
is also inexcusable because modern
technology has advanced to such a
state that most of the pollutants from
stationary sources can, and should be,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
543
reduced or eliminated. In Los Angeles
County a vigorous and effective pro-
gram to abate air pollution from sta-
tionary sources is paying off. Aimed
at reducing air pollution levels from
stationary sources to those existing
in 1940, the goal has almost been
reached. Los Angeles County's con-
trol program for stationary sources
has kept more than 5,000 tons of con-
taminants out of the air daily. The
District of Columbia area could also
achieve similar results by eliminating
or reducing pollutants from stationary
sources. It can and should be done.
Under the Clean Air Act, Federal
action is authorized to abate inter-
state air pollution problems. The Sec-
retary of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare may take such action on his own
initiative or after consultation with
the officials of the States involved or
at the request of the States. It is my
understanding to date Federal au-
thority has been invoked in eight in-
terstate areas. Certainly the Federal
Government has a particular respon-
sibility in the Nation's Capital. It is
for that reason that I urge the Sec-
retary to initiate the necessary ac-
tions to stop the unnecessary pollu-
tion of the air in the Nation's Cap-
ital. The Federal City, pollutionwise,
should be a model city of clean air.
I only wish, Mr. Chairman, that the
State of California was making as
rapid progress in controlling the pol-
lution from the automobile as we have
made in controlling pollution from
stationary sources. Unfortunately,
such is not the case. Although we are
making progress, the truth of the mat-
ter is that we have to run as fast as
we can to stand still. This is so be-
cause of our rapidly growing popula-
tion which is expected to double by the
end of this century, and the increas-
ing number of autos.
On May 27, the Air Pollution Con-
trol District of the County of Los An-
geles issued its report to the Board
of Supervisors of the County of Los
Angeles regarding the status of air
pollution control in Los Angeles Coun-
ty and the prospects of success of the
current control programs. Their con-
clusions were: one, current motor ve-
hicle control programs will not achieve
acceptable air quality in Los Angeles
in the next decade, and two, control
of motor vehicle emissions must be in-
tensified and accelerated if Los An-
geles County is to have acceptable air
quality by 1980.
Since it has been estimated that
emissions from the motor vehicle are
responsible for about 80 percent of the
Los Angeles problem, and a substan-
tial contribution elsewhere, we must
do better. In California all 1966 and
later model cars must meet California
standards that limit the amount of
hydrocarbons to 275 parts per million
and carbon monoxide to 1.5 percent.
Standards have been adopted to fur-
ther reduce these exhaust emissions
in the case of hydrocarbons from 275
parts per million to 180 parts per
million, and carbon monoxide from
1.5 percent to 1 percent in 1970.
Mr. President, I would also urge
that the automobile industry of this
country give the problem of air pol-
lution the top priority to which it is
entitled. I feel very confident that the
industry if it focuses the skills and
abilities of its personnel will find solu-
tions to the pollution problem. In any
event, the industry should move and
move quickly, for I can say that the
public is demanding answers to the
problem of air pollution.
Also, Mr. President, I believe it
imperative that the Federal, State,
and local governments undertake edu-
cational programs designed to make
the public aware of the air pollution
problem. In this effect, I would hope
that such voluntary groups as the
tuberculosis association might join in
such a campaign in view of the in-
creasing statistical evidence showing
some relationship between respiratory
problems and pollution.
-------
544
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
Finally, although I understand this
lies outside the jurisdiction of this
Public Works Committee, I believe
the Federal Government should pro
vide a tax incentive to private indus-
try to anyone who acquires, con-
structs, or installs air pollution de-
vices that have been certified.
In conclusion, I believe that the
work of this Air Pollution Subcommit-
tee is as important as that carried
on anywhere in the Congress. Indeed,
if we are to pass only the benefits of
our great civilization and unsur-
passed technology to future genera-
tions without eliminating or at least
controlling some of its undesirable
byproducts, such as pollution, we may
be cursed rather than praised. We in
this country must learn to conserve
our air and water resources, just as
we learned to conserve other natural
resources. We have already been
given a glimpse of the folly of the
failure to do otherwise.
In closing, I again congratulate the
chairman and my colleagues for their
work in keeping the air pollution
problem before our people and for
their efforts in bringing S. 3112 be-
fore the Senate. I feel confident that
the enactment of S. 3112, which es-
tablishes maintenance grants and in-
creases the authorization by $9 mil-
lion during fiscal year 1967, will help
us to continue the battle against air
pollution.
Mr. TYDINGS. Mr. President, the
bill we are about to pass today is an
important addition to the Clean Air
Act. The increase in annual authori-
zation for air pollution control and
abatement programs to $46 million
per year and the establishment of 50-
50 matching grants for maintenance
of these programs reflects the deter-
mination of the Senate to eliminate
pollution in the atmosphere.
The death in 1962 of 340 people in
London due to smog is a bitter re-
minder that the pollution of the air
we breathe is a serious problem. Air
affects our health. There is strong
evidence that chronic bronchitis and
lung cancer are associated with con-
taminated air. Air
[p. 15259]
affects property. Approximately $11
billion is lost per year through the
accelerated deterioration of materials.
Air affects agriculture. Grapes, to-
bacco, barley, and broccoli are but a
few of the crops that have been
harmed in at least 19 States. Polluted
air affects our esthetic sense. Flowers
have trouble growing in smog-covered
cities, buildings and statues are erod-
ed, and blue skies are turned grey
and ugly. The overall harm to our
environment and our people caused by
air pollution is a shocking indictment
of the entire Nation. Only a massive
cooperative effort on the part of Fed-
eral, State, and local governments,
coupled with ordinary citizens, can
lick the problem. I believe we have be-
gun this effort.
The bill does not affect any essential
change in the Clean Air Act. Rather
it supplements this act and is a good
example of the ability of the Senate
to respond quickly to new problems as
they arise. Over the passage of time,
it is inevitable that some legislation
must be improved. This improvement
should be done with both speed and
wisdom.
Under the effective leadership of
the Senator from Maine [Mr. MUSKIE]
and the Senator from West Virginia
[Mr. RANDOLPH] the Public Works
Committee acted with dispatch and
with great wisdom in recommending
this bill to the Senate. I am proud to
have cosponsored this bill and to have
worked under Senators MUSKIE and
RANDOLPH for its enactment.
Mr. KENNEDY of New York sub-
sequently said: Mr. President, I wel-
come this opportunity to support S.
3112, a bill improving the Clean Air
Act. This legislation will authorize
the Federal Government to pay for
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
545
the operation of municipal, intermu-
nicipal and interstate air pollution
control programs. It will also remove
a restriction on the use of appropri-
ated funds for this purpose, until this
time a limit of 20 percent.
This bill authorizes a total of $46
million in 1967, $70 million in 1968,
and $80 million in 1969 for Federal
air pollution activities. And with this
legislation, the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare can pay up
to half the expenses of a municipal
pollution control program and three-
fifths of the costs of an intermu-
nicipal or interstate program.
This additional authority and these
funds are needed to help expand the
air pollution programs that have
been started during the last few
years. We have used Federal funds
to help stimulate local and State ac-
tivities and these units of govern-
ment have increased their expendi-
tures by 50 percent in the last 2 years.
Most municipalities, however, are hard
pressed to meet the many financial
challenges of growth and renewal and
badly need assistance in meeting this
new threat.
New York City, for example, spent
$1,347,000 for its air pollution control
program in 1965-66. The Federal
Government contributed $190,173 or
14 percent of this total. Most of New
York City's money is used to pay the
personnel of the department of air
pollution control, with less than one-
fourth of its funds available to pur-
chase new equipment. This means that
a city of 7 million operates only four
sampling stations that continuously
monitor at least 4 of the major pol-
lutants. It means that a country that
prides itself on its technology capa-
bilities does not arm its air pollution
control officers with anything ap-
proaching the types of equipment
needed to meet this threat.
The additional support made avail-
able for pollution control programs
by this bill will make it possible to
expand New York City's program
and to begin the purchase of data col-
lection systems that will provide full
information on air pollution.
In a larger sense, however, we have
only begun to come to grips with this
threat to our environment. Our pol-
lution experts point out that with the
expected growth in the number of cars
on our streets and highways, and the
expected increase in electrical power
production, the level of pollution in
our communities will increase rather
than decrease. Even the expected
gains from the automobile exhaust
control devices that are required by
the Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Con-
trol Act of 1965 will be lost by the
late 1980's. The increase in cars, more
than 130 million by 1985, will bring
the level of carbon monoxide and hy-
drocarbon pollution back up to the
level that exists today. And, although
we will reduce the level of these two
pollutants with the new control de-
vices, the device has no effect whatso-
ever on the nitric oxides produced by
the gasoline engine. There are even
some indications that the new device
will increase the amount of nitric
oxides produced by a car.
Similarly, although our electrical
power needs are expected to increase
threefold by 1980, only nuclear power
eliminates air pollution. We do not yet
have an economic way to remove sul-
fur from coal or fuel oil, a necessary
step if we are to lower the amount of
sulfur dioxide in our atmosphere.
The major danger from air pollu-
tion is one of health. Most of us know
that carbon monoxide in a closed ga-
rage can kill us, but fewer know of
the indirect dangers. For air pollution
affects the health of millions who are
unaware of its threat.
In the absence of precise and over-
whelming medical findings, there has
been a reluctance to state that air
pollution is a cause of lung and cir-
culation diseases or cancer. Medical
experts point out that on the basis of
-------
546
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
current information, they cannot tell
whether a pollutant causes a disease.
They do, however, admit that air pol-
lution places an additional load on
those suffering from other diseases.
And they agree that many pollutants
severely restrict the oxygen-carrying
qualities of our blood, reducing our
ability to fight other diseases.
Yet, as early as 1932, the U.S. Pub-
lic Health Service surveyed American
cities to find out whether there was
any connection between air pollution
and disease. They found that the four
most polluted cities at the time—
Pittsburgh, Boston, Baltimore, and
St. Louis—also had the highest pro-
portion of pneumonia deaths in the
country.
Again, in 1957, the Canadian Select
Committee on Air Pollution and
Smoke Control stated that—
Although scientific evidence about the effects
of air pollution on human health is far from
complete, enough proof exists to make it
abundantly and increasingly clear that air
pollution is injurious to both physical and
mental health. Under certain combinations of
circumstances it can be fatal. It fosters dis-
ease, and is very probably a major cause of
lung cancer, if not of other forms of malig-
nancy.
Within the last several years, med-
ical investigations in Buffalo found
that air pollution may double our
chances of dying from lung diseases.
The health records of people living in
the path of Buffalo's industrial smoke
was compared with those of people
living outside the smoke path. The
records showed that twice as many—
6 percent—people between 50 and 70
in the polluted area died from lung
diseases as those who lived else-
where—3 percent.
In 1949, only 915 deaths in the
United States were attributed to em-
physema. By 1961, this figure had
climbed to 10,269. Last year, emphy-
sema killed an estimated 60,000 Amer-
icans according to Dr. John H. Mc-
Clement, chief of the chest service at
New York's Bellevue Hospital. Em-
physema also disables 1 out of every
14 of our workers over 45, according
to the Social Security Administration.
Emphysema does not strike with
the suddenness of a heart attack or
pneumonia. Many victims are unaware
of its presence until more than 50 per-
cent of their lung capacity is de-
stroyed. And once this destruction
takes place, it cannot be reversed. The
victim only receives half as much oxy-
gen as before and is limited in what
he can do. And the extra burden
placed on his blood system bring a
host of heart and circulation prob-
lems.
The significance of this increase in
the number of emphysema cases is
that it has been linked to air pollu-
tion. British medical investigators
have found a close correlation between
this disease and the amount of fuel
burned and the amount of sulfur di-
oxide and soot in the air. Our Na-
tional Institutes of Health state that:
It is probable that air pollution also con-
tributes to the emphysema problem in the
United States cities with smog problems; but
the extent of that contribution remains to be
accurately assessed.
Most recently, the National Acad-
emy of Sciences has reported that, al-
though there is a lack of precise in-
formation, "there is undoubtedly a
major health hazard under certain
atmospheric conditions in larger
cities."
I do not think that we can ask our
medical and scientific experts to be
more precise at this time. They have
established the relationship between
pollution and disease. It is up to us
to reduce the level of pollution.
We do not even have agreement to-
day on the levels of air pollution that
are considered uncomfortable or un-
healthy for the individual on the
street. Congress has asked the De-
partment of Health, Education, and
Welfare to de-
lip. 15260]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
547
velop criteria for this purpose, but to
date they are not available.
California, for example, has estab-
lished a set of standards classifying
the amount of pollution found in the
air at any one time. This standard
has three categories; an adverse level
at which the pollutant is irritating to
the nose and eyes of an individual and
can damage plant life and property;
a serious level where exposure to the
pollutant is likely to lead to chronic
disease and a change in the functions
of an individual who is sensitive to
pollution although it may not affect a
strong healthy person, and an emer-
gency level, where a pollutant will
lead to acute sickness or death in a
sensitive group of persons.
California then goes on to state
that 1 part per million of sulfur di-
oxide for 1 hour or 0.3 part per mil-
lion for 8 hours is an adverse level.
Five parts per million of sulphur di-
oxide for 1 hour is considered a seri-
ous level. And 10 parts per million is
considered an emergency level.
When we compare California's
standard for sulfur dioxide with aver-
age conditions in New York City dur-
ing January 1965, we find that the
adverse level was exceeded on more
than half of the days of that month.
The adverse level was exceeded for a
24-hour period on 17 days of the
month.
The adverse level of sulfur dioxide
has also been exceeded in a number of
other cities. In February 1963, the
average level of sulfur dioxide in
Washington, B.C., exceeded the ad-
verse level as defined by California.
Yet no public warning was given be-
cause Washington, D.C., does not yet
have a standard for pollution.
Similarly, in February 1965, Chi-
cago registered an average sulfur di-
oxide level of 0.27 for the month, a
level of 0.55 for a 24-hour period, and
a level of 1.14 for an hour. And
Cleveland experienced 2 hours in Jan-
uary 1965 when the sulfur dioxide
level reached 0.54 and 0.55, respec-
tively.
In view of the expected growth in
electrical power generation, there is
no question that many of our cities
will have sulfur dioxide concentra-
tions in excess of the adverse level
as established by California. This
level is already being exceeded in a
number of cities. We have only
touched on the regulations and prac-
tices that must be established if the
sulfur dioxide content of our air is
to be lowered.
California has also established
standards for carbon monoxide. No
adverse level has been set. A total of
30 parts per million for 8 hours or 120
parts per million for 1 hour is con-
sidered a serious level. And the emer-
gency level is considered to be some-
where between 120 and 240 parts per
million.
New York City also considers 30
parts per million of carbon monoxide
for a 24-hour period to be dangerous.
Yet New Yorkers and commuters
from surrounding communities have
been exposed to carbon monoxide con-
centrations ranging from 100 to 200
parts per million.
During the recent transit strike in
New York City, carbon monoxide
measurements were taken in the Lin-
coln, Battery, and Holland Tunnels.
The average concentrations taken
from the entrance to the exit of these
tunnels were 44, 54, and 34 parts per
million, respectively. And at a num-
ber of spots in these tunnels, levels
of 100 to 200 parts per million were
recorded.
Although many pollution experts
discount carbon monoxide levels near
major highways, these levels are of
significance to those who drive con-
tinually in heavy traffic or have jobs
that constantly expose them to carbon
monoxide. It is no wonder that several
blood samples taken from taxicab
drivers in one of our cities showed a
carbon monoxide level between 8 and
-------
548
LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
20 percent, considered enough by the
Public Health Service to affect their
driving.
Unfortunately, this picture of tenta-
tive pollution safety levels set by some
States and communities with little
agreement between them is repeated
for other pollutants. The result has
been one of confusion and discourage-
ment for those who have attempted
to clean up our air.
We can make more progress in our
efforts to control air pollution if we
establish a Federal safety code for the
major pollutants. This code, estab-
lishing an adverse and a serious level
for each of the significant pollutants,
could be used as a guideline by com-
munities concerned with this problem.
This code should set a level for a pol-
lutant that will protect all members
of the community, the very young and
the old and those most sensitive to the
effects of this pollutant as well as
those more able to withstand the ef-
fects of pollution. For these groups
suffer most when pollution levels rise.
There is no doubt in the minds of our
doctors that pollution takes a toll of
these groups—a toll that is reflected
in the death records of most major
cities.
In looking toward future legislation,
I believe that major emphasis must
be given to air pollution research and
development. For this is an area where
a major investment will pay dividends.
We need to experiment with new
processes for removing sulfur from
coal and fuel oil. In much the same
way that we have built experimental
desalinization plants, we should build
sulfur extractors. It should be possi-
ble to develop an economic way of do-
ing this.
We also need a major investment
in power transmission technology so
that we can carry electric power from
powerplants located near our coal
mines to our cities. Significant de-
creases in the cost of this form of
power transmission can make it pos-
sible to build our new powerplants
away from the cities.
And we also must continue our de-
velopment of economical nuclear
power to provide pollution-free gen-
erators in our cities.
We also need to explore ways to
eliminate pollution from automobile
engines. A method of reducing the
amount of nitric oxide in engine ex-
hausts is essential and ways of further
reducing the carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbon exhausts are needed. The
Public Health Service should estab-
lish a broad development program to
reduce pollution from the gasoline en-
gine.
We also need to explore the possi-
bilities of electric cars. Recent ad-
vances made with electrical batteries
in space craft and submarines are
providing us with the technology for
battery driven cars. The British are
already moving forward on plans to
develop an effective electric car which
will aid materially in reducing air
pollution. Mr. A. N. Irens of the Brit-
ish Electricity Council has suggested
that Britain may have over a million
electric cars within the next 10 years.
He stated that, "the era of the bat-
tery-driven car need not be far away.
Given enterprise, courage, and swift
action, the battery-driven car will be
the town car of the future."
The battery-driven car can be a
practical vehicle for suburban and
city driving. Although it will not pro-
vide the same acceleration or high
speeds that present cars have, it will
provide any power required for local
streets and roads.
An effective air pollution control
program also requires coordination
with other major Federal programs.
Our national fuel policies, affecting
the availability of better grade fuel
oil, the development of natural gas,
and the utilization of coal, need to be
related to our air pollution problems.
Our transportation programs, aimed
at reducing the number of cars on our
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
549
highways and the stop and go driving
in our cities, also bear a direct rela-
tion to our air pollution problem.
I do not think that the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare
now has the authority to effect this
coordination. Perhaps what we need
is a Federal Council on Air Pollution
with the Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare acting as the lead
agency to handle these problems.
I have mentioned these air pollu-
tion problems and suggested some ap-
proaches not so much as a comment
on this bill as a comment on the na-
ture of the problem and the direction
in which we must move. And although
there may be differences of opinion
about what we must do, there can be
no disagreement on the need to solve
this problem.
In discussing another health prob-
lem, cigarette smoking, it was pointed
out that the individual had a choice
as to whether he would smoke. There
was no choice, however, for the 360
people in New York City who died in
1963 in one incident because of an in-
crease in the pollution of the air. And
there is no choice for the millions who
will have their lives shortened because
our air is contaminated. It is our re-
sponsibility to reduce the level of pol-
lution to a point where no individual's
health is threatened.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If
there be no further amendment to be
proposed, the question is on the en-
grossment and third reading of the
bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, and was read the
third time.
[p. 15261]
The result was announced—yeas 80,
nays 0 * * *. So the bill (S. 3112) was
passed.
[p. 15262]
l.lg(4)(c) Oct. 3: Considered and passed House, amended, pp.
24853-24855
CLEAN AIR AMENDMENTS OF
1966
Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, I
move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (S. 3112) to amend the Clean
Air Act so as to authorize grants to
air pollution control agencies for
maintenance of air pollution control
programs in addition to present au-
thority for grants to develop, estab-
lish, or improve such programs; make
the use of appropriations under the
act more flexible by consolidating the
appropriation authorizations under
the act and deleting the provision
limiting the total of grants for sup-
port of air pollution control programs
to 20 percent of the total appropria-
tion for any year; extend the duration
of the programs authorized by the
act; and for other purposes; as
amended.
Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, this
bill merely represents a simple exten-
sion for a period of 3 years of the
Clean Air Act. It was reported out
of the subcommittee unanimously and
out of the full committee by a unani-
mous vote.
Mr. Speaker, I shall call upon the
distinguished chairman of the sub-
committee, the gentleman from Okla-
homa [Mr. JARMAN], to give a brief
explanation of the bill after my few
brief remarks.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is a 3-year
extension of the Clean Air Act cur-
rently slated to expire June 30, 1967.
The bill increases authorizations for
-------
550
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
the current fiscal year by $4 million,
and authorizes $62 million and $71
million for 1968 and 1969, respec-
tively.
The bill also permits grants to in-
terstate, State, and local air pollu-
tion control agencies of up to one-
half the cost—three-fifths in the case
of intermunicipal or interstate agen-
cies—of maintaining new programs
where the Federal funds involved will
not be substituted for State funds,
thereby reducing State and local ex-
penditures.
The bill makes several other amend-
ments to the act. The existing limita-
tion of 20 percent of total appropria-
tions which may be used for support
of interstate, State, and local air pol-
lution control programs is removed;
the bill provides that in determining
eligibility for program grants. Non-
recurrent expenditures—such as con-
struction—shall not be considered;
and the bill provides for allocation of
expenditures between States where
programs cross State boundaries for
purposes of determining the 12%-
percent limitation on total appropri-
ated funds that may be spent in any
single State.
The bill is an amended version of
an administration proposal and passed
the Senate unanimously. The commit-
tee was also unanimous.
Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, I
yield such time as he may consume
to the distinguished gentleman from
Oklahoma [Mr. JARMAN].
Mr. JARMAN. Mr. Speaker, this
bill amends the Clean Air Act to ex-
tend that act for an additional 3
years and authorize appropriations
for this 3-year period. The bill also
authorizes grants to State, local, and
interstate air pollution control agen-
cies to assist in the cost of maintain-
ing new or additional programs of
those agencies. The committee amend-
ed the bill to insure that in no in-
stance will Federal funds be used to
replace State or local funds available
for air pollution programs, but will be
limited to new and increases in old
programs.
The problem of air pollution which
is already serious in the United States
is steadily growing and worsening. It
is ironic that our high level of pros-
perity is contributing directly to this
problem, because as our economy ex-
pands, we consume more, which means
we dispose of more and the byproducts
have only three places to go, into the
soil, into our rivers and lakes, and
into the air. The pollutants that daily
flow into the atmosphere from mil-
lions of automobiles and from our in-
dustrial plants are causing steadily
increasing health hazards in the
States.
Specific diseases associated in one
degree or another with air pollution
are emphysema, chronic bronchitis,
asthma, lung cancer, and other res-
piratory infections. There is no rea-
son, however, why our society should
permit this problem to grow worse.
Instead, we should be improving the
quality of our air as well as our rivers
and lakes and it is possible to ac-
complish this result. It cannot be done
overnight, but it can be done, and the
programs carried out under the Clean
Air Act are directed to accomplishing
that objective.
This bill reflects the experience that
has been gained in the 3 years since
the Clean Air Act was enacted in
1963.
Last year, the Congress established
a new program authorizing standards
for automobile exhausts, and those
standards have been issued by the
Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare, effective with respect to
1968 and later new passenger auto-
mobiles. This bill will provide added
flexibility in the financing of that
program through consolidating all ap-
propriation authorizations under the
Clean Air Act into one place, so that
unanticipated contingencies which
may arise may more adequately be
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
551
met within the limits of appropria-
tions made.
Under existing law, not more than
20 percent of the funds authorized to
be appropriated may be used for
grants for air pollution control pro-
grams.
Experience has indicated that this
limitation should be removed. We
want
[p. 24853]
to encourage the establishment of
more programs and it is feared that
the 20-percent limitation might inter-
fere with the attainment of that
objective.
There were extensive hearings on
this legislation before the Subcom-
mittee on Air and Water Pollution of
the Senate Committee on Public
Works, and our committee held hear-
ings on bills dealing with this subject.
The bill was amended so as to insure
that no Federal funds could be used
to replace State funds, and on that
basis we reduced appropriation au-
thorizations contained in the bill as
passed by the other body by a total
of $24 million.
The subcommittee and the full com-
mittee were unanimous in reporting
the bill to the House and we recom-
mend its passage.
Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. JARMAN. I shall be glad to
yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, I appreci-
ate the gentleman from Oklahoma
yielding and I want to say initially
that I certainly am in favor of clean
air.
But, Mr. Speaker, on Friday last,
this body passed a $1.2 billion, plus,
bill for antiair and antiwater pollu-
tion. We well realize that this is just
an amendment to an existing Clean
Air Act, and that it was reported
unanimously out of the Committee on
Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
But, Mr. Speaker, it does set up,
for several sessions of Congress yet
to come, increasing amounts in mil-
lions of dollars to be expended on the
part of the Federal Government for
these purposes.
Mr. Speaker, why do we need both
bills? I believe that is the question
to which the Members of the House
need an answer. There might well be
the question of majority duplicity
and/or overlap of surveillance in this
area. However, I am simply wonder-
ing and I believe, first of all, we need
explanation as to why we need these
amendments, in addition to the bill
that was passed last Friday, and
where does the jurisdiction lie among
our House of Representatives com-
mittees in the bill which was passed
on last Friday?
Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HALL. I yield to the gentleman
from West Virginia.
Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, if
I may answer that interrogation, I
believe the gentleman from Missouri
is referring to the bill from Ways and
Means in which certain interests were
given a tax credit for investments
helping to abate water pollution and
air pollution.
Mr. HALL. No, Mr. Speaker, we did
both on Friday last. In the Invest-
ments Credit Act of 1966 we ex-
empted air and water pollution de-
vices from the repeal of the 7-percent
exemption. Then, later on, we had a
clean air and clean water pollution
bill which involved the sum of over
$1 billion.
My question is simply this:
As strong as I am for cleaning up
our air and eliminating smog from
our major municipalities and, certain-
ly, cleaning up our streams, why do
we need both competing amendments?
Is this not a responsibility of local
communities and their ordinances
properly indicting auto exhausts or
manufacturers when appropriate?
Mr. STAGGERS. I may answer the
526-101 O - 73 - 31
-------
552
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
gentleman from Missouri in this fash-
ion:
I believe the gentleman was talking
about simply a clean water bill, where-
as this bill deals with air pollution.
The other bill was a tax amendment
providing a tax credit to those in in-
dustry in order to promote anti-air-
pollution and anti-water-pollution ac-
tivities by private industry.
Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, while
there is some reasonable doubt in my
mind, I appreciate the gentleman's an-
swer, but in the report under the pur-
poses of the legislation, paragraph 3,
it removes the 20 percent of the total
appropriation from the remaining
grants for the air pollution control
program.
Will the gentleman advise the
House whether this simply leaves the
percent of participation of the total
appropriation open ended—in other
words, could it be on a matching basis
with the States up to 90 percent, or
even 99.44 percent, or is there still a
ceiling or a limitation in this bill?
Mr. STAGGERS. I might say to the
gentleman that this allows more flexi-
bility. The law specifies the amounts
that can be expended for these pur-
poses, and the percentage for each
purpose. This would just simply give
more flexibility in the total amounts
that may be used for grants for State,
interstate, and local air pollution con-
trol programs.
Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Speaker, I
think this is what the gentleman
wants to know. To the local air pollu-
tion agencies, two-thirds for the de-
velopment or improvement of a pro-
gram, that is one, and second, one-
half of the operating expenses.
Under grants to intermunicipal or
interstate air pollution agencies and
programs, three-fourths for develop-
ment or improvement, and three-fifths
of the operating expenses.
Mr. HALL. In other words, "flexi-
bility" like "commonalty" is an admin-
istration byword and we are going
from 20 percent to 66% percent in
one instance, and 75 percent in the
other, as far as the Federal largesse
to these matching programs, where
clean air is concerned?
Mr. SPRINGER. Not exactly. The
20 percent applies to overall amounts
available; the 66% and 60 percent
apply to individual projects.
Mr. HALL. There would be an in-
crease.
Mr. SPRINGER. In percentages.
I do not want the gentleman to
think our bill is larger in dollars than
the Senate's bill. Our bill is less than
the Senate version.
Mr. HALL. I understand that there
is a reduction of $24 million over the
other bill, but we are increasing per-
centages allowable from Federal
matching funds in this bill.
Mr. SPRINGER. That is correct in
this piece of legislation.
Mr. HALL. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Speaker, I
yield such time as he may consume
to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
COLLIER] .
Mr. COLLIER. Mr. Speaker, I
wonder if someone can tell me how
much of the additional sums or funds
here appropriated will be used specifi-
cally for research? In other words—
and I know I am not alone in this
feeling—I get the impression that as
we deal with the very serious prob-
lem of air and water pollution by re-
peatedly expanding research and
studies. Certainly I do not question
that some of them are necessary, but
I wonder at what point we should
concentrate more attention to the solu-
tion of the problem, and direct meas-
ures to dealing with the problem and
a little less perhaps, to studying and
restudying the problem as we have
done for so many years. Specifically,
in the area of presenting reports as a
result of investigation where deter-
minations have been made, develop
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
553
in a concrete way what steps should
be taken to cope with the problem.
Mr. SPRINGER. May I say to the
gentleman that one reason we have
not had a uniform solution to the
problem is because in the various
parts of our country the problem is
different.
For instance, in the Los Angeles
area—and I do not know which of my
colleagues are here today from that
area but there is a very intensive
problem which has existed for a num-
ber of years. The State of California
had been working on this problem
long before we came into the picture.
If you want to take the city of Chi-
cago, you have a different problem
there. The same with Pittsburgh, you
have a different problem there.
May I say that this takes into con-
sideration not only what municipal
agencies can do, but also the encour-
agement of much of the private busi-
ness operations, especially as we see
it in the Pittsburgh area. Most of it
was caused in that area by private op-
eration of business alone. They did get
the kind of reduction there that they
had to have. In fact, Pittsburgh is a
pretty well controlled area at the pres-
ent time.
But I say to the gentleman that the
solution of this problem to a large ex-
tent depends upon local conditions
and what you can do to remedy it in
that particular area.
Mr. COLLIER. May I say merely
to illustrate my point, and getting into
the area of water pollution, we have
as my good friend, the gentleman
from Illinois knows, expended sub-
stantial sums of money in research.
Recognizing that some of these are
unique to certain areas, yet those
same problems of water pollution
even after findings have been made,
remain with us.
I can cite specific instances in my
own district where such reports were
made and where a determination was
made as to the cause, and the need
for abating the problem. Yet, as of
today, after millions and millions of
dollars have been expended in re-
searching, to secure at least what was
presumed to be an answer to the
problem or a solution of the problem,
the conditions are no better, and
[p. 24854]
in some instances worse than they
were before we studied it to death.
Mr. SPRINGER. May I say to the
distinguished gentleman, in the latter
part of his comment he is dealing
with water pollution which is an en-
tirely different problem that is solved
in an entirely different way from air
pollution. I should want to say to the
gentleman that we on this committee
would not hope to be responsible for
anything happening in the area of
water pollution. First in the matter of
air pollution, we have found from our
committee hearings that this is indeed
a complex problem, and that the best
thing is to make the grants to the
local communities to assist them to
work out the individual problems as
it affects their particular community.
I think that you will find even in
the city of Chicago that they have
been working on this for years and
they have not been able to come up as
yet with an answer.
We hope that with these grants,
which are quite small, because they
will only be $39 million, $62 million,
and $71 million in the next 3-year
period—that is spread around among
the cities in this country—that they
have more money to help them and it
will be an incentive.
Mr. COLLIER. Let me say that I
qualified my remarks earlier by using
the water pollution situation as an
example of my concern with the ap-
proach to the problem. But if we must
be specific and deal with air pollution,
I will be delighted to do that by sug-
gesting that the situation is entirely
the same in our own area, where for
many years, going back to the time
-------
554
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
when I was the president of the local
health board and we were studying
the problem of air pollution in our
city. After determinations were made
as to the cause, particularly with a
southeasterly wind blowing, I have to
tell you, and I can assure you that as
of today, some 12 years later, the
conditions persist. Thus, I merely say
that I would hope that we can devote
a greater part of these funds to some-
thing that will accomplish a solution
of the problem which I am sure we
are all interested in solving. But one
becomes a little skeptical after awhile
when we continue to expand funds for
research while seeming to really
getting the job done.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr.
Speaker, I rise in support of S. 3112,
a bill which is of grave concern to
every American today and to all
future generations of Americans.
We are faced today with a vexing
question which had developed from a
problem into a crisis. Even our action
here today will not terminate this
crisis. Even our action here today
will not terminate this crisis over-
night. But it is a matter which must
be attacked today if we hope to find
a solution for tomorrow.
As it has been stated, the problem
of clean air—or more aptly put, dirty
air—is not one limited to the big
cities of our Nation. Nor of suburban
America. It is a problem in every
corner of the Nation. For there is
little way of escaping the filth and
poison in the air around us. This air
that has polluted every area of the
Nation is only getting worse. It has
killed directly in some cities and it
has caused injury to persons and
property all across the country.
We must stop this killer. We have
waited all too long to begin the fight.
We cannot afford to tarry longer.
What we offer here is truly a meager
addition to what we have already
done, considering the enormity of the
problem. And I hope that we will be
able to expand, with the help and co-
operation of industry, State, and local
authority, our knowledge of air pollu-
tion through programs such as this
rapidly. Then it will be a problem of
applying what we have gathered so
that the people of all cities can again
see the sun, breathe fresh air, and
fear no more of the menace of air pol-
lution.
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, it is heart-
ening to see that the concern over
problems of air pollution is steadily
growing. Hopefully, it will grow fast-
er than the dimensions of the prob-
lem itself.
People were concerned about air
pollution in Donora, Pa., on the day
in 1948 when 43 percent of the popu-
lation was sickened by the polluted
air. They were concerned about it for
4 days in London in 1952, when 4,000
people were killed by polluted air. We
in New York City were concerned
about it for 15 days during 1963, when
400 people were killed by polluted air.
But air pollution causes more than
physical damage. As the New York
Times pointed out last week:
The more obvious damage to materials and
crops has been estimated nationally at $66
per person a year—$11 billion in all.
Mr. Speaker, we cannot afford to
skimp in our spending for a problem
which causes such great human and
property damage.
We in Congress, and the Committee
on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
have good reason to be proud of the
role which the Federal Government
has played in attacking air pollution
since the inception of the Federal pro-
gram in 1955, and especially since we
first passed the Clean Air Act in 1963.
The Government has encouraged the
States to begin air pollution programs
and has helped the States to assess the
exact nature of their problems. It has
expanded research and magnified the
public concern.
Yet we have not done enough. The
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
555
problem of air pollution continues to
spread. Fewer than one-half of the
States have air pollution programs—
despite the fact that the problem
plagues all 50. We will spend only
$30 million on pollution control this
year, despite the fact that, according
to the National Association of Manu-
facturers, industry spends $500 mil-
lion a year on air pollution.
Mr. Speaker, our antipollution ef-
forts are hardly cost effective. Pollu-
tion costs the Nation $65 per person
per year, yet the expenditures of Gov-
ernment and industry combined do not
exceed $10 per person per year.
I am pleased, therefore, to support
these amendments to the Clean Air
Act. They do not go far enough, but
at least they permit us to proceed.
They authorize the Federal Govern-
ment to double its expenditures to $71
million by 1969.
The bill removes the limitation that
no more than 20 percent of the total
amount appropriated under the act
each year can be used for grants to
support State, local, and regional pro-
grams. It permits those grants to be
used to maintain—as well as to in-
itiate and to improve—those pro-
grams.
Unfortunately, the bill retains the
-percent limitation upon the funds
which may be granted to any one
State. I have opposed these arbitrary
limitations in the past, pointing out
how they discriminate against urban
areas. I have introduced H.R. 10124
to repeal the 12%-percent limitation.
I regret that this bill has been brought
to the floor under the suspension of
the rules procedure which does not
permit a bill to be amended. Other-
wise, I would offer an amendment to
strike subsection (c) of section 104
of the Clean Air Act.
Nevertheless, this is an area where
more must be done. More must be
done by local communities, by the
States, by industry, by a concerned
public, and by the Federal Govern-
ment. The alternative is death by
breathing.
The SPEAKER. The question is,
Shall the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill S. 3112 with amend-
ments?
The question was taken, and two-
thirds having voted in favor thereof,
the rules were suspended and the bill,
as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
[p.24855]
l.lg(4)(d) Oct. 13: House agreed to conference report, p. 26596
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS
OF 1966
Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, I
call up the conference report on the
bill (S. 3112) to amend the Clean Air
Act so as to authorize grants to air
pollution control agencies for mainte-
nance of air pollution control pro-
grams in addition to present authority
for grants to develop, establish, or im-
prove such programs; make the use of
appropriations under the act more
flexible by consolidating the appro-
priation authorizations under the act
and deleting the provision limiting
the total of grants for support of air
pollution control programs to 20 per-
cent of the total appropriation for any
year; extend the duration of the pro-
grams authorized by the act; and for
other purposes, and ask unanimous
consent that the statement of the man-
agers on the part of the House be read
in lieu of the report.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
West Virginia [Mr. STAGGERS]?
-------
556
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the statement.
The conference report and state-
ment follow:
CONFERENCE REPORT (H. KEPT. No. 2266)
The committee of conference on the disagree-
ing votes of the two Houses on the amend-
ment of the House to the bill (S. 3112) to
amend the Clean Air Act so as to authorize
grants to air pollution control agencies for
maintenance of air pollution control programs
in addition to present authority for grants to
develop, establish, or improve such programs;
make the use of appropriations under the Act
more flexible by consolidating the appropria-
tion authorizations under the Act and deleting
the provision limiting the total of grants for
support of air pollution control programs to
20 per centum of the total appropriation for
any year; extend the duration of the programs
authorized by the Act; and for other purposes,
having met, after full and free conference,
have agreed to recommend and do recommend
to their respective Houses as follows:
That the House recede from its amendment
numbered 1.
That the Senate recede from its disagree-
ment of the amendments of the House num-
bered 4 and 5, and agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 2: That the Senate
recede from its disagreement to the amend-
ment of the House numbered 2 and agree to
the same with an amendment as follows:
Strike out the matter proposed to be stricken
out by the House amendment and in lieu of
the matter proposed to be inserted by the
House amendment insert the following:
"$66,000,000".
Amendment numbered 3: That the Senate
recede from its disagreement to the amend-
ment of the House numbered 3 and agree to
the same with an amendment as follows:
Strike out the matter proposed to be stricken
out by the House amendment and in lieu of
the matter proposed to be inserted by the
House amendment, insert the following:
"$74,000,000"; and the House agree to the
same.
HARLEY O. STAGGERS,
JOHN JARMAN,
LEO W. O'BRIEN,
PAUL G. ROGER:,
WILLIAM L. SPRINGER,
ANCHOR NELSEN,
Managers on the Part of the Haute.
JENNINGS RANDOLPH,
EDMUND S. MUSKIE,
FRANK E. Moss,
FRED R.
J. CALEB Booos,
GEORGE L. MURPHY,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
STATEMENT
The managers on the part of the House at
the conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendments of the House
to the bill (S. 3112) to amend the Clean Air
Act so as to authorize grants to air pollution
control agencies for maintenance of air pollu-
tion control programs in addition to present
authority for grants to develop, establish, or
improve such programs; make the use of ap-
propriations under the act more flexible by
consolidating the appropriation authorizations
under the act and deleting the provision limit-
ing the total of grants for support of air
pollution control programs to 20 per centum
of the total appropriation for any year; ex-
tend the duration of the programs authorized
by the act; and for other purposes, submit the
following statement in explanation of the
effect of the action agreed upon by the con-
ferees and recommended in the accompanying
conference report:
Amendment No. 1: Section 2 of the Sen-
ate bill amends section 306 of the Clean Air
Act to authorize $46,000,000 for fiscal year
1968. The House amendments reduce this
authorization to $89,000,000.
The House recedes.
Amendment No. 2: Section 2 of the Senate
bill amends section 306 of the Clean Air Act
to authorize $70,000,000 for fiscal year 1968.
The House amendments reduce the authoriza-
tion to $62,000,000.
The Senate recedes with amendments which
provide an authorization of $66,000,000 for
fiscal year 1968.
Amendment No. 3: Section 2 of the Sen-
ate bill amends section 306 of the Clean Air
Act to authorize $80,000,000 for fiscal year
1969. The House amendments reduce this
amount to $71,000,000.
The Senate recedes with amendments which
authorize $74,000,000 for fiscal year 1969.
Amendment No. 4: This is a clarifying
amendment; the Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 5: Section 3 (a) (2) of the
Senate bill amends section 104 (b) of the Clean
Air Act which provides that "no agency shall
receive any grant under this section during
any fiscal year when its expenditures of non-
Federal funds for air pollution programs will
be less than its expenditures were for such
programs during the preceding fiscal year" to
permit a grantee to reduce annual expendi-
tures to the extent that nonrecurrent costs
are involved. The House amendments provide
that no grant shall be made for maintenance
of an air pollution program unless the Secre-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
557
tary is satisfied that it will not be used to
supplant non-Federal funds and to the extent
practicable, will be used to increase the level
of State, local, and other non-Federal funds
available for the maintenance of such program.
The Senate recedes.
HARLEY O. STAGGERS,
JOHN JARMAN,
LEO W. O'BRIEN,
PAUL G. ROGERS,
WILLIAM L. SPRINGER,
ANCHBR NELSEN,
Managers on the Part of the House.
Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Speaker, I
move the previous question on the
conference report.
The previous question was ordered.
The conference report was agreed
to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
[p.26596]
Oct. 14: Senate agreed to conference report, p. 26808-
26809
CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS
OF 1966—CONFERENCE REPORT
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I
submit a report of the committee of
conference on the disagreeing votes of
the two Houses on the amendments of
the House to the bill (S. 3112) to
amend the Clean Air Act so as to au-
thorize grants to air pollution control
programs in addition to present au-
thority for grants to develop, estab-
lish, or improve such programs; make
the use of appropriations under the
act more flexible by consolidating the
appropriation authorizations under
the act and deleting the provision
limiting the total of grants for sup-
port of air pollution control programs
to 20 percent of the total appropria-
tion for any year; extend the dura-
tion of the programs authorized by the
act; and for other purposes. I ask
unanimous consent for the present
consideration of the report.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro
tempore. The report will be read for
the information of the Senate.
The assistant legislative clerk read
the report.
(For conference report, see House
proceedings of Oct 13, 1966, p. 26596,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.)
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro
tempore. Is there objection to the pres-
ent consideration of the report?
There being no objection, the Sen-
ate proceeded to consider the report.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, today
we bring to the Senate additional
amendments to the Clean Air Act.
These amendments have the vigorous
backing of the Members of both
Houses. There has been no opposition
to this bill at any point in the legis-
lative process. This is significant. It
is evidence of the continued concern
of the Congress with the problems of
air pollution and of the determination
of our chairman, Mr. RANDOLPH, and
the House Interstate and Foreign
Commerce Committee chairman, Mr.
STAGGERS, to maintain our search for
improved ways of reducing the haz-
ards of air pollution.
Today's legislation is a step for-
ward, but it is not the end of our ef-
forts. We cannot rest until we have
removed the threats to man's health,
well-being, and economic advancement
which man himself creates in a mod-
ern, technological society.
S. 3112 amends the Clean Air Act
in order to provide for a stronger,
more effective air pollution control
effort at the Federal, State, and local
level.
S. 3112 is based on legislation pro-
posed by the administration. The pri-
mary purposes of the bill are to con-
solidate appropriation authorizations
-------
558
LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
in the Clean Air Act and to authorize
funds to continue the program
through 1969.
S. 3112 institutes a new grant pro-
gram to allow the air pollution con-
trol agencies up to one-half of the cost
of maintaining programs for the pre-
vention and control of air pollution,
and authorizes the Secretary to make
grants to intermunicipal or interstate
air pollution control agencies in an
amount up to three-fifths of the cost
of maintaining regional air pollution
control programs.
S. 3112 removes the limitation in
existing law that no more than 20
percent of the sums appropriated an-
nually under the act may be used for
support of air pollution control pro-
grams, and provides that in deter-
mining the eligibility for a program
grant nonrecurrent expenditures of
the participating agencies in the pre-
ceeding year shall not be considered.
Finally, S. 3112 provides that
grants for interstate programs, sub-
ject to the 12%-percent limitation,
shall be allocated by the Secretary
according to the portion of such grant
that is chargeable to any one State.
The conferees have, therefore,
agreed to authorize the requested $46
million for 1967 and provided $66
million for 1968, and $74 million for
1969. These authorizations will pro-
vide adequate funds to carry out the
new maintenance grant program au-
thorized by this act and give the divi-
sion of air pollution sufficient funds
to support essential research pro-
grams—research on sulfur and auto-
mobile emission control. The $46 mil-
lion authorized for 1967 represents a
$10-million increase over existing au-
thorization. This increase is, in part,
required by the expanded program of
research into the control of sulfur
emissions and automobile emissions
and includes $7 million as the added
cost of maintenance grant program.
The authorizations for 1968 and
1969 represent similar increases in
the activities of the division and $10
and $13 million, respectively, to carry
out the maintenance grant program.
On the latter point, the desirability
of providing Federal aid to continua-
tion of air pollution control programs
is without question. Existing program
grants have stimulated State and local
activity by providing Federal match-
ing funds for new or improved pro-
grams. They were not designed for
sustained State and local efforts
necessary to cope with a continuing
air pollution problem. This has dis-
criminated against States and local-
ities who initiated their own excellent
programs prior to the Clean Air Act,
and it has worked a hardship on other
States and localities.
Therefore, the provisions of S. 3112
authorizing the Secretary to make
grants for maintaining air pollution
control programs are essential. The
50-percent matching grant program
to State and local agencies and the
three-fifths matching grant program
to regional agencies should provide
adequate incentive for maintenance
of this effort.
[P. 26808]
Nonrecurrent expenditures of pollu-
tion control agencies will not be con-
sidered in determining the eligibility
for a grant. Many factors may justifi-
ably cause the level of expenditures
of a pollution control agency to fluctu-
ate, including, for example, nonrecur-
rent costs of equipment, of facilities,
acquisition of property, or the initia-
tion of studies concerning air quality
or other matters. Where the overall
workability of the air pollution con-
trol program is not impaired, fluctua-
tions in expenditures should not make
local agencies ineligible for the Fed-
eral matching grants support.
S. 3112 deletes the provision in the
Clean Air Act which limits the total
for grants in support of air pollution
control programs to 20 percent of the
total appropriation for any fiscal year.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
559
The existing act imposes a fixed re-
lationship between grant funds to the
total appropriations for all Federal
air pollution activities. Air pollution
and the possibilities for control action
are subject to rapid change. Over a
period of time, the pattern of needs
and desirable program balance with
respect to research, technical assist-
ance, training, Federal abatement ac-
tivities, grants to State and local con-
trol agencies, and other activities may
vary considerably. The committee be-
lieves it would be wise to leave the
determination of the relative empha-
sis to be given to each of these activi-
ties to the annual budgetary and ap-
propriation process so that judgments
may be based upon the overall re-
quirements existing at the time.
Mr. President, these are the major
provisions of the legislation as agreed
upon by the Senate-House conference
committee. I am sure the Senate will
join the other body in unanimously
approving this step forward.
Mr. BOGGS. I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the RECORD at
this point a statement prepared by the
senior Senator from Kentucky [Mr.
COOPER] .
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
STATEMENT BY SENATOR COOPER
I support the Conference Report on S. 3112
and urge its adoption by the Senate.
The bill would broaden the present authority
of the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare by authorizing grants to air pollution
control agencies for program maintenance. It
would make the use of appropriations more
flexible by consolidating the appropriate au-
thorities of the Clean Air Act. In addition,
the bill would amend the Clean Air Act to
delete the provision limiting grants for air
pollution control programs.
Finally, and most important, the bill would
extend the duration of programs authorized
by the Clean Air Act of 1969.
I believe that this bill is another demon-
stration of the determined effort of the Con-
gress to advance solutions to the most chal-
lenging problem facing our country today—
pollution in the air and in the water.
Extensive hearings were conducted by the
Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution in
June of this year which resulted in a thor-
ough and well documented hearing record. I
should like to say as a member of the Com-
mittee on Public Works that the Subcommit-
tee, headed by .the distinguished Senator from
Maine [Mr. MUSKIE], with the able assistance
of the Ranking Republican Member on the
Committee, the Senator from Delaware [Mr.
BOCGS], and the entire Committee has worked
hard and conscientiously in developing the bill
before us.
I would like to make two observations in
connection with this bill. The bill makes no
provision for grants to industry for research
into the problems of air pollution. The bill
amending the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act, which has just been recommended by
the Conferees, including a provision author-
izing for the first time the Secretary of the
Interior to make grants to industry for re-
search in the prevention and treatment of
water pollution.
I believe it is important that we enlist the
initiative and energy of industry in this ef-
fort. In this connection, I shall urge the
Public Works Committee at a future date
when further amendments are being considered
to the Clean Air Act to recommend an amend-
ment making industry eligible to receive re-
search grants for experimentation in the field
of air pollution controls in the manner that
Congress has provided in the field of water
pollution.
I also note by the statement of the Chair-
man of the Subcommittee [Mr. MUSKIK] that
the $46 million authorized for 1967 includes
a $10 million increase beyond the existing au-
thorization and that this increase will be used
for an expanded program of research into
sulphur emissions and automobile emissions.
The testimony taken by the Subcommittee
establishes the need for this additional re-
search.
I support and urge the adoption of the Con-
ference Report.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I
move that the conference report be
adopted.
THE ACTING PRESIDENT pro
tempore. The question is on agreeing
to the conference report.
The report was agreed to.
[p.26809]
-------
560 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
l.lh AIR QUALITY ACT OF 1967
November 21, 1967, P.L. 90-148, 81 Stat. 485
AN ACT To amend the Clean Air Act to authorize planning grants to air
pollution control agencies; expand research provisions relating to fuels and
vehicles; provide for interstate air pollution control agencies or commis-
sion; authorize the establishment of air quality standards, and for other
purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this
Act may be cited as the "Air Quality Act of 1967".
SEC. 2. The Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1857-18571),
is hereby amended to read as follows:
"TITLE I—AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL
"FINDINGS AND PURPOSES
"SEC. 101. (a) The Congress finds—
"(1) that the predominant part of the Nation's population
is located in its rapidly expanding metropolitan and other
urban areas, which generally cross the boundary lines of local
jurisdictions and often extend into two or more States;
"(2) that the growth in the amount and complexity of air
pollution brought about by urbanization, industrial develop-
ment, and the increasing use of motor vehicles, has resulted
in mounting dangers to the public health and welfare, includ-
ing injury to agricultural crops and livestock, damage to and
the deterioration of property, and hazards to air and ground
transportation;
"(3) that the prevention and control of air pollution at its
source is the primary responsibility of States and local gov-
ernments; and
"(4) that Federal financial assistance and leadership is
essential for the development of cooperative Federal, State,
regional, and local programs to prevent and control air pollu-
tion.
" (b) The purposes of this title are—
" (1) to protect and enhance the quality of the Nation's air
resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and
the productive capacity of its population;
"(2) to initiate and accelerate a national research and
development program to achieve the prevention and control
of air pollution;
" (3) to provide technical and financial assistance to State
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 561
and local governments in connection with the development
and execution of their air pollution prevention and control
programs; and
"(4) to encourage and assist the development and opera-
tion of regional air pollution control programs.
"COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES AND UNIFORM LAWS
"SEC. 102. (a) The Secretary shall encourage cooperative activ-
ities by the States and local governments for the prevention and
control of air pollution; encourage the enactment of improved
and, so far as practicable in the light of varying conditions and
needs, uniform State and local laws relating to the prevention
and control of air pollution; and encourage the making of agree-
ments and compacts between States for the prevention and control
of air pollution.
"(b) The Secretary shall cooperate with and encourage coop-
erative activities by all Federal departments and agencies having
functions relating to the prevention and control of air pollution, so
as to assure
[p. 485]
the utilization in the Federal air pollution control program of all
appropriate and available facilities and resources within the Fed-
eral Government.
"(c) The consent of the Congress is hereby given to two or
more States to negotiate and enter into agreements or compacts,
not in conflict with any law or treaty of the United States, for
(1) cooperative effort and mutual assistance for the prevention
and control of air pollution and the enforcement of their respec-
tive laws relating thereto, and (2) the establishment of such
agencies, joint or otherwise, as they may deem desirable for mak-
ing effective such agreements or compacts. No such agreement or
compact shall be binding or obligatory upon any State a party
thereto unless and until it has been approved by Congress. It is
the intent of Congress that no agreement or compact entered into
between States after the date of enactment of the Air Quality
Act of 1967, which relates to the control and abatement of air
pollution in an air quality control region, shall provide for partic-
ipation by a State which is not included (in whole or in part) in
such air quality control region.
"RESEARCH, INVESTIGATIONS, TRAINING, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
"SEC. 103. (a) The Secretary shall establish a national research
-------
562 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
and development program for the prevention and control of air
pollution and as part of such program shall—
"(1) conduct, and promote the coordination and accelera-
tion of, research, investigations, experiments, training, dem-
onstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, ef-
fects, extent, prevention, and control of air pollution;
"(2) encourage, cooperate with, and render technical serv-
ices and provide financial assistance to air pollution control
agencies and other appropriate public or private agencies,
institutions, and organizations, and individuals in the conduct
of such activities;
"(3) conduct investigations and research and make sur-
veys concerning any specific problem of air pollution in coop-
eration with any air pollution control agency with a view to
recommending a solution of such problem, if he is requested
to do so by such agency or if, in his judgment, such problem
may affect any community or communities in a State other
than that in which the source of the matter causing or con-
tributing to the pollution is located;
"(4) establish technical advisory committees composed of
recognized experts in various aspects of air pollution to assist
in the examination and evaluation of research progress and
proposals and to avoid duplication of research.
" (b) In carrying out the provisions of the preceding subsection
the Secretary is authorized to—
"(1) collect and make available, through publications and
other appropriate means, the results of and other informa-
tion, including appropriate recommendations by him in con-
nection therewith, pertaining to such research and other
activities;
"(2) cooperate with other Federal departments and agen-
cies, with air pollution control agencies, with other public
and private agencies, institutions, and organizations, and with
any industries involved, in the preparation and conduct of
such research and other activities;
" (3) make grants to air pollution control agencies, to other
public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, and orga-
nizations, and to individuals, for purposes stated in sub-
section (a)(l) of this section;
"(4) contract with public or private agencies, institutions,
and organizations, and with individuals, without regard to
sections
[p. 486]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 563
3648 and 3709 of the Revised Statutes (31 U.S.C. 529; 41 U.S.C.
5);
"(5) provide training for, and make training grants to,
personnel of air pollution control agencies and other persons
with suitable qualifications;
"(6) establish and maintain research fellowships, in the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and at public
or nonprofit private educational institutions or research or-
ganizations;
"(7) collect and disseminate, in cooperation with other
Federal departments and agencies, and with other public or
private agencies, institutions, and organizations having re-
lated responsibilities, basic data on chemical, physical, and
biological effects of varying air quality and other information
pertaining to air pollution and the prevention and control
thereof; and
"(8) develop effective and practical processes, methods,
and prototype devices for the prevention or control of air
pollution.
"(c) In carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) of this
section the Secretary shall conduct research on, and survey the
results of other scientific studies on, the harmful effects on the
health or welfare of persons by the various known air pollution
agents (or combinations of agents).
"(d) The Secretary is authorized to construct such facilities
and staff and equip them as he determines to be necessary to
carry out his functions under this Act.
" (e) If, in the judgment of the Secretary, an air pollution prob-
lem of substantial significance may result from discharge or dis-
charges into the atmosphere, he may call a conference concerning
this potential air pollution problem to be held in or near one or
more of the places where such discharge or discharges are occur-
ring or will occur. All interested persons shall be given an oppor-
tunity to be heard at such conference, either orally or in writing,
and shall be permitted to appear in person or by representative
in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Secretary. If the
Secretary finds, on the basis of the evidence presented at such
conference, that the discharge or discharges if permitted to take
place or continue are likely to cause or contribute to air pollution
subject to abatement under section 108(a), he shall send such
findings, together with recommendations concerning the measures
which he finds reasonable and suitable to prevent such pollution,
to the person or persons whose actions will result in the discharge
-------
564 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
or discharges involved; to air pollution agencies of the State or
States and of the municipality or municipalities where such dis-
charge or discharges will originate; and to the interstate air pollu-
tion control agency, if any, in the jurisdictional area of which
any such municipality is located. Such findings and recommenda-
tions shall be advisory only, but shall be admitted together with
the record of the conference, as part of the proceedings under
subsections (d), (e), and (f) of section 108.
"RESEARCH RELATING TO FUELS AND VEHICLES
"SEC. 104. (a) The Secretary shall give special emphasis to
research and development into new and improved methods, having
industrywide application, for the prevention and control of air
pollution resulting from the combustion of fuels. In furtherance
of such research and development he shall—
"(1) conduct and accelerate research programs directed
toward development of improved, low-cost techniques for con-
trol of com-
[p. 487]
bustion byproducts of fuels, for removal of potential pollu-
tants from fuels, and for control of emissions from evapora-
tion of fuels;
"(2) provide for Federal grants to public or nonprofit
agencies, institutions, and organizations and to individuals,
and contracts with public or private agencies, institutions, or
persons, for payment of (A) part of the cost of acquiring,
constructing, or otherwise securing for research and develop-
ment purposes, new or improved devices or methods having
industrywide application of preventing or controlling dis-
charges into the air of various types of pollutants; and (B)
carrying out the other provisions of this section, without
regard to sections 3648 and 3709 of the Revised Statutes (31
U.S.C. 529; 41 U.S.C. 5): Provided, That research or demon-
stration contracts awarded pursuant to this subsection (in-
cluding contracts for construction) may be made in accord-
ance with, and subject to the limitations provided with respect
to research contracts of the military departments in, section
2353 of title 10, United States Code, except that the deter-
mination, approval, and certification required thereby shall
be made by the Secretary: Provided further, That no grant
may be made under this paragraph in excess of $1,500,000;
"(3) determine, by laboratory and pilot plant testing, the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 565
results of air pollution research and studies in order to devel-
op new or improved processes and plant designs to the point
where they can be demonstrated on a large and practical
scale;
" (4) construct, operate, and maintain, or assist in meeting
the cost of the construction, operation, and maintenance of
new or improved demonstration plants or processes which
have promise of accomplishing the purposes of this Act;
"(5) study new or improved methods for the recovery and
marketing of commercially valuable byproducts resulting
from the removal of pollutants.
"(b) In carrying out the provisions of this section, the Secre-
tary may—
"(1) conduct and accelerate research and development of
low-cost instrumentation techniques to facilitate determina-
tion of quantity and quality of air pollutant emissions, includ-
ing, but not limited to, automotive emissions;
" (2) utilize, on a reimbursable basis, the facilities of exist-
ing Federal scientific laboratories;
"(3) establish and operate necessary facilities and test
sites at which to carry on the research, testing, development,
and programing necessary to effectuate the purposes of this
section;
"(4) acquire secret processes, technical data, inventions,
patent applications, patents, licenses, and an interest in lands,
plants, and facilities, and other property or rights by pur-
chase, license, lease, or donation; and
"(5) cause on-site inspections to be made of promising
domestic and foreign projects, and cooperate and participate
in their development in instances in which the purposes of
the Act will be served thereby.
"(c) For the purposes of this section there are authorized to
be appropriated for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968, $35,-
000,000, and for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969, $90,000,000.
Amounts appropriated pursuant to this subsection shall remain
available until expended.
[p. 488]
"GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION PLANNING AND CONTROL
PROGRAMS
"SEC. 105. (a) (1) The Secretary is authorized to make grants
to air pollution control agencies in an amount up to two-thirds
of the cost of planning, developing, establishing, or improving,
-------
566 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
and grants to such agencies in an amount up to one-half of the
cost of maintaining, programs for the prevention and control of
air pollution and programs for the implementation of air quality
standards authorized by this Act: Provided, That the Secretary
is authorized to make grants to air pollution control agencies
within the meaning of sections 302 (b) (2) and 302 (b) (4) in an
amount up to three-fourths of the cost of planning, developing,
establishing, or improving and up to three-fifths of the cost of
maintaining, regional air quality control programs. As used in
this subsection the term 'regional air quality control program'
means a program for the prevention and control of air pollution
or the implementation of air quality standards programs as au-
thorized by this Act, in an area that includes the areas of two or
more municipalities whether in the same or different States.
"(2) Before approving any grant under this subsection to any
air pollution control agency within the meaning of sections 302
(b) (2) and 302 (b) (4), the Secretary shall receive assurances
that such agency provides for adequate representation of appro-
priate State, interstate, local, and (when appropriate) inter-
national, interests in the air quality control region.
"(3) Before approving any planning grant under this subsec-
tion to any air pollution control agency within the meaning of
sections 302(b) (2) and 302 (b) (4), the Secretary shall receive
assurances that such agency has the capability of developing a
comprehensive air quality plan for the air quality control region,
which plan shall include (when appropriate) a recommended sys-
tem of alerts to avert and reduce the risk of situations in which
there may be imminent and serious danger to the public health
or welfare from air pollutants and the various aspects relevant
to the establishment of air quality standards for such air quality
control region, including the concentration of industries, other
commercial establishments, population and naturally occurring
factors which shall affect such standards.
"(b) From the sums available for the purposes of subsection
(a) of this section for any fiscal year, the Secretary shall from
time to time make grants to air pollution control agencies upon
such terms and conditions as the Secretary may find necessary
to carry out the purpose of this section. In establishing regula-
tions for the granting of such funds the Secretary shall, so far as
practicable, give due consideration to (1) the population, (2)
the extent of the actual or potential air pollution problem, and (3)
the financial need of the respective agencies. No agency shall
receive any grant under this section during any fiscal year when
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 567
its expenditures of non-Federal funds for other than nonrecurrent
expenditures for air pollution control programs will be less than
its expenditures were for such programs during the preceding
fiscal year; and no agency shall receive any grant under this sec-
tion with respect to the maintenance of a program for the preven-
tion and control of air pollution unless the Secretary is satisfied
that such grant will be so used as to supplement and, to the extent
practicable, increase the level of State, local, or other non-Federal
funds that would in the absence of such grant be made available
for the maintenance of such program, and will in no event sup-
plant such State, local, or other non-Federal funds. No grant
shall be made under this section until the Secretary has consulted
with the appropriate official as designated by the Governor or
Governors of the State or States affected.
[p. 489]
"(c) Not more than 10 per centum of the total of funds appro-
priated or allocated for the purposes of subsection (a) of this
section shall be granted for air pollution control programs in any
one State. In the case of a grant for a program in an area cross-
ing State boundaries, the Secretary shall determine the portion
of such grant that is chargeable to the percentage limitation under
this subsection for each State into which such area extends.
"INTERSTATE AIR QUALITY AGENCIES OR COMMISSIONS
"SEC. 106. (a) For the purpose of expediting the establishment
of air quality standards in an interstate air quality control region
designated pursuant to section 107 (a) (2), the Secretary is au-
thorized to pay, for two years, up to 100 per centum of the air
quality planning program costs of any agency designated by the
Governors of the affected States, which agency shall be capable
of recommending to the Governors standards of air quality and
plans for implementation thereof and shall include representation
from the States and appropriate political subdivisions within the
air quality control region. After the initial two-year period the
Secretary is authorized to make grants to such agency in an
amount up to three-fourths of the air quality planning program
costs of such agency.
" (b) (1) Whenever the Secretary deems it necessary to expedite
the establishment of standards for an interstate air quality con-
trol region designated pursuant to section 107 (a) (2) he may,
after consultation with the Governors of the affected States,
designate or establish an air quality planning commission for the
526-701O - 73 - 38
-------
568 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
purpose of developing recommended regulations setting forth
standards of air quality to be applicable to such air quality control
region.
"(2) Such Commission shall consist of the Secretary or his
designee who shall serve as Chairman, and adequate representa-
tion of appropriate State, interstate, local and (when appro-
priate), international, interests in the designated air quality con-
trol region.
"(3) The Secretary shall, within available funds, provide such
staff for such Commission as may be necessary to enable it to
carry out its functions effectively, and shall pay the other expenses
of the Commission; and may also accept for the use by such
Commission, funds, property, or services contributed by the State
involved or political subdivisions thereof.
"(4) Each appointee from a State, other than an official or
employee thereof, or of any political subdivision thereof, shall,
while engaged in the work of the Commission, receive compensa-
tion at a rate fixed by the Secretary, but not in excess of $100
per diem, including traveltime, and while away from his home
or regular place of business, he may be allowed travel expenses,
including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law
(5 U.S.C. 3109) for persons in the Government service employed
intermittently.
"AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGIONS, CRITERIA, AND CONTROL
TECHNIQUES
"SEC. 107. (a) (1) The Secretary shall, as soon as practicable,
but not later than one year after the date of enactment of the
Air Quality Act of 1967, define for the purposes of this Act,
atmospheric areas of the Nation on the basis of those conditions,
including, but not limited to, climate, meteorology, and topog-
raphy, which affect the interchange and diffusion of pollutants
in the atmosphere.
" (2) For the purpose of establishing ambient air quality stand-
ards pursuant to section 108, and for administrative and other
purposes, the Secretary, after consultation with appropriate State
and local authorities shall, to the extent feasible, within 18 months
after the date of
[p. 490]
enactment of the Air Quality Act of 1967 designate air quality
control regions based on jurisdictional boundaries, urban-indus-
trial concentrations, and other factors including atmospheric
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 569
areas necessary to provide adequate implementation of air quality
standards. The Secretary may from time to time thereafter, as
he determines necessary to protect the public health and welfare
and after consultation with appropriate State and local author-
ities, revise the designation of such regions and designate addi-
tional air quality control regions. The Secretary shall immediately
notify the Governor or Governors of the affected State or States
of such designation.
"(b)(l) The Secretary shall, after consultation with appro-
priate advisory committees and Federal departments and agencies,
from time to time, but as soon as practicable, develop and issue
to the States such criteria of air quality as in his judgment may
be requisite for the protection of the public health and welfare:
Provided, That any criteria issued prior to enactment of this
section shall be reevaluated in accordance with the consultation
procedure and other provisions of this section and, if necessary,
modified and reissued. Such issuance shall be announced in the
Federal Register and copies shall be made available to the general
public.
"(2) Such criteria shall accurately reflect the latest scientific
knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identi-
fiable effects on health and welfare which may be expected from
the presence of an air pollution agent, or combination of agents
in the ambient air, in varying quantities.
"(3) Such criteria shall include those variable factors which
of themselves or in combination with other factors may alter the
effects on public health and welfare of any subject agent or com-
bination of agents, including, but not limited to, atmospheric con-
ditions, and the types of air pollution agent or agents which, when
present in the atmosphere, may interact with such subject agent
or agents, to produce an adverse effect on public health and wel-
fare.
"(c) The Secretary shall, after consultation with appropriate
advisory committees and Federal departments and agencies, issue
to the States and appropriate air pollution control agencies infor-
mation on those recommended pollution control techniques the
application of which is necessary to achieve levels of air quality
set forth in criteria issued pursuant to subsection (b), including
those criteria subject to the proviso in subsection (b) (1), which
information shall include technical data relating to the technology
and costs of emission control. Such recommendations shall include
such data as are available on the latest available technology and
economic feasibility of alternative methods of prevention and
-------
570 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
control of air contamination including cost-effectiveness analyses.
Such issuance shall be announced in the Federal Register and
copies shall be made available to the general public.
"(d) The Secretary shall, from time to time, revise and reissue
material issued pursuant to subsections (b) and (c) in accordance
with procedures established in such subsections.
"AIR QUALITY STANDARDS AND ABATEMENT OP AIR POLLUTION
"SEC. 108. (a) The pollution of the air in any State or States
which endangers the health or welfare of any persons, shall be
subject to abatement as provided in this section.
"(b) Consistent with the policy declaration of this title, mu-
nicipal, State, and interstate action to abate air pollution shall be
encouraged and shall not be displaced by Federal enforcement
action except as otherwise provided by or pursuant to a court
order under subsection (c), (h), or (k).
[p. 491]
"(c) (1) If, after receiving any air quality criteria and recom-
mended control techniques issued pursuant to section 107, the
Governor of a State, within ninety days of such receipt, files a
letter of intent that such State will within one hundred and eighty
days, and from time to time thereafter, adopt, after public hear-
ings, ambient air quality standards applicable to any designated
air quality control region or portions thereof within such State
and within one hundred and eighty days thereafter, and from
time to time as may be necessary, adopts a plan for the imple-
mentation, maintenance, and enforcement of such standards of
air quality adopted, and if such standards and plan are estab-
lished in accordance with the letter of intent and if the Secretary
determines that such State standards are consistent with the air
quality criteria and recommended control techniques issued pur-
suant to section 107; that the plan is consistent with the purposes
of the Act insofar as it assures achieving such standards of air
quality within a reasonable time; and that a means of enforce-
ment by State action, including authority comparable to that in
subsection (k) of this section, is provided, such State standards
and plan shall be the air quality standards applicable to such
State. If the Secretary determines that any revised State stand-
ards and plan are consistent with the purposes of this Act and
this subsection, such standards and plan shall be the air quality
standards applicable to such State.
"(2) If a State does not (A) file a letter of intent or (B)
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 571
establish air quality standards in accordance with paragraph (1)
of this subsection with respect to any air quality control region
or portion thereof and if the Secretary finds it necessary to achieve
the purpose of this Act, or the Governor of any State affect-
ed by air quality standards established pursuant to this subsection
petitions for a revision in such standards, the Secretary may
after reasonable notice and a conference of representatives of
appropriate Federal departments and agencies, interstate agen-
cies, States, municipalities, and industries involved, prepare reg-
ulations setting forth standards of air quality consistent with the
air quality criteria and recommended control, techniques issued
pursuant to section 107 to be applicable to such air quality con-
trol region or portions thereof. If, within six months from the
date the Secretary publishes such regulations, the State has not
adopted air quality standards found by the Secretary to be con-
sistent with the purposes of this Act, or a petition for public hear-
ing has not been filed under paragraph (3) of this subsection,
the Secretary shall promulgate such standards.
"(3) If at any time prior to thirty days after standards have
been promulgated under paragraph (2) of this subsection, the
Governor of any State affected by such standards petitions the
Secretary for a hearing, the Secretary shall call a public hearing
for the purpose of receiving testimony from State and local pollu-
tion control agencies and other interested parties affected by the
proposed standards, to be held in or near one or more of the
places where the air quality standards will take effect, before a
hearing board of five or more persons appointed by the Secretary.
Each State which would be affected by such standards shall be
given an opportunity to select a member of the hearing board.
Each Federal department, agency, or instrumentality having a
substantial interest in the subject matter as determined by the
Secretary shall be given an opportunity to select one member of
the hearing board and not less than a majority of the hearing
board shall be persons other than officers or employees of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The members of
the board who are not officers or employees of the United States,
while participating in the hearing conducted by such hearing
board or otherwise engaged in the work of such hearing board,
shall be entitled to receive compensation at a rate fixed by the
Secretary, but not exceeding $100 per diem,
[p. 492]
including traveltime, and while away from their homes or regular
-------
572 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
places of business they may be allowed travel expenses, including
per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by section 5703,
title 5, of the United State Code for persons in the Government
service employed intermittently. At least thirty days prior to the
date of such hearing notice of such hearing shall be published in
the Federal Register and given to parties notified of the confer-
ence required in paragraph (2) of this subsection. On the basis
of the evidence presented at such hearing, the hearing board shall
within ninety days unless the Secretary determines a longer
period is necessary, but in no event longer than one hundred and
eighty days, make findings as to whether the standards published
or promulgated by the Secretary should be approved or modified
and transmit its findings to the Secretary. If the hearing board
approves the standards as published or promulgated by the Sec-
retary, the standards shall take effect on receipt by the Secretary
of the hearing board's recommendations. If the hearing board
recommends modifications in the standards as published or prom-
ulgated by the Secretary, the Secretary shall promulgate revised
regulations setting forth standards of air quality in accordance
with the hearing board's recommendations which will become
effective immediately upon promulgation.
[p. 492]
"(4) Whenever, on the basis of surveys, studies and reports,
the Secretary finds that the ambient air quality of any air quality
control region or portion thereof is below the air quality standards
established under this subsection, and he finds that such lowered
air quality results from the failure of a State to take reasonable
action to enforce such standards, the Secretary shall notify the
affected State or States, persons contributing to the alleged viola-
tion, and other interested parties of the violation of such stand-
ards. If such failure does not cease within one hundred and
eighty days from the date of the Secretary's notification, the
Secretary—
"(i) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering
the health or welfare of persons in a State other than that
in which the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing
to such pollution) originate, may request the Attorney Gen-
eral to bring a suit on behalf of the United States in the
appropriate United States district court to secure abatement
of the pollution.
"(ii) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering
the health or welfare of persons only in the State in which
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 573
the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such
pollution) originate, at the request of the Governor of such
State, shall provide such technical and other assistance as
in his judgment is necessary to assist the State in judicial
proceedings to secure abatement of the pollution under State
or local law, or, at the request of the Governor of such State,
shall request the Attorney General to bring suit on behalf of
the United States in the appropriate United States district
court to secure abatement of the pollution.
In any suit brought under the provisions of this subsection the
court shall receive in evidence a transcript of the proceedings of
the hearing provided for in this subsection, together with the
recommendations of the hearing board and the recommendations
and standards promulgated by the Secretary, and such additional
evidence, including that relating to the alleged violation of the
standards, as it deems necessary to complete review of the stand-
ards and to determination of all other issues relating to the alleged
violation. The court, giving due consideration to the practicability
and to the technological and economic feasibility of complying
with such standards, shall have jurisdiction to enter such judg-
ment and orders enforcing such judgment as the public interest
and the equities of the case may require.
[p. 493]
"(5) In connection with any hearings under this section no
witness or any other person shall be required to divulge trade
secrets or secret processes.
"(6) Nothing in this subsection shall prevent the application
of this section to any case to which subsection (a) of this section
would be otherwise applicable.
"(d) (1) (A) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State,
a State air pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of
the Governor and the State air pollution control agency for the
State in which the municipality is situated) the governing body
of any municipality, the Secretary shall, if such request refers to
air pollution which is alleged to endanger the health or welfare
of persons in a State other than that in which the discharge or
discharges (causing or contributing to such pollution) originate,
give formal notification thereof to the air pollution control agency
of the municipality where such discharge or discharges originate,
to the air pollution control agency of the State in which such
municipality is located, and to the interstate air pollution control
agency, if any, in whose jurisdictional area such municipality is
-------
574 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
located, and shall call promptly a conference of such agency or
agencies and of the air pollution control agencies of the munici-
palities which may be adversely affected by such pollution, and
the air pollution control agency, if any, of each State, or for each
area, in which any such municipality is located.
" (B) Whenever requested by the Governor of any State, a State
air pollution control agency, or (with the concurrence of the
Governor and the State air pollution control agency for the State
in which the municipality is situated) the governing body of any
municipality, the Secretary shall, if such request refers to alleged
air pollution which is endangering the health or welfare of persons
only in the State in which the discharge or discharges (causing
or contributing to such pollution) originate and if a municipality
affected by such air pollution, or the municipality in which such
pollution originates, has either made or concurred in such request,
give formal notification thereof to the State air pollution control
agency, to the air pollution control agencies of the municipality
where such discharge or discharges originate, and of the munic-
ipality or municipalities alleged to be adversely affected thereby,
and to any interstate air pollution control agency, whose jurisdic-
tional area includes any such municipality and shall promptly call
a conference of such agency or agencies, unless in the judgment
of the Secretary, the effect of such pollution is not of such signifi-
cance as to warrant exercise of Federal jurisdiction under this
section.
"(C) The Secretary may, after consultation with State officials
of all affected States, also call such a conference whenever, on
the basis of reports, surveys, or studies, he has reason to believe
that any pollution referred to in subsection (a) is occurring and
is endangering the health and welfare of persons in a State other
than that in which the discharge or discharges originate. The
Secretary shall invite the cooperation of any municipal, State, or
interstate air pollution control agencies having jurisdiction in the
affected area on any surveys or studies forming the basis of con-
ference action.
"(D) Whenever the Secretary, upon receipt of reports, surveys,
or studies from any duly constituted international agency, has
reason to believe that any pollution referred to in subsection (a)
which endangers the health or welfare of persons in a foreign
country is occurring, or whenever the Secretary of State requests
him to do so with respect to such pollution which the Secretary
of State alleges is of such a nature, the Secretary of Health,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 575
Education, and Welfare shall give formal notification thereof to
the air pollution control
[p. 494]
agency of the municipality where such discharge or discharges
originate, to the air pollution control agency of the State in
which such municipality is located, and to the interstate air pollu-
tion control agency, if any, in the jurisdictional area of which
such municipality is located, and shall call promptly a conference
of such agency or agencies. The Secretary shall invite the foreign
country which may be adversely affected by the pollution to
attend and participate in the conference, and the representative
of such country shall, for the purpose of the conference and any
further proceeding resulting from such conference, have all the
rights of a State air pollution control agency. This subparagraph
shall apply only to a foreign country which the Secretary deter-
mines has given the United States essentially the same rights with
respect to the prevention or control of air pollution occurring in
that country as is given that country by this subparagraph.
"(2) The agencies called to attend such conference may bring
such persons as they desire to the conference. The Secretary shall
deliver to such agencies and make available to other interested
parties, at least thirty days prior to any such conference, a Fed-
eral report with respect to the matters before the conference,
including data and conclusions or findings (if any); and shall give
at least thirty days' prior notice of the conference date to any
such agency, and to the public by publication on at least three
different days in a newspaper or newspapers of general circula-
tion in the area. The chairman of the conference shall give inter-
ested parties an opportunity to present their views to the con-
ference with respect to such Federal report, conclusions or find-
ings (if any), and other pertinent information. The Secretary
shall provide that a transcript be maintained of the proceedings
of the conference and that a copy of such transcript be made
available on request of any participant in the conference at the
expense of such participant.
" (3) Following this conference, the Secretary shall prepare and
forward to all air pollution control agencies attending the con-
ference a summary of conference discussions including (A)
occurrence of air pollution subject to abatement under this Act;
(B) adequacy of measures taken toward abatement of the pollu-
tion; and (C) nature of delays, if any, being encountered in abat-
ing the pollution.
-------
576 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
" (e) If the Secretary believes, upon the conclusion of the con-
ference or thereafter, that effective progress toward abatement of
such pollution is not being made and that the health or welfare
of any persons is being endangered, he shall recommend to the
appropriate State, interstate, or municipal air pollution control
agency (or to all such agencies) that the necessary remedial
action be taken. The Secretary shall allow at least six months
from the date he makes such recommendations for the taking of
such recommended action.
"(f) (1) If, at the conclusion of the period so allowed, such
remedial action or other action which in the judgment of the
Secretary is reasonably calculated to secure abatement of such
pollution has not been taken, the Secretary shall call a public
hearing, to be held in or near one or more of the places where
the discharge or discharges causing or contributing to such pollu-
tion originated, before a hearing board of five or more persons
appointed by the Secretary. Each State in which any discharge
causing or contributing to such pollution originates and each
State claiming to be adversely affected by such pollution shall be
given an opportunity to select one member of such hearing board
and each Federal department, agency, or instrumentality having
a substantial interest in the subject matter as determined by the
Secretary shall be given an opportunity to select one member of
such hearing board, and one member shall be a representative of
the appropriate interstate air pollution agency if one exists, and
not less
[p. 495]
than a majority of such hearing board shall be persons other
than officers or employees of the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare. At least three weeks' prior notice of such
hearing shall be given to the State, interstate, and municipal air
pollution control agencies called to attend such hearing and to
not less than a majority of such hearing board shall be persons
other than officers or employees of the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare. At least three weeks' prior notice of
such hearing shall be given to the State, interstate, and municipal
air pollution control agencies called to attend such hearing and to
the alleged polluter or polluters. All interested parties shall be
given a reasonable opportunity to present evidence to such hearing
board.
"(2) On the basis of evidence presented at such hearing, the
hearing board shall make findings as to whether pollution referred
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 577
to in subsection (a) is occurring and whether effective progress
toward abatement thereof is being made. If the hearing board
finds such pollution is occurring and effective progress toward
abatement thereof is not being made it shall make recommenda-
tions to the Secretary concerning the measures, if any, which it
finds to be reasonable and suitable to secure abatement of such
pollution.
"(3) The Secretary shall send such findings and recommenda-
tions to the person or persons discharging any matter causing or
contributing to such pollution; to air pollution control agencies
of the State or States and of the municipality or municipalities
where such discharge or discharges originate; and to any inter-
state air pollution control agency whose jurisdictional area in-
cludes any such municipality, together with a notice specifying
a reasonable time (not less than six months) to secure abatement
of such pollution.
" (g) If action reasonably calculated to secure abatement of the
pollution within the time specified in the notice following the
public hearing is not taken, the Secretary—
"(1) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering
the health or welfare of persons (A) in a State other than
that in which the discharge or discharges (causing or con-
tributing to such pollution) originate, or (B) in a foreign
country which has participated in a conference called under
subparagraph (D) of subsection (d) of this section and in
all proceedings under this section resulting from such con-
ference, may request the Attorney General to bring a suit
on behalf of the United States in the appropriate United
States district court to secure abatement of the pollution.
"(2) in the case of pollution of air which is endangering
the health or welfare of persons only in the State in which
the discharge or discharges (causing or contributing to such
pollution) originate, at the request of the Governor of such
State, shall provide such technical and other assistance as
in his judgment is necessary to assist the State in judicial
proceedings to secure abatement of the pollution under State
or local law or, at the request of the Governor of such State,
shall request the Attorney General to bring suit on behalf
of the United States in the appropriate United States district
court to secure abatement of the pollution.
" (h) The court shall receive in evidence in any suit brought in
a United States court under subsection (g) of this section a tran-
script of the proceedings before the board and a copy of the
-------
578 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
board's recommendations and shall receive such further evidence
as the court in its discretion deems proper. The court, giving due
consideration to the practicability of complying with such stand-
ards as may be applicable and to the physical and economic feasi-
bility of securing abatement of any pollution proved, shall have
jurisdiction to enter such judgment, and orders enforcing such
judgment, as the public interest and the equities of the case may
require.
"(i) Members of any hearing board appointed pursuant to
subsection (f) who are not regular full-time officers or employees
of the
[p. 496]
United States shall, while participating in the hearing conducted
by such board or otherwise engaged on the work of such board,
be entitled to receive compensation at a rate fixed by the Secre-
tary, but not exceeding $100 per diem, including traveltime, and
while away from their homes or regular places of business they
may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of
subsistence, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 73b-2) for persons in
the Government service employed intermittently.
"(j)(l) In connection with any conference called under this
section, the Secretary is authorized to require any person whose
activities result in the emission of air pollutants causing or con-
tributing to air pollution to file with him, in such form as he may
prescribe, a report, based on existing data, furnishing to the
Secretary such information as may reasonably be required as to
the character, kind, and quantity of pollutants discharged and the
use of devices or other means to prevent or reduce the emission
of pollutants by the person filing such a report. After a conference
has been held with respect to any such pollution the Secretary
shall require such reports from the person whose activities result
in such pollution only to the extent recommended by such con-
ference. Such report shall be made under oath or otherwise, as
the Secretary may prescribe, and shall be filed with the Secretary
within such reasonable period as the Secretary may prescribe,
unless additional time be granted by the Secretary. No person
shall be required in such report to divulge trade secrets or secret
processes and all information reported shall be considered con-
fidential for the purposes of section 1905 of title 18 of the United
States Code.
"(2) If any person required to file any report under this sub-
section shall fail to do so within the time fixed by the Secretary
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 579
for filing the same, and such failure shall continue for thirty days
after notice of such default, such person shall forfeit to the
United States the sum of $100 for each and every day of the
continuance of such failure, which forfeiture shall be payable into
the Treasury of the United States, and shall be recoverable in a
civil suit in the name of the United States brought in the district
where such person has his principal office or in any district in
which he does business: Provided, That the Secretary may upon
application therefor remit or mitigate any forfeiture provided for
under this subsection and he shall have authority to determine
the facts upon all such applications.
" (3) It shall be the duty of the various United States attorneys,
under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States,
to prosecute for the recovery of such forfeitures.
"(k) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the
Secretary, upon receipt of evidence that a particular pollution
source or combination of sources (including moving sources) is
presenting an imminent and substantial endangerment to the
health of persons, and finding that appropriate State or local
authorities have not acted to abate such sources, may request
the Attorney General to bring suit on behalf of the United States
in the appropriate United States district court to immediately
enjoin any contributor to the alleged pollution to stop the emission
of contaminants causing such pollution or to take such other action
as may be necessary.
"STANDARDS TO ACHIEVE HIGHER LEVEL OF AIR QUALITY
"SEC. 109. Nothing in this title shall prevent a State, political
standards and plans to implement an air quality program which
standards and plans to implement an air quality programs which
will achieve a higher level of ambient air quality than approved
by the Secretary.
[p. 497]
"PRESIDENT'S AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD AND ADVISORY
COMMITTEES
"SEC. 110. (a) (1) There is hereby established in the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare an Air Quality Advisory
Board, composed of the Secretary or his designee, who shall be
Chairman, and fifteen members appointed by the President, none
of whom shall be Federal officers or employees. The appointed
-------
580 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
members, having due regard for the purposes of this Act, shall
be selected from among representatives of various State, inter-
state, and local governmental agencies, of public or private inter-
ests contributing to, affected by, or concerned with air pollution,
and of other public and private agencies, organizations, or groups
demonstrating an active interest in the field of air pollution pre-
vention and control, as well as other individuals who are expert
in this field.
" (2) Each member appointed by the President shall hold office
for a term of three years, except that (A) any member appointed
to fill a vacancy occurring prior to the expiration of the term for
which his predecessor was appointed shall be appointed for the
remainder of such term, and (B) the terms of office of the mem-
bers first taking office pursuant to this subsection shall expire as
follows: five at the end of one year after the date of appointment,
five at the end of two years after such date, and five at the end
of three years after such date, as designated by the President at
the time of appointment, and (C) the term of any member under
the preceding provisions shall be extended until the date on which
his successor's appointment is effective. None of the members
shall be eligible for reappointment within one year after the end
of his preceding term, unless such term was for less than three
years.
"(b) The Board shall advise and consult with the Secretary on
matters of policy relating to the activities and functions of the
Secretary under this Act and make such recommendations as it
deems necessary to the President.
"(c) Such clerical and technical assistance as may be necessary
to discharge the duties of the Board and such other advisory com-
mittees as hereinafter authorized shall be provided from the per-
sonnel of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
"(d) In order to obtain assistance in the development and
implementation of the purposes of this Act including air quality
criteria, recommended control techniques, standards, research and
development, and to encourage the continued efforts on the part
of industry to improve air quality and to develop economically
feasible methods for the control and abatement of air pollution,
the Secretary shall from time to time establish advisory com-
mittees. Committee members shall include, but not be limited to,
persons who are knowledgeable concerning air quality from the
standpoint of health, welfare, economics, or technology.
" (e) The members of the Board and other advisory committees
appointed pursuant to this Act who are not officers or employees
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 581
of the United States while attending conferences or meetings of
the Board or while otherwise serving at the request of the Secre-
tary, shall be entitled to receive compensation at a rate to be fixed
by the Secretary, but not exceeding $100 per diem, including
traveltime, and while away from their homes or regular places
of business they may be allowed travel expenses, including per
diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by section 5703 of title 5
of the United States Code for persons in the Government service
employed intermittently.
[p. 498]
"COOPERATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES TO CONTROL AIR POLLUTION
MX FROM FEDERAL FACILITIES
/ N
"Sfac. 111. (a) It is hereby declared to be the intent of Congress
that any Federal department or agency having jurisdiction over
any building, installation, or other property shall, to the extent
practicable and consistent with the interests of the United States
and within any available appropriations, cooperate with the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare and with any air
pollution control agency in preventing and controlling the pollu-
tion of the air in any area insofar as the discharge of any matter
from or by such building, installation, or other property may
cause or contribute to pollution of the air in such area.
"(b) In order to control air pollution which may endanger the
health or welfare of any persons, the Secretary may establish
classes of potential pollution sources for which any Federal depart-
ment or agency having jurisdiction over any building, installation,
or other property shall, before discharging any matter into the
air of the United States, obtain a permit from the Secretary for
such discharge, such permits to be issued for a specified period
of time to be determined by the Secretary and subject to revoca-
tion if the Secretary finds pollution is endangering the health
and welfare of any persons. In connection with the issuance of
such permits, there shall be submitted to the Secretary such plans,
specifications, and other information as he deems relevant thereto
and under such conditions as he may prescribe. The Secretary
shall report each January to the Congress the status of such
permits and compliance therewith.
-------
582 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"TITLE II—NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS ACT
"SHORT TITLE
"SEC. 201. This title may be cited as the 'National Emission
Standards Act'.
f
"ESTABLISHMENT OF STANDARDS
"Ssc. 202. (a) The Secretary shall by regulation, giving ap-
propriate consideration to technological feasibility and economic
costs, prescribe as soon as practicable standards, applicable to the
emission of any kind of substance, from any class or classes of
new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his
judgment cause or contribute to, or are likely to cause or to con-
tribute to, air pollution which endangers the health or welfare of
any persons, and such standards shall apply to such vehicles or
engines whether they are designed as complete systems or incor-
porate other devices to prevent or control such pollution.
"(b) Any regulations initially prescribed under this section,
and amendments thereto, with respect to any class of new motor
vehicles or new motor vehicle engines shall become effective on
the effective date specified in the order promulgating such regula-
tions which date shall be determined by the Secretary after con-
sideration of the period reasonably necessary for industry com-
pliance.
"PROHIBITED ACTS
"SEC. 203. (a) The following acts and the causing thereof are
prohibited—
"(1) in the case of a manufacturer of new motor vehicles
or new motor vehicle engines for distribution in commerce,
the manufacture for sale, the sale, or the offering for sale,
or the introduction or delivery for introduction into com-
merce, or the importation into the United States for sale or
resale, of any new motor
[p. 499]
vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, manufactured after the
effective date of regulations under this title which are appli-
cable to such vehicle or engine unless it is in conformity with
regulations prescribed under this title (except as provided in
subsection (b));
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 583
"(2) for any person to fail or refuse to permit access to
or copying of records or to fail to make reports or provide
information, required under section 207; or
"(3) for any person to remove or render inoperative any
device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle
or motor vehicle engine in compliance with regulations under
this title prior to its sale and delivery to the ultimate pur-
chaser.
"(b) (1) The Secretary may exempt any new motor vehicle or
new motor vehicle engine, or class thereof, from subsection (a),
upon such terms and conditions as he may find necessary to pro-
tect the public health or welfare, for the purpose of research in-
vestigations, studies, demonstrations, or training, or for reasons
of national security.
"(2) A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine offered
for importation by a manufacturer in violation of subsection (a)
shall be refused admission into the United States, but the Secre-
tary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare may, by joint regulation, provide for deferring final deter-
mination as to admission and authorizing the delivery of such a
motor vehicle or engine offered for import to the owner or con-
signee thereof upon such terms and conditions (including the
furnishing of a bond) as may appear to them appropriate to
insure that any such motor vehicle or engine will be brought into
conformity with the standards, requirements, and limitations ap-
plicable to it under this title. The Secretary of the Treasury
shall, if a motor vehicle or engine is finally refused admission
under this paragraph, cause disposition thereof in accordance with
the customs laws unless it is exported under regulations pre-
scribed by such Secretary, within ninety days of the date of notice
of such refusal or such additional time as may be permitted pur-
suant to such regulations, except that disposition in accordance
with the customs laws may not be made in such manner as may
result, directly or indirectly, in the sale, to the ultimate consumer,
of a new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine that fails to
comply with applicable standards of the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare under this title.
" (3) A new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine intended
solely for export, and so labeled or tagged on the outside of the
container and on the vehicle or engine itself, shall not be subject
to the provisions of subsection (a).
526-701 O - 73 - i
-------
584 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
"INJUNCTION PROCEEDINGS
"SEC. 204. (a) The district courts of the United States shall
have jurisdiction to restrain violations of paragraph (1), (2), or
(3) of section 203(a).
" (b) Actions to restrain such violations shall be brought by and
in the name of the United States. In any such action, subpenas
for witnesses who are required to attend a district court in any
district may run into any other district.
"PENALTIES
"SEC. 205. Any person who violates paragraph (1), (2), or
(3) of section 203 (a) shall be subject to a fine of not more than
$1,000. Such violation with respect to sections 203 (a) (1) and
203 (a) (3) shall constitute a separate offense with respect to each
new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine.
[p. 500]
"CERTIFICATION
"SEC. 206. (a) Upon application of the manufacturer, the Sec-
retary shall test, or require to be tested, in such manner as he
deems appropriate, any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle
engine submitted by such manufacturer to determine whether
such vehicle or engine conforms with the regulations prescribed
under section 202 of this title. If such vehicle or engine conforms
to such regulations the Secretary shall issue a certificate of con-
formity, upon such terms, and for such period not less than one
year, as he may prescribe.
"(b) Any new motor vehicle or any motor vehicle engine sold
by such manufacturer which is in all material respects substan-
tially the same construction as the test vehicle or engine for which
a certificate has been issued under subsection (a), shall for the
purposes of this Act be deemed to be in conformity with the
regulations issued under section 202 of this title.
"RECORDS AND REPORTS
"SEC. 207. (a) Every manufacturer shall establish and main-
tain such records, make such reports, and provide such informa-
tion as the Secretary may reasonably require to enable him to
determine whether such manufacturer has acted or is acting in
compliance with this title and regulations thereunder and shall,
upon request of an officer or employee duly designated by the
Secretary, permit such officer or employee at reasonable times to
have access to and copy such records.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 585
"(b) All information reported or otherwise obtained by the
Secretary or his representative pursuant to subsection (a), which
information contains or relates to a trade secret or other matter
referred to in section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code,
shall be considered confidential for the purpose of such section
1905, except that such information may be disclosed to other
officers or employees concerned with carrying out this Act or when
relevant in any proceeding under this Act. Nothing in this section
shall authorize the withholding of information by the Secretary
or any officer or employee under his control, from the duly au-
thorized committees of the Congress.
"STATE STANDARDS
"SEC. 208. (a) No State or any political subdivision thereof
shall adopt or attempt to enforce any standard relating to the
control of emissions from new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle
engines subject to this title. No State shall require certification,
inspection, or any other approval relating to the control of emis-
sions from any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine
as condition precedent to the initial retail sale, titling (if any),
or registration of such motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or
equipment.
"(b) The Secretary shall, after notice and opportunity for
public hearing, waive application of this section to any State
which has adopted standards (other than crankcase emission
standards) for the control of emissions from new motor vehicles
or new motor vehicle engines prior to March 30, 1966, unless he
finds that such State does not require standards more stringent
than applicable Federal standards to meet compelling and extraor-
dinary conditions or that such State standards and accompany-
ing enforcement procedures are not consistent with section 202 (a)
of this title.
" (c) Nothing in this title shall preclude or deny to any State or
political subdivision thereof the right otherwise to control, regu-
late, or restrict the use, operation, or movement of registered or
licensed motor vehicles.
[p. 501]
"FEDERAL ASSISTANCE IN DEVELOPING VEHICLE INSPECTION
PROGRAMS
"SEC. 209. The Secretary is authorized to make grants to appro-
priate State air pollution control agencies in an amount up to two-
-------
586 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
thirds of the cost of developing meaningful uniform motor vehicle
emission device inspection and emission testing programs except
that (1) no grant shall be made for any part of any State vehicle
inspection program which does not directly relate to the cost of
the air pollution control aspects of such a program; and (2) no
such grant shall be made unless the Secretary of Transportation
has certified to the Secretary that such program is consistent with
any highway safety program developed pursuant to section 402 of
title 23 of the United States Code.
"REGISTRATION OF FUEL ADDITIVES
"SEC. 210. (a) The Secretary may by regulation designate any
fuel or fuels (including fuels used for purposes other than motor
vehicles), and after such date or dates as may be prescribed by
him, no manufacturer or processor of any such fuel may deliver
any such fuel for introduction into interstate commerce or to an-
other person who, it can reasonably be expected, will deliver such
fuel for such introduction unless the manufacturer of such fuel
has provided the Secretary with the information required under
subsection (b) (1) of this section and unless any additive con-
tained in such fuel has been registered with the Secretary in
accordance with subsection (b) (2) of this section.
" (b) For the purposes of this section the Secretary shall require
(1) the manufacturer of such fuel to notify him as to the commer-
cial identifying name and manufacturer of any additive contained
in such fuel; the range of concentration of such additive or addi-
tives in the fuel; and the purpose in the use of such additive; and
(2) the manufacturer of any such additive to notify him as to the
chemical composition of such additive or additives as indicated by
compliance with clause (1) above, the recommended range of con-
centration of such additive, if any, the recommended purpose in
the use of such additive, and to the extent such information is
available or becomes available, the chemical structure of such addi-
tive or additives. Upon compliance with clauses (1) and (2), in-
cluding assurances that any change in the above information will
be provided to the Secretary, the Secretary shall register such fuel
additive.
"(c) All information reported or otherwise obtained by the Sec-
retary or his representative pursuant to subsection (b), which
information contains or relates to a trade secret or other matter
referred to in section 1905 of title 18 of the United States Code,
shall be considered confidential for the purpose of such section
1905, except that such information may be disclosed to other offi-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 587
cers or employees of the United States concerned with carrying
out this Act or when relevant in any proceeding under this title.
Nothing in this section shall authorize the withholding of informa-
tion by the Secretary or any officer or employee under his control,
from the duly authorized committees of the Congress.
"(d) Any person who violates subsection (a) shall forfeit and
pay to the United States a civil penalty of $1,000 for each and
every day of the continuance of such violation, which shall accrue
to the United States and be recovered in a civil suit in the name of
the United States, brought in the district where such person has
his principal office or in any district in which he does business.
The Secretary may, upon application therefor, remit or mitigate
any forfeiture provided for in this subsection, and he shall have
authority to determine the facts upon all such applications.
[p. 502]
"(e) It shall be the duty of the various United States attorneys,
under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States,
to prosecute for the recovery of such forfeitures.
"NATIONAL EMISSIONS STANDARDS STUDY
"SEC. 211. (a) The Secretary shall submit to the Congress, no
later than two years after the effective date of this section, a com-
prehensive report on the need for and effect of national emission
standards for stationary sources. Such report shall include: (A)
information regarding identifiable health and welfare effects from
single emission sources; (B) examples of specific plants, their loca-
tion, and the contaminant or contaminants which, due to the
amount or nature of emissions from such facilities, constitute a
danger to public health or welfare; (C) an up-to-date list of those
industries and the contaminant or contaminants which, in his
opinion, should be subject to such national standards; (D) the re-
lationship of such national emission standards to ambient air
quality, including a comparison of situations wherein several
plants emit the same contaminants in an air region with those in
which only one such plant exists; (E) an analysis of the cost of
applying such standards; and (F) such other information as may
be appropriate.
" (b) The Secretary shall conduct a full and complete investiga-
tion and study of the feasibility and practicability of controlling
emissions from jet and piston aircraft engines and of establishing
national emission standards with respect thereto, and report to
Congress the results of such study and investigation within one
-------
588 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
year from the date of enactment of the Air Quality Act of 1967,
together with his recommendations.
"DEFINITIONS FOR TITLE II
"SEC. 212. As used in this title—
"(1) The term 'manufacturer' as used in sections 203, 206, 207,
and 208 means any person engaged in the manufacturing or as-
sembling of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, or
importing such vehicles or engines for resale, or who acts for and
is under the control of any such person in connection with the dis-
tribution of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, but
shall not include any dealer with respect to new motor vehicles or
new motor vehicle engines received by him in commerce.
"(2) The term 'motor vehicle' means any self-propelled vehicle
designed for transporting persons or property on a street or high-
way.
"(3) The term 'new motor vehicle' means a motor vehicle the
equitable or legal title to which has never been transferred to an
ultimate purchaser; and the term 'new vehicle engine' means an
engine in a new motor vehicle or a motor vehicle engine the equi-
table or legal title to which has never been transferred to the ulti-
mate purchaser.
"(4) The term 'dealer' means any person who is engaged in the
sale or the distribution of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle
engines to the ultimate purchaser.
"(5) The term 'ultimate purchaser' means, with respect to any
new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine, the first person
who in good faith purchases such new motor vehicle or new engine
for purposes other than resale.
"(6) The term 'commerce' means (A) commerce between any
place in any State and any place outside thereof; and (B) com-
merce wholly within the District of Columbia.
[p. 503]
"TITLE III—GENERAL
"ADMINISTRATION
"SEC. 301. (a) The Secretary is authorized to prescribe such
regulations as are necessary to carry out his functions under this
Act. The Secretary may delegate to any officer or employee of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare such of his powers
and duties under this Act, except the making of regulations, as he
may deem necessary or expedient.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 589
"(b) Upon the request of an air pollution control agency, per-
sonnel of the Public Health Service may be detailed to such agency
for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act. The
provisions of section 214 (d) of the Public Health Service Act shall
be applicable with respect to any personnel so detailed to the same
extent as if such personnel had been detailed under section 214 (b)
of that Act.
"(c) Payments under grants made under this Act may be made
in installments, and in advance or by way of reimbursement, as
may be determined by the Secretary.
"DEFINITIONS
"SEC. 302. When used in this Act—
" (a) The term 'Secretary' means the Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare.
"(b) The term 'air pollution control agency' means any of the
following:
"(1) A single State agency designated by the Governor of
that State as the official State air pollution control agency for
purposes of this Act;
" (2) An agency established by two or more States and hav-
ing substantial powers or duties pertaining to the prevention
and control of air pollution;
"(3) A city, county, or other local government health au-
thority, or, in the case of any city, county, or other local gov-
ernment in which there is an agency other than the health
authority charged with responsibility for enforcing ordi-
nances or laws relating to the prevention and control of air
pollution, such other agency; or
"(4) An agency of two or more municipalities located in
the same State or in different States and having substantial
powers or duties pertaining to the prevention and control of
air pollution.
"(c) The term 'interstate air pollution control agency' means—
"(1) an air pollution control agency established by two or
more States, or
" (2) an air pollution control agency of two or more munici-
palities located in different States.
"(d) The term 'State' means a State, the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and
American Samoa.
" (e) The term 'person' includes an individual, corporation, part-
-------
590 LEGAL COMPILATION—Am
nership, association, State, municipality, and political subdivision
of a State.
"(f) The term 'municipality' means a city, town, borough,
county, parish, district, or other public body created by or pursu-
ant to State law.
[p. 504]
" (g) All language referring to adverse effects on welfare shall
include but not be limited to injury to agricultural crops and live-
stock, damage to and the deterioration of property, and hazards to
transportation.
"OTHER AUTHORITY NOT AFFECTED
"SEC. 303. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this sec-
tion, this Act shall not be construed as superseding or limiting the
authorities and responsibilities, under any other provision of law,
of the Secretary or any other Federal officer, department, or
agency.
"(b) No appropriation shall be authorized or made under sec-
tion 301, 311, or 314 of the Public Health Service Act for any
fiscal year after the fiscal year ending June 30, 1964, for any pur-
pose for which appropriations may be made under authority of
this Act.
"RECORDS AND AUDIT
"SEC. 304. (a) Each recipient of assistance under this Act shall
keep such records as the Secretary shall prescribe, including rec-
ords which fully disclose the amount and disposition by such recip-
ient of the proceeds of such assistance, the total cost of the project
or undertaking in connection with which such assistance is given
or used, and the amount of that portion of the cost of the project
or undertaking supplied by other sources, and such other records
as will facilitate an effective audit.
"(b) The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the
Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly
authorized representatives, shall have access for the purpose of
audit and examinations to any books, documents, papers, and rec-
ords of the recipients that are pertinent to the grants received
under this Act.
"COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC COST STUDIES
"SEC. 305. (a) In order to provide the basis for evaluating pro-
grams authorized by this Act and the development of new pro-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 591
grams and to furnish the Congress with the information necessary
for authorization of appropriations by fiscal years beginning after
June 30,1969, the Secretary, in cooperation with State, interstate,
and local air pollution control agencies, shall make a detailed esti-
mate of the cost of carrying out the provisions of this Act; a com-
prehensive study of the cost of program implementation by
affected units of government; and a comprehensive study of the
economic impact of air quality standards on the Nation's indus-
tries, communities, and other contributing sources of pollution,
including an analysis of the national requirements for and the
cost of controlling emissions to attain such standards of air qual-
ity as may be established pursuant to this Act or applicable State
law. The Secretary shall submit such detailed estimate and the
results of such comprehensive study of cost for the five-year period
beginning July 1, 1969, and the results of such other studies, to
the Congress not later than January 10, 1969, and shall submit a
reevaluation of such estimate and studies annually thereafter.
" (b) The Secretary shall also make a complete investigation and
study to determine (1) the need for additional trained State and
local personnel to carry out programs assisted pursuant to this Act
[p. 505]
and other programs for the same purpose as this Act; (2) means
of using existing Federal training programs to train such person-
nel; and (3) the need for additional trained personnel to develop,
operate and maintain those pollution control facilities designed
and installed to implement air quality standards. He shall report
the results of such investigation and study to the President and
the Congress not later than July 1, 1969.
"ADDITIONAL REPORTS TO CONGRESS
"SEC. 306. Not later than six months after the effective date of
this section and not later than January 10 of each calendar year
beginning after such date, the Secretary shall report to the Con-
gress on measures taken toward implementing the purpose and
intent of this Act including, but not limited to, (1) the progress
and problems associated with control of automotive exhaust emis-
sions and the research efforts related thereto; (2) the develop-
ment of air quality criteria and recommended emission control re-
quirements; (3) the status of enforcement actions taken pursuant
to this Act; (4) the status of State ambient air standards setting,
including such plans for implementation and enforcement as have
been developed; (5) the extent of development and expansion of
-------
592 LEGAL COMPILATION—AIR
air pollution monitoring systems; (6) progress and problems re-
lated to development of new and improved control techniques;
(7) the development of quantitative and qualitative instrumenta-
tion to monitor emisions and air quality; (8) standards set or
under consideration pursuant to title II of this Act; (9) the
status of State, interstate, and local pollution control programs
established pursuant to and assisted by this Act; and (10) the
reports and recommendations made by the President's Air Quality
Advisory Board.
"LABOR STANDARDS
"SEC. 307. The Secretary shall take such action as may be nec-
essary to insure that all laborers and mechanics employed by con-
tractors or subcontractors on projects assisted under this Act
shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing for the
same type of work on similar construction in the locality as deter-
mined by the Secretary of Labor, in accordance with the Act of
March 3, 1931, as amended, known as the Davis-Bacon Act (46
Stat. 1494; 40 U.S.C. 276a—276a-5). The Secretary of Labor shall
have, with respect to the labor standards specitied in this subsec-
tion, the authority and functions set forth in Reorganization Plan
Numbered 14 of 1950 (15 F.R. 3176; 64 Stat. 1267) and section 2
of the Act of June 13, 1934, as amended (48 Stat. 948; 40 U.S.C.
276c).
"SEPARABILITY
"SEC. 308. If any provision of this Act, or the application of
any provision of this Act to any person or circumstance, is held
invalid, the application of such provision to other persons or cir-
cumstances, and the remainder of this Act, shall not be affected
thereby.
"APPROPRIATIONS
"SEC. 309. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this Act, other than sections 103 (d) and 104, $74,000,-
000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968, $95,000,000 for the
fiscal year ending
[p. 506]
June 30, 1969, and $134,300,000 for the fiscal year ending June
30, 1970.
"SHORT TITLE
"SEC. 310. This Act may be cited as the 'Clean Air Act'."
Approved November 21, 1967.
[p. 507]
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1973 O - 526-701
-------
-------
t,-
-------
-------
------- |