EPA-600/5 73 012c
February 1974
Socioeconomic Environmental Studies Series
Studies in Environment -
Vol. Ill -
Pollution and the Municipality
\
UJ
CD
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and appli-
cation of environmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum inter-
face in related fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
series. This series includes research on environmental management, compre-
hensive planning and forecasting and analysis methodologies. Included are
tools for determining varying impacts of alternative policies, analyses of
environmental planning techniques at the regional, state and local levels,
and approaches to measuring environmental quality perceptions. Such topics
as urban form, industrial mix, growth policies, control and organizational
structure are discussed in terms of optimal environmental performance.
These interdisciplinary studies and systems analyses are presented in forms
varying from quantitative relational analyses to management and policy-
oriented reports.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and Development,
EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
EPA-600/5-73-012C
February 1974
STUDIES IN ENVIRONMENT
VOLUME III
POLLUTION AND THE MUNICIPALITY
By
Pamela C. Cooper
Samuel J. Kursh
Jeanie Rae Wakeland
Margo Van Winkle
, Mary A. Zoller
Grant No. 801473
Program Element No. 1HA098
Project Officers
Samuel Ratick
John Gerba
Environmental Studies Division
Washington Environmental Research Center
Washington, D.C. 20460
Prepared for
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
For sole by the Superintendent ol Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
-------
ABSTRACT
Recent studies have focused attention on the fact that residents of
inner-city neighborhoods are subject to greater amounts of pollutants
than are other neighborhoods of large cities. In this study, Pollution
and the Municipality, the premise is set forth and investigated at the
metropolitan scale, seeking to discover differences of impact between
the center city and its suburbs.
The report hypothesizes differentials of a generalized metropolitan
area, by pollutant types, by interpreting diverse information sources.
The findings were looked at in the light of standards imposed by federal
and state regulation, first uniformly enforced, then implications for
variable enforcement.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ii
List of Tables iv
Acknowledgments vi
Sections
I Introduction 1
II Air Pollution 5
III Pesticide Pollution 23
IV Water Pollution 38
V Solid Waste 60
VI Noise 69
VII Radiation and Climate Changes 84
VIII Federal Pollution Controls: Ramifications of 92
Uniform Enforcement
111
-------
TABLES
Page
1 Air Pollution Sources 8
2 Carbon Monoxide Levels of 28 Selected Cities 10
3 Distribution of Subjects According to the 12
Concentration of Lead in Blood—Philadelphia
4 The Designated Ambient Air Primary and Secondary 14
Standards
5 Pests Considered Sufficiently Annoying to 24
Require Chemical Treatment
6 Usage Patterns in the Home 24
7 Source of Pesticide Purchases 24
8 Hollingshead Two Factor Index 26
9 Income Classes 26
10 Population Density 26
11 Summary of Pesticide Residue Concentrations 27
(Parts Per Billion) Between Residents of
Lanai and Honolulu
12 Number of Persons by Pesticide Usage 29
Characteristics and Respiratory Impairment
Class
13 Number of Person (Non-Smokers) by Pesticide 30
Usage Characteristics and Respiratory
Impairment Class
14 Respiratory Symptoms and Home Insecticide Use 30
15 Comparison of the Prevalence of Selected Chronic 32
Diseases Among Families That Were Users or
Non-Users of Pesticides
16 Bacterial Survey of Upper Bay—New York Harbor 39
17 Outfall Pipes in Newark and Lower Passaic Area 43
(Percent of Total in Newark)
xv
-------
TABLES (cont'd.)
No. Page
18 Location of Four Criticla Pollution Industries 43
(Newark and Vacinity)
19 Percent of Each Type of Sewer, Within Population 45
Groups
20 Wilmington Trash Collection Routes 62
21 Sources of Differential Pollution 72
22 Maximum Observed Power Density Levels in Four 85
Frequency Bands
23 Demographic Characteristics of Selected Census 88
Tracts in St. Louis, July 1966.
-------
ACKNCWLEDGEHyENTS
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
for Environmental Protection Agency:
Samuel Ratick, Physical Scientist, ESD, Fellows Counselor
John Gerba, Chief, Special Projects, ESD, Report Production
for Homer Hoyt Institute:
Maury Seldin, President
for National Bureau of Standards:
Lynn G. Llewellyn, Research Psychologist, TAD
HOMER HOYT INSTITUTE
John Kbkus, Jr., Deputy Director
John Hairrnaker, Research Director
Ira Bechoefer, Sr. Research & Administrative Assistant
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
Marilyn Westfall, Operations Research Analyst, TAD
Gail Hare, Research Psychologist, TAD
Donald Corrigan, Legislative Research Analyst, TAD
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Stanley M. Greenfield, Assistant Administrator for Research and
Development
Leland Attaway, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Research
Peter House, Director, Environmental Studies Division
Robert Livingston, Research Analyst, ESD
Alan Neuschatz, Chief, Environmental Management Research Branch,
ESD
Philip D. Patterson, Assistant to the Director, ESD
Albert Pines, Operations Research Analyst, ESD
Martin Redding, Chief, Comprehensive Environmental Planning Branch,
ESD
VI
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this research is threefold. First,
current levels of environmental differentials existing
between inner city and suburban locales will be reviewed
with emphasis upon the sources and nature of center city
environmental pollution as they are linked to the polluters.
Secondly, the effects of environmental pollution on human
health are discussed. Finally, the ramifications of uni-
formly enforced Federal environmental standards to center
city locales and constituent populations are analyzed.
The methodology applied to the questions of uniform
application of Federal controls to the center city involves
a review of current research in the field of environmental
pollution. This is done through a presentation of case
studies and survey data.
In order to analyze the differences between suburban
and center city environmental quality, the characteristics
of each area must be established and the sources of the
differences discovered. The potential development of uni-
formly enforced Federal controls can only be accomplished
after key concepts are understood in an operationally
significant manner.
I.A Center City and Suburban Differentials
For this report, a differentiation is made between the
center city locale and the suburban locale. The metropoli-
tan community is subdivided into the population residing
"inside the central city or cities" and the population
residing "outside the central city or cities."-'- It is the
pppulation inside the central city or cities which defines
the center city locale. The outside area is commonly
referred to as the suburban ring.2 This suburban ring
definition defines the suburban locale in this report. The
center city is also distinguished from the suburb by its
greater development and more dense population.
It is also necessary to distinguish between the natural
and the built environments of the center city. The natural
environment, as defined here, constitutes those physical
characteristics existing in natural forms. The components
of the natural environment are ambient air, water resources,
solar energy, soil, vegetation and terrestrial and aquatic
animal life. Noise, solid wastes, radiation and toxic
chemical substances are considered as additions to the
natural environment produced by natural and man-made pro-
cesses. The built environment as defined here comprises
the buildings, roads, transport systems, pipe lines, power
lines and other man-made structures in the center city
locale.
-------
I.B Demographic Data
The demographic composition of the center city differs
from that of the suburbs. The center city is characterized
by a higher median age, lower median income, higher percent
poor and a higher percent non-white. The median age inside
the center city is 30.1 years compared to 26.9 years in the
suburban locale. People over 65 compose 11.1 percent of the
central city population as compared to 7.5 percent of the
suburban population. Race-specific data indicate a similar
age distribution for those aged 65 and over.
The median income for all families residing in the
center city was $7,420 compared to a median income of $8,350
for suburban families.3 Besides the lower median income
earned by center city families, a larger proportion of these
residents earn incomes classified as "below poverty level."
Census data collected in 1970 show that 13.4 percent of the
population within -the center city are below the poverty
level.4
Race-specific data indicate a substantial difference in
the percent of the black population residing within the
center city as compared to the suburban ring. The propor-
tion of blacks inside the central city locales was greater
for metropolitan areas of 1,000,000 or more than smaller
metropolitan areas in 1970.
These statistics present the current demographic distri-
bution of the metropolitan population within center city and
suburban locales. Historically, a selective process of out-
migration has produced an ethnically homogeneous center city.
It is hypothesized that this selective shifting of the popu-
lation to the suburbs will result in black majorities in
most important cities in the U.S. in this decade.5 Campbell
and Shalala note that the phenomenon of "white middle-class
exodus" to the suburbs started in the 194O's.6
To sum, the areas of investigation are the center city
and the suburban locale, defined by the Census Bureau as
that area inside the central city or outside the central
city, respectively. Structurally, the center city is more
densely populated and more developed. Distributional data
show a lower median income, higher median age, greater pro-
portion age 65 and over and a higher percent black popula-
tion. It is this risk population, to which the research
addresses itself in the following sections of this report.
I.e. Overview of Research
The problem of environmental differentials is essen-
tially a question of specifying what the levels of pollu-
tion are and determining who is producing these differen-
tial levels. The following findings suggest that the center
city locale is different from the suburban locale because of
a greater magnitude of pollutants. As previously stated,
each pollutant category is comprehensively covered in
-------
relation to differentials in sources of pollution, health
effects and pollution controls. Each category has causal
significance when approaching the sources and nature of
differential pollution. The causes of varying levels of
pollution are a function of the peculiar internal structure
of the center city. The following data are presented to
support the hypothesis that the internal structure of the
center city is associated with its differentially polluted
environment.
The first category to be covered is that of air pollu-
tion and its affect upon the center city.
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. U.S., Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Number
of Inhabitants, United States Summary (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office).The "central city" is defined
as any city within a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area
with a population of 50,000 or more.
2. Ibid., pp. XII-XIII.
3. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
Current Population Reports, Special Studies, "Social and
Economic Characteristics of the Population in Metropolitan
and Metropolitan Areas," Series P-23 (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1970).
4. Ibid. Poverty level is an index figure. The income
factor for a nonfarm family of four was $3,743 in 1969. The
remaining factors defining the index are family size, sex
and age of the family head, and farm-nonfarm residence.
5. Myles Boylan, Economics of the Community (New Jersey:
Scott Foresman and Co., 1961), p. 177.
6. Alan K. Campbell and Donna E. Shalala, "Problems, Un-
solved, Solutions, Untried: One Urban Crisis," in The
States and the Urban Crisis, ed. by Alan K. Campbell (Engle-
wood Cliffs, New Jersey:Prentice-Hall, 1970).
-------
SECTION II
AIR POLLUTION
II.A Air Pollution (Center City vs. Suburban)
Air pollution has been an integral part of the center
city so long that many of its residents hardly notice its
presence. It has become a feature of the landscape, like
stop lights. For the poor who reside in the center city,
air pollution is another indignity that must be endured.
It seems relatively minor, however, when compared to unem-
ployment, crime, and discrimination.
This section will define air pollution, describe how
it is measured, and compare center city and suburban differ-
ential levels of air pollution. This information will first
show that air pollution is worse in the center of cities
than in the suburbs, secondly it will examine the health
effects of air pollutants in center city and suburban areas
thirdly, the sources of air pollution, and finally, air
pollution controls.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated
six elements of the atmosphere as air pollutants. 1 Also,
there are proposed Federal standards for airborne lead.
These will be discussed in this report as a unique problem
of the center city.
Air pollution is measured by monitoring both ambient
air quality and point source emissions. Ambient air is
chemically monitored in small stations placed around a city.
Emission data are gathered from point sources, e.g. factories
and mobile sources, automobiles, trucks, etc. Levels are
measured directly by placing monitoring devices on the source
or by estimating the amount of emissions from the amount and
type of materials consumed, and the completeness of the
combustion.
II.B Ambient Air Data
Daily and hourly ambient air data, averaged into monthly
and seasonal means form the most accurate picture for analy-
sis. When plotted on a regional map, ambient data can be
used to compare center city and suburban air quality. The
areas of highest population and industrial density, charac-
teristics of the center city, have the greatest levels of
SO2 and particulates.
Similarly, analysis of mobile source data suggests a
relationship between land use (residential and industrial
density) traffic density, and levels of pollutants (carbon
monoxide and oxidants).
The findings with respect to lead also appear to support
the hypothesis of pollution differentials. Data indicate
that annual levels of lead were higher in the. more urbanized
industrial and commercial areas than in residential and
rural areas.
-------
Comprehensive ambient air quality data from several
stations within and outside the central city are rare for
most cities. Data are needed over several years to provide
a comprehensive picture, and operation of such monitoring
locations is expensive. For cities without comprehensive
ambient air monitoring systems, a diffusion model is a use-
ful method of analysis.
Diffusion models most graphically demonstrate the
center city-suburban differentials in air pollution. Dif-
fusion models (see Appendix A) for sulfur oxides, particu-
lates, and carbon monoxide in five American cities show
consistently that the highest levels of air pollution are
in the center of the city.
II.C Air Pollution Sources
There are thousands of sources of air pollution in
every city. Each home heater, car, and factory contributes
to air pollution. The great density of these possible
polluters in the city results in the generation of over 60
percent of the total air pollution on only 2 percent of the
land area of this country.2 Sixty-seven percent of the .
carbon monoxide, 56 percent of the sulfur oxides, 54 percent
of the nitrogen oxides, 63 percent of the hydrocarbons, and
53 percent of the particulates emitted are within center
city areas.3
The primary source of air emissions is incomplete com-
bustion of fossil fuels, e.g. petroleum and coal products.
These fuels provide the energy that runs the cars and
industries, and heats offices and homes. (Other sources
include leakage and process losses.) Sources can also be
categorized by the proprietors of the sources, including
industrial, commercial, municipal, mobile, and residential.
II.C.I Industrial Sources
Industrial sources can be broken down into two types :4
heavy manufacturing process losses and large boiler emis-
sions. Heavy manufacturing includes steel, cement, and
paper pulp production. Nationally, they contribute a wide
variety of emissions including 22 percent of the sulfur
oxides, 26.5 percent of the particulates, 23.8 percent of
the nitrogen oxides, 9.6 percent of the carbon monoxides,
and 1.2 percent of the airborne lead. Industrial boilers
emit two pollutants in significant quantities: 17 percent
of the sulfur oxides and 11 percent of the particulates.
Commercial and institutional sources include retail
establishments, public buildings, office buildings, and some
light industries. Their pollutants originate primarily from
space heating plants, which emit 3.6 percent of the sulfur
oxides nationwide. The use of organic solvents by dry
cleaning establishments results in the emission of 9.7
percent of the total hydrocarbons in the air.
-------
II.C.2 Municipal Sources
Municipal sources include utilities and solid waste
combustion. Power plants are one of the most significant
sources, emitting 49 percent of the sulfur oxides, 20 per-
cent of the particulates, and 23 percent of the nitrogen
oxides. Incineration and open burning of trash is responsi-
ble for 2.5 percent of the nitrogen oxides, 7.8 percent of
the carbon monoxide, 5 percent of the hydrocarbons and 3
percent of the particulates.
Mobile sources can be defined as anything that moves
and uses a petroleum or coal based fuel as a power source.
This includes cars, buses, airplanes, trucks, trains, boats
and ships, and off-road vehicles. Their contribution is
large, emitting 64 percent of the carbon monoxide, 51 per-
cent of the hydrocarbons, 39 percent of the nitrogen oxides,
4 percent of the particulates, and 2.5 percent of the sulfur
oxides. Photochemical oxidants are produced almost exclu-
sively from the reaction of gasoline combustion emissions
with N02 and sunlight.5 The automobile, with its heavy use
of leaded gasoline, is the source of 95 percent of the 'air-
borne lead.6
Residential heating units also add pollutants to the
air. They emit approximately 5 percent of the sulfur oxides
and 1 percent of the particulates. Table 1 summarizes air
pollutants by their respective sources.
The percentages cited represent national distributions.
However, pollutants are not evenly distributed over the
country. Definite geographical tendencies are exhibited for
some pollutants. Sulfur oxides have the most pronounced
geographical bias, with 50 percent of this pollutant found
in seven northeastern states: New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Michigan, Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois. These concentra-
tions are a result of the use of coal and residual fuel oil
as the major source of heat and energy. Concentrations in
Texas and Arizona are also high but these are due to
smeltering plants rather than use of high sulfur fuels.7
Although particulates come from a great variety of
sources, they are found in the heaviest quantities in coal
burning areas. Such areas include older cities which have
space heating units, and older coal burning plants for
heavy industry.8
In contrast, mobile emissions follow the pattern of
urbanization. Carbon monoxide is the best illustrator of
this pattern. Carbon monoxide (CO) concentration has
a linear relationship with population density.
A densely populated, older center city in most cases has a
greater number of automobiles per square mile than other
locales. The center city as a transport nexus has been dis-
cussed by Duncan.9 It has been estimated that Washington,
D.C. maintains 4,000 registered automobiles per square mile.l°
Western and newer cities, which have grown since the
introduction of the automobile, have the largest per capita
-------
TABLE 1
AIR POLLUTION SOURCES
Sourde
Industry
Commercial
Municipal
Mobile
oo Residential
% of
National
sox
39
3.6
49
2.5
5
% of
National
Particulates
43.5
_ *
23
4
1
% of
National
CO
9.6
-
7.8
64
_
% of
National
HC
N/A
9.7
5
51
_
% of
National
03
-
-
-
99
_
% of
National
Pb
1.2
-
-
95
_
% of
National
NOX
23.8
-
25.5
39
_
Minus sign (-) indicates negligible amounts.
-------
emissions. In a sample of 28 cities in the nation (see
Table 2) , three of 10 cities with the highest CO emis-
sions per capita per year were in the far west, three were
in Texas, and two in the Midwest (Minneapolis-St. Paul and
Kansas City). Lead, being roughly proportional to automo-
bile emissions, also shows a Western bias. Of 27 cities
with lead levels exceeding 2.0 ug/m3, 15 are west of the
Mississippi River, including four of the five cities with
the highest levels.11 Oxidant levels are higher in Western
cities also. Of twelve cities measured for oxidant levels,
five of seven Western cities had levels above .05 ppm on at
least 70 percent of the days measured. None of the Eastern
cities reached that level more than 63 percent of the days
measured.1^
The effect on the center city resident of these varia-
tions differs depending on the city. Those living in the
old northeastern cities have the most serious potential
effect. They live in older housing units with coal burning
furnaces, the density of mobile emissions per square mile
are higher, and they are exposed to generally higher levels
of sulfur oxide producing industries and power plants than
other areas of the country.
In contrast, people in cities such as Los Angeles
receive less pollution per square mile because of the lower
density. Secondly, they are exposed to lower levels of
sulfur oxides because natural gas and low sulfur petroleum
fuels are used. However, the Western cities with a high
dependence on cars for transportation have the highest
levels of carbon monoxide, oxidant, and ambient lead.
Each city has a unique combination of sources and thus
a unique air pollution problem, but regional differences
from fuel uses and development patterns are evident. These
regional differences must be taken into account in preparing
strategies to enforce uniform ambient air standards.
II.D Health Effects
The previous data suggest that air quality is worse in
the center city than in the suburbs. But air quality should
be understood in terms of its effect on the city resident.
The most important effect is real and potential health
damage to inner city residents living in the area of highest
air pollution concentration. Unfortunately, few good studies
have been done relating air pollution severity with illness
in the center city.
Several studies indicate that air pollution is a factor
in increased respiratory illness. Acute exposures to high
levels of pollutants caused rapid increases in respiratory
illnesses in Donora, Pennsylvania in 1948.13 During that
attack, levels of sulfur dioxide reached approximately 1,140
ug/m3.14 Forty-three percent of the population reported
symptoms of respiratory distress. In fall 1966, the East
Coast of the United States was subjected to heavy smog as
-------
TABLE "2
CARBON MONOXIDE LEVELS OF 28 SELECTED CITIES
Carbon Monoxide (Tons/capita per year)
Over 0.6
0.6 - 0.5
0.5 - 0.4
0.4 - 0.3
Los Angeles
St. Louis
Kansas City
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Houston
Denver
San Francisco
Dallas
San Antonio
Philadelphia
Washington
Detroit
Cleveland
Seattle
Dayton
Louisville
Steubenville
Pittsburgh
Chicago
Providence
Buffalo
Birmingham
Milwaukee
Indianapolis
Boston
Cincinnati
Hartford
New York
Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
"Sources and Pollutant Emission Patterns," p. 21.
-------
levels of sulfur dioxides rose to over 1,300 ug/m3- During
this intense pollution period the New York City death rate
increased by twenty-four per day.15
Studies in Chattanooga, Tennessee16 and New York City17
show an increase among adults in bronchitis, coughs, and
shortness of breath in areas with high levels of sulfur
oxides, particulates, and nitrogen oxides. In the New York
study, the percentage of women with chronic bronchitis in
low pollution areas was 4.7 percent as compared with 11.6
percent of the women in high pollution areas. Only 11.5
percent of men in low pollution areas had bronchitis as com-
pared to 18.4 percent of men in high pollution areas. In
all cases pollution variables were prime explanatory factors.
Urban children also suffer from air pollution. A study
done on Cincinnati school children18 found that children in
polluted areas performed 17.4 percent below those in unpol-
luted areas on ventilatory function tests.
Additional studies have measured increases in mortality
rates as a function of high levels of pollutants.1^ In
Chicago daily respiratory mortality increased as levels of
SO2 increased and socioeconomic level decreased.20 The
death rate for respiratory disease per 10,000 ranged from
4.3 in low SC>2, high socioeconomic areas to 12.5 in areas
of high SC>2, low socioeconomic levels.
In Buffalo researchers found an association between
levels of suspended particulates and deaths from cirrhosis
of the liver (results were adjusted for alcohol dependency).21
Deaths for white men over fifty ranged from 26 per 100,000
in low particulate, high economic status areas to 359 per
100,000 for white men over fifty in high particulate, low
economic status areas. White women over fifty had a death
rate of 11 per 100,000 in low particulate, high economic
status areas to 69 per 100,000 in high particulate, low
economic status areas.
Airborne lead contributes to high lead concentrations
in the blood when combined with other lead sources such as
food or water. Lead levels exceeding 80 mg per 100 grams of
whole blood are toxic and can lead to severe anemia, brain
and nervous system damage by inhibiting production of red
blood cells. For center city children this is especially
hazardous, as they are also deficient in iron (another
necessary element for red blood cells) and are exposed to
greater levels of oxygen inhibiting carbon monoxide. This
combination of reactions can lead to anemia.22
A study of lead levels in children in low income neigh-
borhoods of 27 cities23 indicated that 9.1 percent of the
children had blood levels of lead exceeding 40 mg per 100
grams of whole blood. Eighty percent of lead poisoning
cases can be traced to lead paint consumption.2^
Blood lead levels for adults differ between those
living in the center city and those in the suburbs.25 A
study in Philadelphia compared blood lead levels of people
living and working in the center city (downtown), those
11
-------
living and working in the suburbs, those living in the
suburbs and commuting to the city, and policemen. Police-
men, who are exposed to lead filled automobile exhaust more
frequently than others in the sample, had the highest levels
of lead in their blood. Downtown males had the next highest
level of lead. Suburban men and women each had .013 mg, the
lowest levels of blood lead. Actual lead concentrations are
shown in Table 3.
TABLE 3
DISTRIBUTION OF SUBJECTS ACCORDING TO THE
CONCENTRATION OF LEAD IN BLOOD—PHILADELPHIA
Suburban
Commuter
Downtown
Lead in
blood
mg/lOOg Male Female Male Female Male Female Police
0 -0.009
0.010-0.019
0.020-0.029
0.030-0.039
0.040-0.049
Totals
Mean 0.
Std. Dev. 0.
Source :
6
14
3
23'
013
005
U.S.
14
39
2
3
58
0.013
0.007
Depar
5
17
16
4
1
43
0.019
0,009
tment of
1
5
1
7
0.015 0
0.004 0
Health,
2
12
37
12
3-
66
.024
.008
4
24
9
3
40
0.018
0.007
Education ,
0
17
70
22
4
113
0.026
0.006
and
Welfare, Public Health Service, Division
of Air Pollution, Survey of Lead in the
Atmosphere of Three Urban Communities, by
the Working Group on Lead Contamination,
Public Health Service, Publication Number
999-AP-12 (Cincinnati, Ohio: Government
Printing Office, 1965), figure 3, p. 76.
There has been little research on the psychological
effects of air pollution with the exception of a few studies
reporting indirect evidence of subtle behavioral change.
For example, on days of high oxidant levels, more headaches
are reported and decreased work productivity is often the
result.26 Carbon monoxide can cause psychbphysical changes
when blood levels of carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) reach 6.6 per-
cent, a level not uncommon in driving or in many work situa-
tions.27 At this level, vigilance may be impaired. A
driver may not notice a traffic light or another car beside
him, and his responses to stimuli are slower.28 The implica-
tions for driving safety are obvious.
There are no studies on the effect of auto emissions on
the pedestrian, but since pedestrians are exposed to similar
12
-------
or greater levels of pollutants, it is not unreasonable to
expect reduced vigilance on their part also.
II.E The Application of Standards
The mandate of environmental control in the United
States metropolitan areas should effectively halt the
deterioration of the natural resources. The Federal
authority designated to enforce the directive is the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.29 This agency has responsibility
for the six natural environmental categories defined pre-
viously. Briefly, these are: air, water, solid wastes,
pesticides, noise and radiation (including solar energy).
The technique through which this agency enforces the direc-
tive of environmental control'is through application of
standards. These standards are then applied uniformly to
geographic regions of the United States.
Air pollution legislation has been in existence since
1963. Other legislation passed in 1965, 1967, and 1970 have
been added to form the present Clean Air Act. Each law
tried a somewhat different approach to end air pollution.
EPA can use national ambient air quality standards imple-
mented on a statewide level, air quality regions, and abate-
ment conferences to cqmbat the problem of polluted air.30
The most recent and currently most emphasized approach
is ambient air standards with state implementation plans.
EPA has set primary standards and secondary standards for
six pollutants: sulfur oxides, particulates, hydrocarbons,
carbon monoxide, photochemical oxidants, and oxides of
nitrogen. Primary standards are the maximum levels at which
there are no health effects. Secondary standards are the
maximum levels at which there are no "known or anticipated
adverse effects. "33- A list of the primary and secondary
standards is presented in Table 4.
The state pollution control agencies are responsible
for reaching and/or maintaining these standards with a
variety of methods. Their choices include emission stand-
ards, transportation controls, and land use controls.
States- had to submit plans to EPA in 1971 to spell out how
they were to accomplish these goals by 1975. If these plans
were not satisfactory to EPA, they were sent to the state
agencies for revision. Should a state plan still be unsatis-
factory, EPA will draw one up for the state. It is still
the state's duty to enforce it. If necessary, in the view
of the Administrator of EPA, the length of time needed to
implement the state plan can be extended from three to five
years.
An earlier (1967) section of the law set up air quality
regions. These are political jurisdictions based on legal,
meteorological, social, and topographical information as
related to air pollution. They can be either interstate or
intrastate. There is an implementation plan for each air
quality region in the United States.
13
-------
TABLE 4
THE DESIGNATED AMBIENT AIR PRIMARY AND SECONDARY STANDARDS
Pollutant
Primary Standard
Secondary Standard
Sulfur oxide
80 ug/m3
annual arithmetic mean
365 ug/m3
24 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more than once a
60 ug/m3
annual arithmetic mean
260 ug/m3
24 hour maximum not to be exceeded
more than once a year
Particulates
75 ug/m3
annual geometric mean 260 ug/m3
24 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more than once a
year
60 ug/m3
annual geometric mean 150 ug/m3
24 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more than once a
year
Oxidants
125 ug/m3
1 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more -than once a
year
125 ug/m3
1 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more than once a
year
Carbon monoxide
10 mg/m3
8 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded
15 mg/m3
1 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more than once a
year
10 mg/m3
8 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded
15 mg/m3
1 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more than once a
year
-------
TABLE 4 Continued
Pollutant
Primary Standard
Secondary Standard
Hydrocarbons
125 ug/m3
3 hour maximum concentration (6
to 9 a.m.) not to be exceeded
more than once a year
125 ug/m3
3 hour maximum concentration (6
to 9 a.m.) not to be exceeded
more, than once a year
Nitrogen dioxide
100 ug/m3
annual arithmetic mean 250 ug/m3
24 hour maximum concentration not
to be exce'eded more than once a
year
100 ug/m3
annual arithmetic mean 250 ug/m3
24 hour maximum concentration not
to be exceeded more than once a
year
Source: Environmental Protection Agency, "Environmental Protection Agency;
National Primary and Secondary Air Quality Standards." Federal
Register, XXXVI, No. 21 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing
Office, 1971), 1502-1504.
-------
An abatement conference is one form of control for
specific pollution problems. These conferences must be
requested by the governor of the state or states involved,
the state or interstate air pollution agency, or the munici-
pal authorities in the area with the consent of the gover-
nor (s) and air agencies involved. Conferences are informal
hearings, open to the public, and must have participation
from all interested parties. The hearing board, consisting
of representatives from the Federal, State, and local
levels, issues a report to the Administrator of EPA. He
must then make a recommendation and wait at least six months.
If his recommendation is not complied with he may then call
a formal hearing. If his recommendations from the formal
hearing are not acted upon in another six months, he can
turn the case over to the Justice Department for prosecution.
There are no Federal emission standards for sulfur
oxides, particulates, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxi-
dants, and oxides of nitrogen from stationary sources. How-
ever, the Federal government does regulate hazardous emis-
sions from stationary sources. These are defined as materi-
als for which there is no ambient level, and that can cause
an increase in mortality or serious, incapacitating disease.
Hazardous emissions may be regulated in a variety of ways.
For example, proposed EPA standards prohibit and prescribe
certain application and filtering procedures for asbestos.
Another method is to prescribe monitoring techniques along
with emission standards. This has been done for beryllium
and mercury.32 These standards apply only to new sources.
EPA has jurisdiction over motor vehicles and other
mobile sources. Under the 1970 amendments to the Clear Air
Act, all light duty vehicles must have a ninety percent
reduction of their 1970 emissions of carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbons by 1975 and a ninety percent reduction of their
1971 emissions of oxides of nitrogen by 1976. The Adminis-
trator can regulate of prohibit additives in fuels if they
are found to endanger the health or welfare of the public or
if they inhibit the performance of any emission control
devices. EPA has proposed limitations of lead and phospho-
rous in fuel. Lead in gasoline would be limited to 2."0 grams
per gallon in 1974 and gradually cut down to 1.5 grams after
January, 1977. EPA has proposed requiring one grade of gaso-
line that is lead free (less than 0.05 grams per gallon) and
phosphorous free (less than 0.01 grams per gallo.n).33
New cars will be required to have emission control
devices by 1975 and 1976. In addition, some states may
require control devices on used cars. Several states may
also restrict automobile traffic in the center city. Other
mobile sources, such as trucks and buses, may also need
emission devices.
States are experimenting with several methods to meet
the ambient air standards of the Federal law. Fifty-four
jurisdictions (50 states and 4 territories) have the legis-
lative authority to adopt emission standards, limitations,
16
-------
and other means to meet the Federal standards. Fifty-one
jurisdictions can abate air pollution emissions on an emer-
gency basis. Only thirty-four states have the authority to
require emission control devices on stationary sources.
Seven states have the right to require inspection and
testing of motor vehicles, and to use transportation and
land control use measures.34 (Environmental Quality, 1972.)
The effect of air pollution legislation on the center
city will be influenced by the State or local government's
previous involvement with air pollution control. For
example, California and New York have had fuel and emission
controls for several years, and thus industry and utilities
will not be significantly affected by the Federal standards
if they are already meeting the State, standards. In States
where such controls have not existed, these sources will be
affected if they are the important sources of pollutants in
their State.
It is not likely that most center city residents will
be directly affected by pollution controls on their home or
apartment furnaces. Their contribution to pollution is
small nationwide. However, in cities where coal burning
space heating units are used, some units may have to be
changed or converted to burn a less polluting fuel.
Center city residents may use the law to sue pollution
sources or government agencies if they believe the Clean Air
Act is not being enforced in their area. While this proce-
dure has drawbacks because it can be a time-consuming,
expensive process, it gives the center city residents a
direct input into controlling sources of pollution.
Like residents of the city, commercial sources contri-
bute little to the total air pollution picture, but they may
also have to change their space heating fuels in cities
where coal burning units are common. Dry cleaners and other
users of organic solvents might be specifically regulated in
their emissions of hydrocarbons.
Municipal sources, defined here as public and utility
sources,35 win be greatly affected by the Clean Air Act,
especially in areas using coal and high sulfur oil fuels for
power generation. These sources will either have to change
fuels or add stack emission control devices. Incineration
of solid waste will have to be eliminated in many states in
order to meet the Federal standards. This, of course, could
complicate even further the problem of disposing of munici-
pal solid waste.
For municipal and regional governments without a pre-
existing air pollution control agency, the Clean Air Act can
help finance up to two-thirds of the creation of such an
agency, and one-half of its yearly cost of operation. For
joint agencies between two or more cities, the Federal
government will pay three-fourths of the cost of initiating
the agency, and up to three-fifths the cost of maintaining
it. Interstate agencies can have their entire initial costs
paid for two years, and three-fourths of their operating
costs paid after that time.
17
-------
Industrial sources will be affected, but the effect
will differ among the states. As previously indicated,
thirty-four states allow stationary source emission con-
trols, and others may use land and transportation controls
to discourage industrial uses of some areas of the city.
To meet the state standards, some industries may not only
need to invest in pollution control devices, but in new
processes and machinery.
18
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. Air pollutants: sulfur oxides (chiefly sulfur dioxide,
SO2, and sulfur oxide, SO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon
monoxide (CO), photochemical oxidants (usually measured as
ozone, 03), hydrocarbons (HC), and particulates or airborne
non-gaseous materials. An explanation of the standards with
respect to each of these will be presented later.
2. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service, National Air Pollution Control
Administration, "Sources and Pollutant Emission Patterns
in Major Metropolitan Areas," by Guntis Ozalin, David V.
Mason, and Clyde B. Marita (Durham, N.C., 1969), p. 19.
3. Ibid.
4. The following percentages for all sources were computed
from Ozolins, et al, Nationwide Inventory of Air Pollutant
Emission (1970), pp. 1-36, and The Cost of Clean Air (2nd
ed., 1970), pp. 10-23. All percentages are aggregated
nationally unless specified otherwise.
5. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service, Environmental Health Service, Air
Quality Criteria for Photochemical Oxidants (Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office,1970), p. 2-2.
6. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Programs and Natural Environmental Research Center, Health
Hazards of Lead (Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
1972), p. 6.
7. U.S. Department of-Health, Education, and Welfare,
"Sources and Pollutant Emission Patterns," p. 26.
8. For example, before World War II, the city of Nashville,
Tennessee used coal primarily for heating. Since then, most
new homes use gas or electric heating. The contrast between
the center city and the suburbs is striking: thirty-five
percent of the city dwelling units used coal but only six-
teen percent of the suburban units do. Of the 28,900 coal
burning units in the Davidson County in 1960, 18,000 of them
were in the prewar boundaries of Nashville. (An Air
Resource Management Plan for the Nashville Metropolitan
Area, 1965).
9. Otis D. Duncan, Metropolis and Region (Baltimore,
Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1960).
19
-------
10. U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Commerce, facts
presented by James P. Alexander, Department of Environmental
Services before a subcommittee of the Committee on Commerce,
April 7, 1972.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Health Hazards of
Lead, p. 13.
12. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
Environmental Health Service, Air Quality Criteria for
Photochemical Oxidants (Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, 1970).
13. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Environmental Health Service, Air Quality Criteria for
Sulfur Oxides (Washington, D.cTlGovernment Printing
Office, 1967).
14. ug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter.
15. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Environmental Health Service, Thanksgiving 1966 Air Pollu-
tion Episode in the Eastern United States by Jack C.
Fensterstock and Robert K. Fankhauser, National Air Pollu-
tion Control Administration, AP-45 (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1968).
16. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air Pollution
Control Office, Air Quality Criteria for Nitrogen Oxides
(Washington, D.C71Government Printing Office, 1971).
17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Division of
Health Effects Research, Prevalence of Chronic Respiratory
Disease Symptoms in Adults; 1970 Survey of New York
Communities, by Harvey Goldberg, John F. Finklea, Cornelius
J. Nelson, Walter Steen, et al., unpublished draft (Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1972).
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Division of
Health Effects Research, Ventilatory Function in School
Children; 19.67-1968 Testing in Cirtcinnati Neighborhoods,
by Carl Shy, C. J. Nelson, Ferris Benson, Wilson B. Reggan
and Vaun Newill (Research Triangle, North Carolina, 1972).
19. Marvin Glasser and Leonard Greenberg, "Air Pollution,
Mortality, and Weather," Archives of Environmental Health,
XX (March, 1971), 334.
20. Mark H. Lepper, Nario Schisura, Bertram Carnaw, Samuel
Andelman, and Leah Lehrer, "Respiratory Disease in an Urban
Environment," Industrial Medicine, XXXVIII (1969), 36-41.
20
-------
21. Warren J. Winkelstein, Jr. and Michael L. Gay, "Sus-
pended Particulate Air Pollution," Archives of Environmental
Health, XXII (January, 1971), 174-177.
22. Environmental Protection Agency, Health Hazards of
Lead, p. 6.
23. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service, Childhood Lead Poisoning; A Thirty
Neighborhood Survey, by Roger S. Challop and Edward B.
McCabe,(Unpublished Draft, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1972), p. 6.
24. Environmental Protection Agency, Health Hazards of
Lead, p. 6.
25. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service, Division of Air Pollution, Survey of
Urban Lead in the Atmosphere of Three Urban Communities, by
the Working Group on Lead Contamination, Public Health
Service, Publication Number 999-AP-12 (Cincinnati, Ohio:
Government Printing Office, 1965), p. 76.
26. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service, Environmental Health Service, Air
Quality Criteria for Photochemical Oxidants (Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1970).
27. Steven Horvath, Thomas E. Dahms, James F. O'Hanlan,
"Carbon Monoxide and Human Vigilance," Archives of Environ-
mental Health, XXIII (November, 1971), 343.
28. Ibid., p. 343.
i
29. The history of the Environmental Protection Agency is
contained in the brochure "Environmental Protection in
Federal Activities" and the Annual Report of the Council on
Environmental Quality, 1972.
30. J. Clarence Davies, The Politics of Pollution, Pegasus
Books (New York: Western Publishing Corporation,Inc.,
1970).
31. Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 1857.
32. Proposed National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (1971), pp. 9-28.
33. Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Quality
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972),
p. 163.
34. Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Quality
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), p. 46,
21
-------
35. Utilities are defined as municipal sources because they
are controlled by non-Federal governmental bodies in most
areas of the country although they may be owned by private
companies.
22
-------
SECTION III
PESTICIDE POLLUTION
III.A Introduction
With the exception of local government spraying programs
to maintain inner city foliage, the domestic use (or misuse)
of pesticides is the predominant pollutant generator. Condi-
tions in the center city which precipitate the use of pesti-
cides are substandard housing, overcrowding, and garbage
accumulation. This paper attempts to quantitatively describe
the magnitude of the center city pesticide problem.
in 1970 the number of reported injuries attributed to
pesticide usage was 4,045.1 The number of deaths was nine-
teen. 2 Both of these statistics represent significant
declines from the previous year. Unfortunately, data on
exposure to pesticides is extremely sketchy. Moreover, the
health effects of exposure to pesticides are not known or
understood.
Pesticide abuse in the center city can be illustrated
through the use of case studies. These studies were con-
cerned with pesticide usage and storage characteristics of
urban residents. To establish the existence of differen-
tials, two studies, will be reviewed in which pesticide
residue concentrations in the blood were measured.
III.B The Kentucky Study
The Kentucky study3 was a survey of urban households to
determine pesticide usage and users habits. Some of the
more alarming statistics: forty-three percent of the survey
group stored pesticides in the kitchen, less than one-third
of the survey group did not even bother to wash their hands
before eating or drinking. There are other statistics worth
mentioning. An overwhelming 81% (196 of 243) of the survey
group said they used pesticides regularly. Ninety percent
(218 of 243) used pesticides or professional pest control
services. The average length of pesticide usage was 7-1/2
years. Only 15% of the population purchased pesticides from
technical stores (nurseries, chemical dealers, feed and seed
dealers), where proper instruction on their usage would be
readily available. The remainder of the group was satisfied
to purchase pesticides from general merchandise stores, food
markets or drug stores.
The volume of pesticides used was greatest in the lower
and upper income groups of the city. The lower income
groups usage patterns were believed to stem mainly from pest
problems related to poor housing and solid waste accumula-
tion. Upper income usage patterns were believed to be
influenced by a concern for protection of ornamental plants
and shrubbery. Table 5 lists the pests reported suffi-
ciently annoying to require pesticide'usage.
23
-------
TABLE 5
PESTS CONSIDERED SUFFICIENTLY ANNOYING
TO REQUIRE CHEMICAL TREATMENT
Percent Reporting
49%
32%
21%
5%
Data indicating usage patterns in the home is shown in Table
O « £• * (a
TABLE 6
USAGE PATTERNS IN THE HOME
Room Percent Reporting Usage
Kitchen 63%
Basement 11%
Bedrooms 4%
Garage 4%
_ The SoUth Carolina Study
The South Carolina Study4 was conducted in Charleston,
South Carolina using a sample group of 196 urban and center
city families. The .121 white families in the study were
from predominately middle class areas. The 75 non-white
families were mainly from lower socioeconomic areas in the
city. Among the usage characteristics investigated were
frequency of application, pesticide hazards in the home and
pesticide sources. In all cases, data was separated by
race. A final portion of the study compared the prevalence
of selected chronic diseases among families that were users
or nori -users.
The survey indicated that 89% made some use of pesti-
cides. Of this user group, one-third utilized pesticides at
least weekly, usage was greater among non-whites than
'whites. . . . . ,
As in the Kentucky study, the majority of pesticide
purchases were made in non-technical stores. Table
indicates the source of -pesticide purchases.
TABLE 7
SOURCE OF PESTICIDE PURCHASES
Source Percent
Grocery Stores
Drug Stores 15%
Feed and Seed Stores 15%
General Merchandise 10%
24
-------
Differences in pesticide sources by race were not signifi-
cant, and, hence, were not presented.
Pesticide mishandling was equally prevalent in both
groups. Among the 174 user families 88% (153) utilized
unlocked storage. Pesticides were stored within easy
reach of children in 66% (115) of the cases. (Substan-
tial morbidity and mortality among South Carolina children
[particularly Negro children] due to acute pesticide poison-
ing was reported in the study. No figures were given.) Over
one-half of the storage facilities were located near food or
medicine. Finally, two-thirds of pesticide users did not
wash their hands after usage or wear gloves during usage.
CII.D The Florida Study
The Florida studyS was conducted in Dade County,
Florida during 1970-71 under the auspices of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Division of Pesticide Community
Studies (Contract FDA 70-11).
Residue concentrations of DDT, DDE and Dieldrin were
measured and then compared with three social indicators:
the Hollingshead Two Factor Index, population density and
census tract median income. General classifications used
in these indicators are shown in Tables 8-10.
Data used for analysis was tested to assure that no
significant age differences existed between social classes.
Also, persons under 20 years of age were eliminated from the
study to minimize age dependency effects. Finally, it was
assured that all persons had no recent or remote occupa-
tional exposure to pesticides.
Results of the study indicated that residue concentra-
tions were associated with social class, i.e. greater con-
centrations were found in the poor. Average levels of DDT
increased in those social classes reflective of poverty.
Similarly, average levels of DDE residues increased in
those social classes reflective of poverty. This trend also
appeared for both whites and non-whites.
Dieldrin concentrations also increased in those social
classes reflective of poverty. However, this was only true
for whites
Irrespective of the indicator of poverty that was used
for comparison (i.e. Hollingshead Index, Census tract com-
paction Index or census tract median income) the results
were the same. Average levels of residue concentrations
increased in those social classes reflective of poverty.
Additional comparisons of concentrations within social
classes (i.e. whites versus non-whites of the same class)
yielded significantly higher mean concentrations among non-
whites. Comparisons between sexes (i.e. white males versus
white females of the same social class) yielded no signifi-
25
-------
TABLE 8
HOLLINGSHEAD TWO FACTOR INDEX*
Classes I & II
Class III
Classes IV & V
Professionals
Skilled
Semi-skilled
and unskilled
(Note: The Hollingshead Two Factor Index represents
a weighted summation of the occupation of the head
of the household and his level of education.)
TABLE 9
INCOME CLASSES
Class
Annual Family Income
I
II
III
IV
V
$6000+
$5000 - 5999
$4000 - 4999
$3000 - 3999
Less than $3000
TABLE 10
POPULATION DENSITY
(Census Tract Compaction Index)
Class
Density
(Persons/acre)
I
II
III
IV
V
Less than 20
20-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
26
-------
cant differences. Finally, variances (as measured by F-
tests) were significantly greater in the poorer classes.
III.E The Hawaii Studies
A study similar to the Florida study was conducted in
Hawaii (contract FDA-70-40) under the auspices of the
Community Studies on Pesticides Branch of EPA.6 Its purpose
was to ascertain pesticide usage differentials between
people residing in urban Honolulu and people living in the
small village environment of Lanai. As in the Florida study,
care was taken to assure that the sample group had no occupa-
tional exposure to pesticides. Interviews and blood samples
analyzed for pesticide residues (DDT, DDE, Dieldrin, BHC)
comprised the data collection phase of the study. Results
of the residue analysis are shown in Table 11.
TABLE 11
SUMMARY OF PESTICIDE RESIDUE CONCENTRATIONS
(PARTS PER BILLION) BETWEEN RESIDENTS OF
LANAI AND HONOLULU
Residue
(ppb)
DDT
DDE
Dieldrin
BHC
LANAI
Range Mean Std. Dev.
0-20 3.27 2.40
1-130 16.7 14.3
0-26 1.55 1.81
0-5 0.17 0.59
HONOLULU
Range Mean Std. Dev.
0-27 4.56 3.05
1-107 16.1 11.1
0-11 1.47 1.30
0-8 0.74 1.28
Analysis of variance at 0.01 level of significance indi-
cated that the differences between samples (Lanai versus
Honolulu) were significant for DDT and BHC concentrations.
Differences were not significant for DDE and Dieldrin residue
concentrations. (No sample sizes were given in the study.
Therefore it is impossible to comment on the non-significant
differences observed in the DDE and Dieldrin results.)
Residents of Honolulu had higher mean concentrations of
DDT (4.56 ppb versus 3.27 ppb) and BHC (0.74 ppb versus 0.17)
Standard deviations were also larger for DDT and BHC among
the Honolulu residents. Residents of Lanai had higher con-
centrations of DDE and Dieldrin. However, these differences
were not significant.
Although cited before, the statistics bear repeating.
In the South Carolina and Kentucky studies, the percentage
of urban residents using pesticides exceeded 80 percent.'
Even with rigid usage guidelines, it is doubtful that this
percentage could be significantly reduced. To try to regu-
late pesticide usage is to operate on symptoms rather than
problems or causes.
In the short run, pesticide abuse can be curbed through
educational programs, informative labelling and use and
27
-------
application laws. The long run solution is much more diffi-
cult. It involves eliminating the causes of pesticide
pollution. Housing must be improved. Solid waste must be
removed. Pesticides which are non-toxic to humans and that
have no detrimental environmental impacts must be developed.
Only then can significant inroads to pesticide pollution -in
the central city be made.
On the basis of the material cited one may draw the
following conclusions:
A majority of pesticide purchases are made in
non-technical stores with little regard for
consumer education. (Kentucky and South Carolina)
The volume of pesticides consumed tends to be higher
in the lower socio-economic classes. (Kentucky)
*
There is an overall lack of respect for safe
pesticide storage. (Kentucky and South Carolina)
Pesticide residue concentrations in the blood are
positively associated with poverty and its
related ills. (Florida)
Pesticide residue concentrations in the blood
tend to be larger in urban environments than in
small village environments. (Hawaii)
III.F Health Effects
Little information has been collected concerning the
health effects of pesticide pollution in the urban environ-
ment. What data exists is extremely fragmented and indirect
or inferential in character. Relationships between pesti-
cide exposure and disease are ill-defined. Speculation
rather than affirmation has been the key word in associating
human health problems with pesticide use.
A study examining the health effects of household pesti-
cide usage was recently undertaken in Oahu, Hawaii.8 This
study examined the relationship between chronic exposure to
household pesticides and patients with medical histories of
asthma, chronic bronchitis and sinusitis. A second study
performed two years later on a sub-sample of the original
study indicated a significant correlation between frequent
use of insecticides and respiratory impairment.
In the Hawaii study,' people who used pesticides once a
week or oftener were classified as heavy users. Light users
were classified as those that used pesticides less than once
a week. The original study was made jap of forty-four family
units who were heavy users and forty-six family units who
were light users.
Results of the study indicate that 26.3 percent (99 of
376) of the heavy use group reported having asthma, chronic
28
-------
bronchitis or both. Only 18.6 percent (61 of 328) of the
light use group reported having the same health problems.
Sinus trouble was also reported significantly more often
in the heavy user group.9
The results of the sub-sample study are even more
revealing. One hundred forty-two adults were analyzed with
respect to respiratory impairment according to the AMA
rating scale and their usage of insecticides. The AMA
rating scale gives normative standards of respiratory per-
formance based upon age, sex and height.10 Pesticide usage
patterns were classified as consistently heavy use (A), no
use to heavy use (B), daily use to light use (G), and con-
sistently light use (D). Usage patterns were based upon the
previous two years. Table 12 indicates the results of this
study. Statistical comparisons of the heavy usage group
(A+B+C) with the light usage group (D) indicated these
results were significant.il
TABLE 12
NUMBER OF PERSONS BY PESTICIDE USAGE
CHARACTERISTICS AND RESPIRATORY IMPAIRMENT CLASS
Usage
Group
A
B
C
D
Respiratory Impairment
Cla.ssi.fi- Class
cation l-(85+%) 2- (70-84%) 3(55-69%)
Consistent
Heavy Use
No Use to
Heavy Use
Daily Use to
Light Use
Consistent
Light Use
TOTALS (142)
A+B+C
D
Any Heavy
Use
Consistent
Light Use
16
5
6
' 25
52
27
25
19
10
7
13
49
36
13
9
6
6
10
31
21
10
4(L55%)
6
2
1
1
10
9
1
The results of the Hawaian study were further improved
by separating the smokers from the non-smokers in the sample
group. By removing smokers from the analysis, any possible
bias introduced by the health effects of smoking may be
eliminated. Eighty-one persons in the sample group did not
smoke cigarettes. Seventy-one percent (35 of 49) of the
heavy use group reported significant impairment. Only 44
(14 of 32) percent of light use group reported the same
impairment. Comparison of heavy users (A+B+C) versus light
29
-------
users (D) again proved significant.12 These results are
shown in Table 13.
TABLE 13
NUMBER OF PERSONS (NON-SMOKERS)
BY PESTICIDE USAGE CHARACTERISTICS AND
RESPIRATORY IMPAIRMENT CLASS
Usage Classifi- Respiratory Impairment Class
Group cation l-(85+%) 2- (70-84%) 3(55-69%) 4(L55%)
A+B+C Any Heavy
Use
D Consistent
Light Use
TOTALS (81)
14
18
32
16
8
24
13
6
19
6
0
6
The final part of the Hawaian study compared pesticide
usage characteristics over the past two years with persons
exhibiting current symptoms of asthma, chronic sinusitis,
chronic bronchitis, and perennial nasal allergy. The study
was conducted with a sample group of 380 persons. Results
are shown in Table 14. Twenty-three (62 of 268) percent
of heavy users reported symptoms of the chronic diseases
being considered. This contrasts with only 9.9 (11 of 112)
percent of the light users reporting the same symptoms.
Again, statistical comparisons between consistently heavy
users (A+B+C) versus consistently light users (D) proved
significant.13
TABLE 14
RESPIRATORY SYMPTOMS AND
HOME INSECTICIDE USE
Usage Classifi-
Group cation
Number of Persons with Current Symptoms
Chronic Chronic Perennial
Sinus- Bron- Nasal
Total Asthma itis chitis Allergy None
A
B
C
D
Consistent
Heavy Use
No Use to
Heavy Use
Daily Use to
Light Use
Consistent
Light Use
TOTALS
A+B+C
D
Any Heavy
Use
Consistent
Light Use
156
50
62
112
380
268
112
16
3
• 2
1 .
22
21
1
6
3
1.
1
11
10
1
5
0
4
0
9
9
0
18
5
4
9
36
27
9
111
39
51
101
302
202
101
30
-------
General conclusions for the Hawaii study are (1)
respiratory impairment, as measured by the AMA scale, was
shown to be positively related to heavy pesticide usage;
and (2) the existence of symptoms.of certain chronic dis-
eases was shown to be positively related to heavy pesticide
usage.
These type of conclusions, however, are only scratching
the surface of a very complex problem. Age, sex, diet and a
myriad of other socio-economic variables affect the pesti-
cide disease causal relationship. The same study undertaken
in Oahu could be done in another area and yield totally
different results. For example, the earlier referenced
South Carolina study compared the prevalence of selected
chronic disease among families that were users or non-users
of pesticides. Their results for asthma, the only disease
common to both studies, indicated no significant difference
between pesticide users and non-users and existence of the
disease. In fact, the study found no significant difference
between users and non-users for any of the eight chronic
diseases considered.1^ Results of the South Carolina study
are shown in Table 15.
Due to the significant lack of knowledge in pesticide
toxicology, it is fruitless to try to describe any uniform
relationships between pesticide exposure and human health.
The Mrak Commission's report uses over 200 pages to describe
the effects of pesticides on man. To use any less, simpli-
fies the problem beyond recognition. Present research is
considering the possible effects of pesticide exposure in
"genetic material (mutagenesis), effects on reproduction,
including malformations in the fetus or newborn infant
(tetragenesis) and increasing the incidence of various forms
of cancer (carcinogenesis). 1° While there is no real evi-
dence of detrimental effects of pesticides on human life,
the fact that pesticide exposure on lower forms of mammals
produces adverse effects, is a definite cause for human con-
cern. It can only be considered a form of preventive medi-
cine to limit pesticide usage among humans. The necessity
for limitation in urban areas becomes more acute when over-
all inner environmental conditions are considered.
III.G Pesticide Regulation
The Environmental Protection Agency exercises pesticide
regulation through the means of (1) The Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) as amended, (2)
Section 403(c) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA), as amended, and (3) the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970,
The major points of these acts are enumerated below:17
All pesticides that are shipped through inter-
state commerce must be registered with EPA.
31
-------
TABLE 15
COMPARISONS OF THE PREVALENCE OF SELECTED
CHRONIC DISEASES AMONG FAMILIES THAT
WERE USERS OR NON-USERS OF PESTICIDES
Disease
Anemia
Asthma
Cataract
Diabetes
Emphysema
Glaucoma
Liver Disease
Peptic Ulcer
Users (172)
2 %
7 %
6 %
13 %
3 %
2 %
0
5 %
Non-Users (22)
9 %
9 %
14 %
5 %
0
0
0
0
Comparison*
NSD
NSD
NSD
NSD
NSD
NSD
NSD
NSD
NSD = No Significant Difference
* The most plausible reason for the lack of relationship in
this example is probably medical in nature, i.e. pesticides
have little impact in causation or aggravation of the dis-
eases in question. In the cases of asthma and emphysema,
both of which are respiratory system related, no comment can
be made. It is possible that lack'of data prevents any
inference from being made.
32
-------
Pesticides cannot be approved for sale without
manufacturers evidence concerning the purpose,
toxicity and effectiveness of the substance.
All pesticides approved for sale must be labeled
clearly indicating ingredients, methods of appli-
cation and safety precautions to be observed.
EPA may halt the interstate shipment of any pesti-
cide product if it is found to present a hazard to
the public.
EPA may terminate the production and use of any
pesticide within thirty days notice (termination
may be appealed).
EPA establishes pesticide residue tolerance
levels on raw food stuffs shipped through inter-
state commerce.
Other Federal activity can be summarized as below:18
The Federal Trade Commission may regulate the
advertising of pesticides.
The Department of Transportation may regulate
'the shipment of pesticides through interstate
commerce.
The Food and Drug Administration may monitor
food for the existence of economic poisons.
«
The Department of Agriculture may prevent the
introduction of pests into the United States
and may engage in other activities relating to
the control and spread of pests.
At the. present time, there is a bill before Congress
(H.R. 10729) to strengthen pesticide regulation and control,
The bill, authored by the Council on Environmental Quality,
was rewritten by the House Agriculture Subcommittee and
severely weakened. As of August 18, 1972, this bill was
pending before the Senate Commerce Committee. The major
provisions of this bill are listed below.
EPA would have the authority to resttict pesti-
cide usage by classifying and categorizing them
(e.g. restricted use, use with permit only).
EPA would have the authority to regulate the
disposal and storage of pesticides and pesticide
containers.
33
-------
The bill will simplify procedures for suspension
and cancellation of pesticides.
In addition to Federal activity, state governments are
also trying to regulate pesticide consumption. For the most
part state legislation has been oriented along the same
lines as Federal legislation: Labelling, regulations on
use, and listing of acceptable compounds.
III.H Federal Legislation and Pesticides
Federal legislation does not address itself to the
center city pesticide pollution problem. The provisions of
labelling, registration, and approval for sale are very lax.
When studies indicate that a large majority of pesti-
cide users purchase compounds from non-technical sources,
it indicates little regard for the selection of the proper
compound on the part of consumers.19 If labels were read
and heeded, labelling could help solve this problem. How-
ever, considering the overall lack of consumer awareness in
lower socioeconomic groups, labelling products and then
allowing free choice in selection is a self-defeating act.
If'the labels are not heeded, labelling is not a real
solution.
Additional indicators of total disregard for labelling
would be the prevalence of hazards among pesticide users in
South Carolina.20 Also, the Kentucky survey indicated that
most usage in the home was in the kitchen, proximate to food
and eating utensils.21
An additional problem with labelling is the language
used. Many central city residents lack the education to
read and understand the language employed in labelling.
Also, many central city residents are Spanish speaking.
Labels written only in English cannot possibly serve their
purpose among this group.
Before a pesticide is approved for sale, it must be
registered with EPA. Registration consists of testing by
EPA and by the manufacturer in order to designate what the
pesticide may be used for, in what proportions, etc. The
results of these tests guide the labelling decisions.
Unfortunately, very few of the required tests pertain to
environmental impact or health implications. Test require-
ments encourage the development of multi-use rather than
single-use pesticides. It is only logical to assume the
broad based multi-use compounds would tend to have a larger
based environmental and- health impact and thus make the
environmental control more difficult.
To summarize, the present Federal pesticide legislation
does influence the pesticide problem in the inner city; how-
ever, labelling can only be a solution if the 'labels are
read and obeyed, and registration and approval for sale is
only a solution if they are based on environmental and health
considerations. The inner city pesticide problem cannot be
34
-------
improved significantly through present Federal legislation
and action.
35
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Cate-
gorical Programs, Office of Pesticide Programs, "Urban
Pesticide Usage," Pesticides and Public Health (Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972), p. 75.
2. Ibid.
3. Kentucky Department of Health, Division of Environmental
Services, Report of Pesticides Programs, A Survey of Urban
Households to Determine Pesticide Usage and Users Habits,
by Earl Edsel Moore (Unpublished Draft, Lexington, Kentucky,
1968).
4. Office of Categorical Programs, Office of Pesticide
Programs, South Carolina Study.
5. Office of Categorical Studies, Office of Pesticides
Program, Florida Study, 1971.
6. Office of Categorical Programs, Office of Pesticide
Programs, Hawaiian Study, 1971.
7. Office of Categorical Programs, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
8. Betsy P. Weiner and Robert M. Worth, "Insecticides,
Household Use and Respiratory Impairment," Hawaii Medical
Journal, XXVIII, No. 4 (1969), 283-285.
9. Results of the asthma/chronic bronchitis test are signi-
ficant at the 0.05 level. The sinus test results are signi-
ficant at the 0.01 level.
10. Classifications of the AMA scale are as follows:
Percent of Expected
Class Respiratory Function
1 85+%
2 70 - 84%
3 55 - 69%
4 Less than 55%
11. p = 0.05, x2 = 8.486, 3 df.
12. p = 0.01, x2 = 14.782, 3 df.
13. p = 0.05, x2 = 15.191, 4 df.
36
-------
14. Julian E. Keil, John F. Winkler, Richard L. Pietsch,
Richard H. Gadsden, "A Pesticide Use Survey of Urban House-
holds," Agricultural Chemicals (August, 1969).
15. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Report of the Secretary's Commission on Pesticides and Their
Relationship to Environmental Health (Washington, D.C.;
Government Printing Office, 1969), p. 229.
16. Ibid., p. 235.
17. Environmental Protection Agency, Programs for the Inner
City Environment, (Draft, March 17, 1972).
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Toward a New
Environmental Ethic.
19. Keil, et al., "A Pesticide Use Survey."
20. Ibid.
21. Kentucky Department of Health, A Survey of Urban Homes
to Determine Pesticide Usage.
37
-------
SECTION IV
WATER POLLUTION
IV.A Introduction
f—
Water pollution is among the most pressing and wide-
spread of the environmental problems. Any additions to the
water which tend to degrade its quality so as to constitute
a hazard or impair the usefulness of the water are con-
sidered pollutants by the Public Health Service. The Com-
mittee on Pollution of the National Academy of Sciences
classifies water pollutants into eight categories.! The
purpose of this discussion will be to show the increased
water pollution problems associated with the center city.
Two specific cases, Newark, New Jersey and New York City,
will be analyzed. A Boston study and a survey study by the
Bureau of Water Hygiene will exemplify drinking water
problems.
IV.B Passaic River Study
Water in its natural environment, or ambient water, has
been found quite polluted. A report on the extent of the
pollution in the Passaic River was given by A. W. Bromberg,
Chief of the Operations Branch of the Hudson-Delaware Basin
dffice of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
(FWPCA) , to an enforcement conference in 1969. A case study
of the water quality of the lower Passaic River (mainstem
between Newark Bay and its confluence with the Pompton River)
was made based on data taken from 15 stations. This study
indicates the disease producing potential of the water by
the high coliform2 bacteria counts. Almost all of the
samples exceeded the permissible limits suggested by the
standards. Total coliform counts were from 9,700 to 500,000
organisms per 100 milliliters (standard permissible is
tO,000 organisms per 100 ml). The stations located specifi-
cally in the Newark Area show counts in the 100,000's. The
fecal coliform levels increase very sharply to 50 and 60,000
organisms per 100 ml close to Newark (the fecal coliform
standard is 2,000 per 100 ml).3 Dissolved oxygen (DO) is
measured as an indicator of pollution by organic wastes. In
fehe vicinity of Newark the DO concentrations are consistently
measured at one and two milligrams per liter (the standards
are from 5-7 mg/1) which are the minimum allowable concen-
trations to support fishlife. This study (see Appendix A)
shows why the Passaic River has been given the distinction
of being "one of the most contaminated waterways in the
•1 J3 M 4
~l Other sampling studies estimate the biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD) loading of the Passaic River to be 17,000
pounds per day. This estimated loading is equivalent to the
.Saw discharge of a population of 100,000 persons. The para-
meter of suspended solids was also estimated at a high level
38
-------
(47,000 pounds per day).5 The massive BOD loading, high
coliform counts, heavy amounts of floating debris and very
low amounts of DO show that the water quality conditions of
the lower Passaic are below the Federal-state standards.
The most severely polluted section of the river is near the
city of Newark, where center city residents will be affected.
IV.C Hudson River Study
Similarly, the Hudson River shows the high degree of
pollution affecting New York City. An ecological survey of
the Hudson was done in 1968 by the Department of Environ-
mental Medicine of the New York University Medical Center.^
They found that high sulfates and nitrates together with low
oxygen tip the balance between a healthy river and a noxious
one producing hydrogen sulfide and ammonia gas. Coliform
bacteria counts as high as 18,000 per 100 ml were found in
July and August of.1967. The standard allowed for body con-
tact recreation is 2000 per 100 ml.
A study restricted to the New York Harbor region was
done in August of 1969. All of the six monitors show DO
values of 2-3 mg/1 (only 30 to 40 percent saturated) whether
the measurements were taken at surface, mid, or deep levels.
Total coliform counts reached values in the hundreds of
thousands per milliliter showing long lasting pollution and
potential health hazards; some samples were over 1,000,000
total coliform counts per 100 ml. The fecal coliform counts
were found as high as 25,000/100 ml which strongly suggests
gross contamination of the waters by the discharge of human
wastes.7 Table 16 gives a summary of the results. More
complete data can be found in Appendix B.
TABLE 16
BACTERIAL SURVEY OF UPPER BAY—NEW YORK HARBOR
Coliform Minimum Maximum
Shallow samples (5 ft. from surface) 43 x 103 52 x 104
Deep samples (5 ft. from bottom) 22 x 103 25 x 105
Fecal Coliform
Shallow samples 46 x 102 70 x 103
Deep samples 17 x 102 44 x 104
The Hudson River and Hudson Bay watershed represents a
major population and industrial development. Sampling
studies presented show significant amounts of pollution in
these waters. G. P. Howells of the Department of Environ-
mental Medicine of New York University Medical Center states
in an interview July, 1972, "The lower Hudson River has the
characteristics of an eutrophic,8 brackish lake."9 Pollu-
tion of the ambient waters near urban areas lowers the qual-
ity of the water for beneficial uses to center city residents,
39
-------
Besides the ambient water, drinking water can become
polluted and unsafe for consumption. Large cities may have
a lesser quality of drinking water. The drinking water of
a city generally leaves the treatment plant in an acceptable
form, but depending upon the quality of the distribution
system it may reach some people in a less than acceptable
form. In old center city systems many supply pipes and
drains are made of lead. "Under such conditions, water con-
taining as much as 920 mg/110 of lead has been found in
inner city areas, compared to an average of 20 ug/per liter
elsewhere."!1 The Public Health Service drinking water
standard for lead,is "not greater than 0.05 mg per liter"
(or 50 ug/1).12 In July 1972, a survey was done in an older
community of Boston on the quality of the drinking water in
regards to trace metals. In 29 out of 54 homes the concen-
tration of lead was found to exceed the standard. Some of
the samples ranged from 0.060 mg/1 to .253 mg/1.13 A
drinking water quality survey was also done in Chicago in
1968 by the Bureau of Water Hygiene. About 20% of the tap
water samples were found to have higher concentrations of
lead than water at the treatment plants, although only four
samples exceeded the PHS-rejection limit.14 This indicates
the use of lead pipes in the distribution system. When it
is combined with corrosive or acidic water, the lead will be
slowly dissolved into the water and can affect the health of
the center city residents.
i
The Vermont Water Study
The National Community Water Supply Study surveyed 969
public water supply systems in the state of Vermont and in
eight standard metropolitan statistical areas (SMSA). Each
investigation considered three factors: tap water quality,
adequacy of the facilities and operations, and status of
surveillance and maintenance of the system.15 It was found
that the quality of drinking water is decreasing as the
water supply systems are growing older and are not upgraded.
"Forty-one percent of the 969 systems were delivering waters
of inferior quality to 2.5 million people. In fact,
360,000 persons in the study population were being served
waters of a potentially dangerous quality. ... 56 percent
of the systems evidenced physical deficiencies including
.poorly protected groundwater sources, inadequate disinfec-
tion capacity, inadequate clarification capacity, and/or
inadequate system pressure. In the eight SMSA's studied,
the arrangements for providing water service were archaic.
and inefficient. While a majority of the population was
served by one or a few large systems, each metropolitan area
also contained small inefficient systems."16 Most pf our
municipal supply systems were built .Qve,r 20 ye.a£s ago. * The*
population that many of them serve have increased rapidly^
and the systems do not have the capacity to serve the rising
demands for clean water. The systems are obsolete because -'
40
-------
they were not built for the removal.of toxic chemical or
virus contaminants which increasingly pollute our waters.
The drinking water quality and the ambient water in the
center city have been shown to be of lower quality than some
of the Federal-state standards for water quality and protec-
tion of health. The lower water quality may have detrimen-
tal effects on the health of the center city resident.
IV.E Industrial Water Pollution
Water pollution associated with industrialized and
highly populated areas is caused mainly by municipal sewage
and industrial wastes. A high density of industries in one
area means that there will be more process wastes discharged
.into the nearby waters. In many of the large, old cities
the waste water sewers are combined with the storm sewers
and they overflow during storms and peak flow periods.
Other major sources of water pollution are urban runoff,
sediment from construction, oil spills, and ocean dumping.
Drinking water quality is lowered by the maintenance of the
municipal systems, the material of the pipes and the quality
of the original source water.
Excessive deterioration of rivers, lakes and bays has
now reached inexcusable magnitudes in urban settings. The
sources of this pollution burden will be reviewed here
showing that industries and municipal governments are con-
tributing the largest amounts. Commercial, domestic and
mobile sources will also be discussed as contributers to the
pollution load. Unsafe drinking water is traced to inade-
quate municipal distribution systems.
Industrial process wastes are contributing the largest
amounts of pollutants to our nation's waters. They produce
13,}LOO billion gallons of waste per year which includes
massive amounts of suspended solids and BOD. An annual
amount of 22 billion pounds of BOD load is being generated
by industries, one-fifth of which is discharged to municipal
sewers.^ Between 1957 and 1968 the industrial BOD genera-
tion increased 200 percent while the growth in industrial
production was only 60%.18 This indicates that the type of
technological processes used in production are a more impor-
tant factor in causing pollution than just the amount of
pollution. "The Federal Water Quality Administration in
1970 estimated that industrial discharges imposed an oxygen
demand on waterways equivalent to the untreated sewage of
165 million people" (about eighty percent of the U.S.
population)A9
"There are at least 40,000 discharges of substantial
amounts of industrial wastes directly into water courses in
the U.S'. "20 A definite lack of information exists on what
the individual industries are actually dumping. It is known
that a few major industries account for most industrial
water use and most industrial water pollution. About 10,000
out of 300,000 manufacturing establishments in the U.S.
41
-------
account for 90 percent of industrial water use.21 Nine of
the big contributors to water pollution can be identified:
food and kindred products, paper, chemicals, petroleum,
primary metals, transportation equipment, textiles,
machinery (excluding electrical), and rubber and plastics.22
The chemical and the primary metals have the most difficult
effluents to treat in terms of the cost of the technology.
The estimates for these costs in 1974 will be, respectively,
$421 and $396 million dollars.23 The paper industries are
also large polluters especially when they use the sulfite
process instead of the draft process in manufacturing. With
an annual dumping of fifty trillion gallons of heated water,
the electric power industries are also major polluters.24
IV.E.I Industrial Water Pollution; New York City
New York City is a good example of pollution of a river
associated with a highly industrialized area. New York's
"Pure Waters Program" identified 225 industries as polluters
of the Hudson River and Bay. All were /included in the
clean-up schedule. Out of the total number, 66 industries
are in the New York City area and dump into the Hudson,
Harlem and East Rivers, the Upper and Lower*Bay and Kill Van
Kull. The list of polluters contains dye works, food pro-
cessing, printing, and smelting and-refining. At the 1969
Enforcement Conference dealing with pollution of the Hudson
River and its tributaries, only 4 out of the 66 New York
City industries were reported as being on schedule in their
clean-up processes.2^
IV.E?2 Industrial Water Pollution; Newark
Along the lower Passaic River where Newark is located,
133 out of 182 outfall pipes belong to industries.26 The
city of Newark alone accounts for 41 of the industrial dis-
charges as shown in Table 17. The quantities and proper-
ties of what comes out of these pipes are not precisely
known. The industries located here include major water
polluting types such as paper, petroleum, dyes, paints,
chemicals, and electroplating. The city of Newark has over
90 percent of the electroplating industries located in the
vicinity an.d 100 percent of the petroleum plants as shown
in Table 17-2T
The sewerage commission of Newark has pollution control
responsibilities for discharges into the Passaic River and
keeps violation records. In a review of these records up to
50 percent of the industrial violations detected each year
were found to be committed by multiple offenders. Each year
25 to 30 major factories were cited several times for "acci-
dental" violations. The list includes chemical companies,
electroplating companies, dye corporations, paper mills,
brewery, and meat packaging operations. But out of these
42
-------
TABLE
17
Newark
OUTFALL PIPES IN NEWARK AND LOWER PASSAIC AREA
(Percent of Total in Newark)
No. of No. of Major No. of Misc.
Pipes Storm Sewers Storm Sewers Total
from or Combined and Surface No. of
Industry Sewer Overflow Drains Pipes
41 5 3
Total on Lower 133
Passaic River
% Total in 31%
Newark
11
45%
38
49
182
8%
27%
Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, Hudson
River Conference, p. 98. (The total
number of pipes is for 13 Municipalities.)
TABLE 18
LOCATION OF FOUR CRITICAL POLLUTION INDUSTRIES
(Newark and Vicinity)
Municipality
Belleville
Bloomfield
East Newark
East Orange
Suburban Total
Newark
Area Total
% of Area Total
Paper
Mills
2
4
—
1
7
24
31
77%
Petroleum
Plants
__
_—
—
—
—
8
8
100%
Dye, Paint,
Chemicals
10
2
4
3
19
103
122
84%
Electro-
plating
1
1
—
— —
2
28
30
93%
in Newark
Source: Beale, Pollution Control on the Passaic
River, pp. 17-18.
43
-------
violators not one has been assessed a penalty fine or been
named in an abatement court action under state law.28
IV.F Municipal Wastes
Municipal wastes are the second largest source of water
pollution after industries. The problems include municipal
waste water plant effluents', "combined sewer"29 discharges
and urban runoff. The general situation concerning munici-
pal plants is that 13,000 communities have sewer systems and
of these 10 percent dump the wastes back into the rivers
untreated and 15 percent provide only primary treatment.30
In 1960 only 62.3 percent of the U.S. population was served
by public sewers (27.5 percent had a septic tank or cesspool
and 10.2 percent had non-water carriage or a privy)-31 In
the 1970 census, about 70 percent of the total all-year
housing had public sewer connections.32 Many communities
are still in need of sewage systems, while 25 percent of
those that have them discharge partially treated or un-
treated wastes into receiving waters.
The large cities tend to be the oldest ones with the
historically unplanned and presently overloaded sewer
systems. They exhibit the largest numbers of combined
sewers and the pollution problems that go with them. Table
.19 is from an inventory of the percent and population size
of communities with combined or separate sewers.33 The
inventory showed that 71 percent of the population groups of
over 500,000 people have combined sewers or both separate
and combined sewers. Most of the combined sewers are found
in large communities, while 81.0 to 95.5 percent of the
communities of less than 10,000 people have separate sewers.
The combined sewer problem can be seen in the highly
urbanized area of New York City. The combined sewer over-
flow pollution load dumped into the Hudson in 1969 was 46
million pounds of BOD annually. The BOD load from municipal
discharges in the area was 422 million pounds of BOD per
year. It was estimated to decrease to 70 million pounds if
the present treatment reached 90 percent BOD removal.34 But
New York City's plans are behind schedule for the building
of waste treatment plants in the Pure Waters Program (1967-
72). These plants were supposed to increase the city-wide
BOD removal from 49 percent to at least 80 percent. More
complete data is given in Appendix C. A
The city of Newark, located on the lower Passaic River,
is another example of a combined sewer system which causes
pollution. More than 75'percent of its sewer system is over
100 years old and about 250 miles of its 500 miles of sewer
pipes are combined. Together, age and inadequate mainten-
ance result in inefficient operation and frequent breakdowns.
Numerous illegal industrial connections into the collection
system add to the total problem. The largest treatment
plant of the lower valley and the Newark area offers only
primary treatment and no disinfection. It is clear why the
44
-------
TABLE 19
PERCENT OF EACH TYPE OF SEWER,
WITHIN POPULATION GROUPS
Population Size
Groups
Under 500
500-1,000
1,000-5,000
5,000-10,000
10,000-25,000
25,000-50,000
50,000-100,000
100,000-250,000
250,000-500,000
Over 500,000
TOTAL
*Percent of Communities With —
Separate
Sewers
95.5
90.2
85.5
81.0
78.3
71.3
65.8
52.4
58.3
27.3
85.2
Combined
Sewers
3.5
7.6
10.3
10.4
13.2
13.9
22.4
22.6
19.4
31.8
9.7
Both Separate
and Combined
Sewers
1.0
2.2
4.3
8.6
8.5
14.8
11.7
25.0
19.4
40.9
5.1
*Percent of reported cases.
Source: U.S. Federal Water Quality Administration,
Municipal Waste Facilities, Statistical
Summary, 1968 inventory (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office) Table 20,
p. 35.
45
-------
Passaic River is so heavily polluted. One estimate of the
extent was that 70 percent of the Passaic's BOD is caused
by the Newark sewer discharge.35 Similarly, during a nine-
month study in Chicago, Illinois, 31 storms occurred and the
total BOD discharged to the stream was 278,000 pounds. The
average total BOD overflow load was calculated to be 46,900
Ibs/day..
The_third category of municipal water pollution is
urban runoff which is considered a dispersed or non-point
source. This less obvious pollution enters receiving waters
through separate storm sewer discharges during periods of
precipitation, thaw, or runoff and drainage from other
sources. The range of stormwater pollutants concentrations
is very wide. Total coliform counts per 100 ml have been
measured from 40 to 240,000 and suspended solids from 26 to
36,250 mg/1.36 The dispersed pollution load should be con-
sidered along with the municipal and industrial point
sources. For example, a study done of the runoff near
Detroit indicated that BOD in separate stormwater discharges
was generally about one-fifth of that observed in combined
sewers. Total coliform densities were approximately one-
tenth of those in combined sewers. Another study of street
-runoff from Washington, D.C. found that the average BOD
concentration was 126 milligrams per' liter and the average
concentration of suspended solids was 2,100 mg/1. In
meeting the future demand for municipal water supplies and
sewage treatment, proper drainage sheds should also^be
planned.
Commercial and domestic sources of water pollution are
mainly indirectly responsible for their pollution. Busi-
nesses, offices and residences are hooked up to municipal
sewage systems and those systems cause pollution. Sediment
in urban runoff is a pollutant which is traceable to the
practices of a construction firm. Non-agricultural land
disturbing activities that are concentrated in urban areas
yield enough sediment to add to water pollution levels.
During construction when the land is exposed to erosion some
form of sediment control is needed.
The mobile sources of water pollution in the U.S. which
are of the most concern to urban areas are oil spills and
ocean dumping. Oil spillage has been ranked as the second
most important source of pollution in the Chesapeake Bay by
Dr. Pritchard, director of the Chesapeake Bay Institute at
Johns Hopkins University. (First is domestic sewage at nine
million gal./day.) The number of oil spills documented by
the Coast Guard in 1970 off the coast of Maryland and
Virginia was 145 amounting to 1,058,896 gallons of spillage.
The Chesapeake Bay is one of the major trans-shipments
routes along the East Coast used by the petrochemical
industry.37 The deliberate dumping of sludge and garbage
into the ocean pollutes harbors near large population centers,
The marine life in them is crucial to the fishing industry
which provides jobs and food for the people of the city.
46
-------
Industrial waste accounts for most of the dumping. Solid
waste, sewage sludge and dredge spoil are also significant
pollutant sources.38
IV.G Health Hazards
This discussion considers the health hazards which
close public beaches and those health hazards found in
poorly treated drinking water. These hazards affect the
center city resident by causing a lack of water recreational
resources and by lowering the quality of drinking water.
IV.G.I Beach Areas
Many beaches near urban areas are closed because of
hazardous pollution counts. These include beaches in the
Hudson River and Bay, the Chesapeake Bay and the Lake Erie
area. "Fifty years ago, 540 of New York City's 575 miles of
waterfront were deemed unfit for swimming. Almost none of
the shoreline has been reclaimed. Less than twenty miles of
beaches exist where the water is considered clean enough for
swimming—and the quality at these beaches is highly ques-
tionable." Beaches at Coney Island and Staten Island were
rated as either conditionally unsafe or unsafe.39 A study
of New York Harbor in 1969 showed that bacteria discharged
at Robbins Reef (discharge point for a waste treatment
plant) can reach the beaches of Coney Island and Staten
Island within six hours. A minimum of 20,000 organisms per
100 milliliter of coliform bacteria can survive the six-hour
exposure.40 The maximum allowed for body contact recreation
is 2,000 organisms per 100 ml. This indicates that patho-
genic organisms which may be in the waste water can cause a
health hazard for center city residents using the lower bay
for recreation.
Similar hazardous conditions were found in the
Washington, D.C. area' in a study done by the Department of
Microbiology at the Georgetown University School of Medicine
in 1970.41 Coliform counts in the Potomac River consis-
tently exceeded 100,000 MPN (most probable number) per 100
ml and fecal coliform levels exceeded 10,000 MPN/100 ml.
The study indicates a clear danger to public health as
coliform counts should not exceed 2,000 MPN/100 ml. for
swimming and 10,000 MPN/100 ml for boating and shore recrea-
tion. Dr. Falkow of the Georgetown University School of
Medicine recommended that water contact recreation on the
Potomac be immediately prohibited because of the health
hazard. The waters near urban areas have been found to be
extremely polluted and unhealthy. Center city residents are
without easy access to water recreational resources as the
closest waters are unsafe.
47
-------
IV. G. 2 Drinking Water
Poor quality drinking water can be traced to inadequate
municipal water treatment facilities, old distribution
systems, and unprotected water supply sources. The older
supply systems and treatment plants are subject to more
frequent breakdowns and contaminatipn entering in from
inadequate chlorination. Lead may be dissolved in the water
from older lead pipes and joints. Metals and organic chemi-
cals reach the water supplies from industries and may not be
completely removed by present treatment processes.
Drinking water from old, center city distribution
systems can also be considered unsafe. The Public Health
Service Drinking Water Standards define health hazards as
"any conditions, devices or practices in the water supply
system and its operation which create, or may create, a
danger to the health and well being of the water consumer."42
Harmful substances in the water as well as poor maintenance
of and inadequate treatment in the water supply facilities
constitute health hazards. Potential health dangers exist
in inefficient supply systems which do not or cannot remove
harmful substances such as bacteria, viruses, heavy metals
and organic chemicals from the drinking water. Physical
deficiencies were found in fifty-six percent of the 969
systems studied in the Community Water Supply Study (CWSS).43
Individual tap water samples were taken during the CWSS
in 1970 and analyzed according to the PHS Drinking Water
Standards. Thirty-six percent of the 2,600 samples con-
tained one or more bacteriological or chemical constituents
exceeding the limits. Nine percent contained bacteriologi-
cal contamination evidencing a potentially dangerous quality
of water. Thirty-six percent exceeded at least one of the
chemical limits. Eleven percent exceeded the recommended
organic chemical limit of 200 parts per billion.44
A potential problem exists with bacterial contamination
as public distribution and treatment facilities become older.
Bacteria can enter at the source of the water supply or
later in the distribution systems. Cases of system failures
and the resultant outbreak of waterborne diseases show the
lack of adequate treatment facilities and their maintenance.
In Riverside, California (in 1965) 16,000 people were
affected by an epidemic of acute gastroenteritis in which
seventy people were hospitalized and three died.45 Another
attack of gastroenteritis occurred in 1968 in Angola, New
York because of a failure in the disinfection system. The
town uses the same lake for sewage and drinking water.46
Other cities such as Buffalo, New York and Fall River,
Massachusetts have frequently instructed their residents to
boil all their drinking, cooking and washing water because
of bacterial pollution.47
Other than the deterioration of water supply facilities,
a potential health hazard exists in the water pollutants
which cannot be removed by regular processes. Three types
47a
-------
of these pollutants are viruses, heavy metals and organic
chemicals. Viruses can survive chlorination processes
better than vegetative bacteria. The occurrence of water-
borne hepatitis indicates the potential danger of such epi-
sodes if conditions favor the virus population. A total of
53 waterborne outbreaks of infectious hepatitis were
reported in the literature in this century.48 A recent
example happpned in 1969 in Worcester, Massachusetts when
sixty percent of the Holy Cross College football team was
stricken with infectious hepatitis as a result of ineffec-
tive cross-connection control procedures.49 Better tech-
niques of water treatment are needed to insure elimination
of viruses from drinking water.50
IV.G.3 Toxic Substances
Heavy metals such as lead and mercury constitute
another health hazard to center city residents. Toxic
effects occur from an accumulation of the metals in the
body resulting from exposure to excessive amounts (in air,
water, food and/or paint). More cases of lead poisoning
have been discovered in older sections of cities than else-
where. 51 Although the largest source of lead exposure is
probably lead based paint the existence of lead concentra-
tions in drinking water must also be considered a severe
problem. 52 The major problem with heavy metals in water
treatment processes is removal difficulties. Existing pro-
cedures are not always effective in removal of these
substances.
The addition of organic chemicals such as DDT to water
resources is growing in frequency all the time. Newer
chemicals are being developed and added to the environment,
while the effect of these chemicals has not been fully
analyzed to determine their toxicity to people. An example
is PCB's (polychlorinated biphenyls) which are used in
industrial coolants. It is estimated that about 300,000
gallons per year of PCB materials are presently used by
Michigan industries and that there is a potential market of
about one million gallons per year.53 Most of this is
dumped.in waste effluents into receiving waters. More
research needs to be done on the environmental and health
effects of these new chemicals as well as better methods
of removing them from drinking water.
IV.H Control of Water Pollution
The Environmental Protection Agency represents the
Federal government's role in the abatement of water pollu-
tion. It offers central administrative support to the
individual states in the establishment of their own
standards. Pollution controls on interstate and navigable
waters can be directly enforced by EPA. There is a Federal
system of "matching grants" to municipalities for the
.*
48
-------
construction of waste water treatment works. Recently a
bill*'to set minimum national-standards for drinking water
was passed. The present laws will be reviewed along with
three which are now before the legislature.
The'Federal laws to abate water pollution follow two
methods: (1) That of an enforcement conference, and (2)
that of construction grants for waste treatment plants. Both
of these-are in"1 conjunction with the states. Direct Federal
responsibility exists for interstate^ and navigable waters
and also for cases where the interstate sale of shellfish
suffers>from pollution. Only if a governor or state agency
requests the assistance may the Federal government take
action for intrastate pollution. Forrexample, the confer-
ences on the Hudson River began in 1965 because of requests
from the governors of New York and New Jersey and also
because;survey;studies showed interstate pollution.
The idea of-enforcement conferences to end water pollu-
tion began in 1956 with the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act. -After hearing testimony from the polluters recommenda-
tions are made along with arclean-up schedule. The states
are given the responsibility of enforcing the recommenda-
tions.'- After more hearings and warnings with six months
time limits the polluters
-------
in the standards (most of the final compliance dates are
prior to 1975) EPA may issue a 180 day notice. This gives
the polluter six months to agree to voluntary action or be
taken to court.55
The most recent law, The Water Quality Act of 1970,
includes a section on the control of oil pollution placing
this problem under Federal authority- Fines of up to
$10,000 are required for discharges of oil from vessels, and
on-shore or off-shore facilities. The owners or operators
responsible for the pollution are liable for up to
$14,000,000 for the cost of the damages and removal of the
oil.
Federal water pollution abatement through grants for
the construction of waste treatment plants began in 1956
when funds were first authorized. More funds were authorized
in 1965 and in the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966.
Under the present law, grants between 30 and 55 percent of
the approved construction cost are available from EPA.
Since 1957, the Federal government has paid considerable
amounts of money for treatment plants.5° In theory this
helps abate industrial pollution because industries may pay
to hook up to municipal plants to allow treatment of their
effluents. Federal grants for manpower training to schools
and scholarships to individuals for training in water
quality technology are also available. Funds are also
provided for regional planning agencies which draw up the
implementation programs.
An anti-pollution tool that was already in existence
but not being used as such is the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899 (Refuse Act). It provides for fines of $2,500 per day
for discharging refuse or waste, except municipal sewage,
into navigable waters without a permit from the Army Corps
of Engineers. The law was brought back into use jji 1970 by
an executive order. A permit program was instituted to be
run jointly by the Army Corps of Engineers and The Environ-
mental Protection Agency. The states are also given a say
in whether a permit is to be issued or denied until the
discharge receives treatment. One unique provision of the
law is that any person who gives information which "leads to
a conviction" is entitled to one-half the fine. The Act has
been tested in a court and found to be a useful tool against
unauthorized discharges.
Presently the permit program is being held up because
of a court case (Kalur v. Resor, December 1971) which says
that an environmental impact statement must be filed for each
permit issued. Section 1'02 (2) (C) of the National Environ-
mental Policy Act requires "all agencies of the Federal
government" to prepare environmental impact statements on
major actions significantly affecting the environment.
Congress did not intend section 102 should change existing
agencies that "already have important responsibilities in
the area of environmental control." The Council on Environ-
mental Quality issued guidelines which limit exemptions from
50
-------
the 102 process to "environmental protective regulatory
activities taken or concurred in by" EPA. But NEPA itself
contains no specific guidance on this point. As a result
the Federal district court's decision in the Kalur case
has held up the permit program established under the Refuse
Act. There is now a backlog of over 20,000 permit applica-
tions on existing refuse discharges which are awaiting
further decisions.57
The most recent method to control pollution is the idea
of effluent limitations which is part of the proposed 1972
amendments to the Water Pollution Control Act. Effluent
limitations are a more direct means of enforcement than the
stream water quality standards, because they are easily
applied to a specific polluting discharge. The new bill
would require, by January 1, 1976, effluent limitations "of
the best practical control technology currently available."5
The bill even goes further to say that there shall be no
discharge of pollutants by January 1, 1981; or else "limita-
tions consistent with the best available demonstrated tech-
nology. "59 Publicly owned treatment works existent on
January 1, 1976, or those approved for construction prior
to June 30, 1974, must meet effluent limitations based upon
a defined secondary treatment.60 This difference between
public and private sources was made in recognition that they
generally have different types of effluents. If a private
discharge is put into a public treatment system, provisions
are made for "pretreatment standards."
The Federal and state governments will work together to
establish the effluent limitations regulations along with
the best "practicable" and the best "available" techniques.
The economic, social, environmental and technological
effects of achieving or not achieving the effluent limita-
tions and the goals of no discharge by 1981 are expected to
be considered. This will be in a report to Congress by the
National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy o'f
Engineering which is due two years after passage of the bill
How does this bill relate to past legislations? First
of all, the Water Quality Standards program according to
the 1965 Act will still be continued "unless found to be
inconsistent with the 1972 Act." The effluent limitations
can be made more stringent if they are found inadequate to
meet the water quality standards of the 1965 Act. Secondly,
the Refuse Act Permit program will be changed. Under this
bill there will be more Federal-state cooperation in issuing
Federal permits. Most of the enforcement burden will be
upon the states. The Federal government can only deny a
permit if the discharge will affect the quality of the
waters in another state. Overall, the enforcement proce-
dures will be based upon discharge permits and effluent
limitations with fines and/or jail sentences instead of the
old conferences and 180-day notices.
The comprehensive new bill includes many other provi-
sions. One calls for "user charges" which industries will
51
-------
pay for their use of a waste water treatment plant according
to volume and strength of effluent. Public participation
will be in the form of "citizens suits" against any person
or persons in violation of the effluent limitations. Grant
money is included for the construction of new waste treat-
ment plants for amounts from 60 to 75 percent of the cost,
depending on the state's share. Eighteen billion dollars
for fiscal years 73-75 is asked for in the proposed law for
the purpose of construction grants.. Loans to small business
concerns for water pollution control facilities are author-
ized in the bill to be made when the small business needs
assistance. The Attorney General will "make a study of the
feasibility of establishing a separate court or court system
having jurisdiction over environmental matters." An
Environmental Financing Authority (EFA) will be established
under the supervision of the Secretary of the Treasury. The
EFA will help the state and local governments in the financ-
ing of their share of the construction of waste treatment
facilities.
The proposed Marine Protection and Research Act of 1971
provides for a permit system run by EPA to control ocean
dumping. The Federal controls will be applied at the
loading dock. No owner of a vessel may load waste which is
to be discharged in ocean waters unless a permit has been
obtained from EPA and the Coast Guard is notified of the
exact dumping location. The permits are issued only if EPA
concludes that the discharge of such waste in any ocean
waters will not damage the ecology of the marine environ-
ment. The wastes which are included in this Act are dredge
spoils, sewage sludge, solid waste, industrial wastes, con-
struction debris and radioactive wastes. The area covered
by the "ocean waters" is both the territorial waters within
three miles of the shore and the high seas adjacent to the
territoral waters as far as twelve miles out.
There are proposed amendments to the Public Health
Service Act which will provide for the establishment by the
Federal government of certain standards pertaining to
drinking water and its sources. The bill provides for
minimum national standards which will be implemented and
enforced by the state and local governments. These proposed
standards for the minimum quality of water allowable for
drinking in the U.S. will include the maximum permissible
levels for any chemical, biological, radiological or other
contaminants. Before these standards, the Federal govern-
ment only had authority over water supplies serving inter-
state carriers. The new law will allow Federal enforcement
action when the states fail to do this. A hearing board may
be called to examine the problem and to make recommendations,
The violators then have six months to one year to correct
the drinking water contamination problem before, the matter
is referred to a court. Technical as well as financial
assistance will be provided by EPA for state and local
52
-------
agencies in need. These amendments are still in Congres-
sional subcommittees for discussion.
Provisions in the Federal water pollution laws will not
affect the residents of the center city as direct generators
of that pollution, but the residents may take action against
the polluters. Under the Refuse Act of 1899 citizens may
act as informers against industries which are discharging
wastes without a permit. Employee protection is insured for
any citizens acting as informers against their own employers
for violation of anti-pollution laws. The informers are
entitled to one-half of the imposed fine. Under the pro-
posed 1972 amendments, citizens may sue public and private
violators of the effluent limitations.
Municipal governments are responsible for the pollution
caused by publicly owned waste treatment facilities, com-
bined or separate sewer systems, and urban runoff. If they
are presently found to be violators of the Federal-state
water quality standards program, EPA first gives the states
an opportunity to take action. When the state pollution
control agency doesn't do this, the Federal government can
call an enforcement conference or issue a 180-day notice to
the municipality to abate the pollution. The usual route
followed today is to issue a 180-day notice. During the 180
days an agreement may be reached on a program for pollution
abatement. If not, the court will hear the case and makes
its own recommendations. The polluter can then be fined or
imprisoned for contempt of court.
Under the present law municipal governments are eligi-
ble for construction grants between 30 and 55 percent of the
cost to treatment facilities. The remaining cost must be
made up on their own (45-70 percent) at the expense of other
much needed city programs.
The 1972 proposed law has a simpler means of enforce-
ment. By January 1, 1976 all publicly owned treatment works
must have secondary treatment for their effluents. When EPA
determines a municipal plant is illegally discharging, the
state agency is given thirty days to take action. EPA will
then issue an order to the polluter or take him to court.
Federal enforcement action can be in a civil court for a
fine of $10,000/day of violation or in a criminal court for
penalties up to $25,000 per day of violation and/or one year
in jail.
Besides a faster and more direct means of enforcement,
the new law would provide for construction grants of between
60 and 75 percent of the cost for waste treatment works.
This leaves only 25 to 40 percent of the cost up to the
municipal government. Federal money will also be provided
for comprehensive planning by regional or interstate
agencies (75 to 100%).
The passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act will mean
enforcement of standards upon municipal water supply systems.
Municipal governments will have to pay to upgrade their
present systems and efficiency of treatment, or, pay to
53
-------
build all new systems. Federal money and technical assis-
tance is offered to the municipalities to help meet condi-
tions of the Act.
The proposed legislation may have direct effects upon
certain industries.. Building and highway construction will
have to provide for sediment control programs which will
increase construction costs. The cost of sediment control
for housing construction programs is estimated at between
$100 and $150 per structure. A total investment in this is
estimated by CEQ for 1972 to 1980 to be $900 million.61
Industries which discharge wastes into interstate and
navigable waters are presently subject to the same controls
as municipal waste treatment plants. They must comply with
the 1965 Water Quality Standards Program or be given a 180-
day notice and then taken to court. The industry may be
found discharging refuse without a permit and be illegal
under the 1869 Refuse Act. If found guilty, the polluter
must pay $2500 per day for the violation.
The new law -will clear up the procedure to define dead-
lines for achieving certain effluent limitations. They are
the "best practicable methods" by January 1, 1976 and no
discharge or the "best available methods" of treatment by
January 1, 1981. Enforcement of the law will rest with both
state and Federal authorities. Federal action could take
one of three approaches: court order, civil proceedings or
criminal proceedings. The choice "presented" to the
industry is to pay for the pollution controls or to pay
court fines, plus the pollution controls if found in viola-
tion. Possible fines of $25,000 per day of violation are
provided in the law. J
The mobile sources which cause oil pollution are now
liable for the costs of damages and clean-up under the 1970
amendments. This method will probably continue under the
new proposed law. The choice for the oil transporters is to
pay for safer vessels or to pay for the high cost of the
damages which their pollution imposes upon the environment.
The vessels which would dump refuse into the ocean (harbors
and bays) will have to receive permits if the Marine Protec-
tion Act becomes law. The permits would only be allowed if
EPA determined that the dumping would not damage the marine
ecology.
54
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. (1) Domestic sewage and other oxygen demanding wastes;
(2) Infectious agents; (3) Plant nutrients, particularly
nitrogen and phosphorous; (4) Organic chemical exotics,
particularly insecticide, pesticide and detergents; (5)
Other mineral and chemical substances from industry, mining
and agricultural operation; (6) Sediments from land erosion;
(7) Radioactive substances; Heat. From Hoch, p. 26.
2. Coliform bacteria are a group of bacteria often found in
human wastes and their existence in the water indicates the
possibility of finding more.
3. U.S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution
Administration, Proceedings of the Conference in the Matter
of Pollution of the Interstate Waters of the Hudson River
and Its Tributaries—New York, New Jersey,3rd Session
(Newark, New Jersey, 1969), pp. 27, 81-85.
4. David T. Beale, et al. Pollution Control on the Passaic
River; A Report by the Center for Analysis of Public Issues
(Princeton, N.J.: 1972), p. 22~. '
5. U.S. Department of the Interior, Hudson River Conference,
p. 87.
6. Ibid., p. 34.
7. Ibid., p. 66. Data tables, maps and graphs are given in
Appendix B.)
8. Eutrophication is the tendency of a body of water to
fill up with debris or algae and degenerate into a swamp.
9. U.S. Department of the Interior, Hudson River Conference,
p. 33.
10. One microgram per liter (ug/1) is equivalent to 10"6
grams per liter. _
11. The Second Annual Report of the Council on Environ-
mental Quality (1971), p. 196.
12. Public Health Service. Drinking Water Standards, 1962,
PHS #956 (1969), p. 45.
13. Boston Trace Metal Analysis (unpublished data 1972) and
The Boston Globe (July 25, 1972).
55
-------
14. Leland J. McCabe, "Trace Metals Content of Drinking
Water from a Large System/1 Symposium on Water Quality in
Distribution Systems, (Minneapolis: American Chemical
Society, 1969).
15. U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, Bureau of Water Hygiene, "Community Water
Supply Study: Analysis of National Survey Findings," Safe
Drinking Water (1970) in Safe Drinking Water Hearings,
before the Subcommittee on Public Health and Environment
of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce
(May, 1971), pp. 180-307.
16. Ibid., James H. McDermott, pp. 176-177.
17. Allen V. Kneise, "Lectures on the Political Economy of
Water Quality Management," lecture presented at the Univer-
sity of California, Berkeley, Spring (1971).
18. Ibid.
19. Gladwin Hill, "Our Troubled Waters: The Fight Against
Water Pollution," Public Affairs Pamphlet No. 462 (1971),
p. 4.
20. Kneise, "Lectures on the Political Economy of Water
Quality Management."
21. Hill, "Our Troubled Waters," p. 3.
22. Council on Environmental Quality,. Environmental Quality,
p. 123.
23. Hill, "Our Troubled Waters," p. 3.
24. Ibid., p. 3.
25. U.S. Department of the Interior, Hudson River Confer-
ence, pp. 341-344.
26. Beale, Pollution Control on the Passaic River, p. 27.
27. Ibid., pp. 29, 50-54.
28. Ibid., pp. 17-18.
29. Combined sewers exist when waste water pipes are con-
nected to stormwater pipes and they form one sewage system.
When the system is overloaded by stormwaters, it overflows
or bypasses the treatment plant and dumps raw or partially
treated wastes into the receiving water.
56
-------
30. "Primary treatment" removes only gross solids and up to
35 percent of the BOD. "Secondary" is considered minimal
treatment and that removes (80 to 90) percent of the BOD.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Needed Clean Air"
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972).
31. Cornelius W. Kruse, "Our Nation's Water: Its Pollution
Control and Management," Advances in Environmental Science,
ed. by Pitts and Metcalf, I (1969), 55.
32. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, U.S.
Census of Housing (1970).
33. Irving Hoch, "Urban Scale and Environmental Quality,"
Resources and Environmental Implications of U.S. Population
Control, ed. by Ronald G. Ridker (to be published), p. 39.
34. U.S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Popula-
tion Control Administration, and NE Region Hudson-Delaware
Basins Office, "An Evaluation of the Significance of Com-
bined Sewer Overflows in the Hudson River Enforcement Con-
ference Area," Proceedings of the Conference in the Matter
of Pollution of the Interstate Waters of the Hudson River
and Its Tributaries—New York, New Jersey (Newark, New
Jersey, 1969), p. 68-143.
35. Beale, Pollution Control on the Passaic River, pp.
25-26.
36. Jerry J. Cleveland et al., "Evaluation of Dispersed
Pollution Loads from Urban Areas," PB-230-746 (Washington,
D.C.: National Technical Information Service.
37. The Bay Series (I-IV), Washington Post, (July 1971).
38. U.S. Congress, Senate, Public Works Committee, Water
Pollution Control Legislation, Hearings, Part 3, before a
subcommittee of the Public Works Committee, U.S. Senate
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1971),
p. 1212.
39. U.S. Department of the Interior, Hudson River Confer-
ence, p. 369.
40. Ibid., A. W. Bromberg, pp. 53-63.
41. Dr. Stanley Falkow statement in the Enforcement Con-
ference on the Pollution of the Potomac River, I (Washington,
D.C. metropolitan area, 1970), 23-26.
42. Public Health Service, Drinking .Water Standards (1962),
p. 2.
57
-------
43. Bureau of Water Hygiene, Safe Drinking Water, pp.
176-177. a '
44. Public Health Service, Drinking Water Standards (1962),
p. 2.
45. Public Health Service, Drinking Water Standards (1962),
p. 649.
46. Public Health Service, Drinking Water Standards (1962),
p. 180.
47. U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Public Works, Water
Pollution Control Legislation, Hearings, Part 2, before a
Subcommittee of the Committee on Public Works, Senate
(March 1971) , p. 600.
48. Bureau of Water Hygiene, Safe Drinking Water, p. 400.
49. Senate, Committee on Public Works, Water Pollution
Control Legislation, Part 2, p. 600.
50. For a more detailed discussion of the virus problems
see Bureau of Water Hygiene, Safe Drinking Water, pp. 379-469,
51. U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Labor and Public
Welfare, "Lead Based Paint Poisoning Amendments of 1972,"
before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Labor and Public
Welfare, Senate (March 1972), p. 67.
52. U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Public Works,
Economic Dislocations Resulting from Environmental Controls,
before a subcommittee of the Committee on Public Works,
Senate (May 1971), pp. 41-44.
53. Bureau of Water Hygiene, Safe Drinking Water, p. 630.
54. Kneise, "Lectures on the Political Economy of Water
Quality Management," p. 9.
55. For more discussion of the program refer to: Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Office of Water Pollution, Divi-
sion of Water Quality Standards, "Questions and Answers on
Water Quality Standards," (April 1972).
56. Kneise, "Lectures on'the Political Economy," pp. 11-14.
57. Council on Environmental Quality, "Environmental
Quality (1972)" pp. 239-240.
58. U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Public Works, report,
H.R. 11896, 92nd Congress, 2nd Session (1972), Title III
(Section 301).
58
-------
59. Council on Environmental Quality,"Environmental Quality,
(1972)" pp. 239-240.
60. Ibid.
61. Council on Environmental Quality, "Environmental
Quality (1972)" p. 273.
59
-------
SECTION V
SOLID WASTE
V.A Introduction
The most visible of urban environmental problems is
solid waste. Streets and alleys are cluttered with garbage,
trash, worn out appliances and furniture and frequently,
abandoned automobiles. Residents of the inner city often
feel that solid waste is the most significant urban environ-
mental problem. Inadequate sanitation and garbage removal
were named as significant grievances by the residents of al-
most half of the cities surveyed by the National Advisory
Commission on Civil Disorders. In 1968, solid waste genera-
tion in urban areas, exceeded one billion pounds daily.
The problem is growing: incinerators cannot be built
because of air pollution requirements; landfills must move
further away from cities thus increasing hauling cost; water
pollution and dumping requirements are becoming more strin-
gent thus eliminating presently used disposal methods. Most
importantly, patterns of consumption are changing. Paper,
wood, plastics and glass are all being consumed in ever
increasing quantities. An average urban resident generates
5.72 pounds of solid waste per day.1 By 1980, this figure
is expected to rise to almost eight pounds per day.2
V.B Inner City Solid Waste
Inner city solid waste problems are more pronounced than
those of the urban area as a whole. High population density
in conjunction with housing conditions and community economic
and educational levels tend to accentuate the problem. Lack
of community recreational facilities force children to play
in streets, alleys and vacant lots whose proximity to solid
waste accumulations cause exposure to rats, vermin and rot-
ting food. Containers are easily knocked over giving rise to
broken glass, scavengers and waste strewn all over the area.
Abandoned appliances, furniture and automobiles become play
toys for children and breeding places for roaches, rats and
other pests.
In order to better understand inner city solid waste
problems a case study of Wilmington, Delaware will be pre-
sented. Wilmington is a typical Northeastern city evidencing
most urban problems, but .on a smaller, somewhat manageable
scale. Poverty, housing abandonment, Model Cities grants and
urban renewal are all part of Wilmington's character. Solid
waste problems are also a part of that character. In order
to discuss .the solid waste problem of Wilmington, four subject
areas will be considered: solid waste generation and collec-
tion, abandpned automobiles, street cleaning and special pick-
ups (used appliances, furniture, etc. too large to be handled
during regular service).
60
-------
V.B.I Solid Waste Generation and Collection
Wilmington is divided into 36 routes for routine trash
collection. All routes are traversed twice weekly, either
Monday and Thursday or Tuesday and Friday. Wednesday is left
as a bad weather makeup day or for special pick ups. Route
size is based upon equivalent numbers of dwelling units in
each route. No allowance for density considerations is made.
Data representing 35 weeks of collection during 1971 was
collected. (Originally data for the whole year was collect-
ed. However, all data sheets containing Wednesday pick ups
were disregarded. This was done to eliminate any possible
bias that might be caused by water soaked waste.) The unit
of measurement was a truck load which represents 20 cubic
yards of compacted refuse. All refuse was collected in trucks
of this type. Each day, drivers reported the number of loads
collected. Number of loads collected weekly ranged from 3.04
to 4.86 with a mean of 3.78 and a variance of .2125.
The Census Bureau poverty map3 according to the
1969 census was imposed upon a mop of the
collection routes in Wilmington. Accordingly, collection
routes were classified in one of the following four categor-
ies:
I. Contained Entirely within poverty area.
II. Contained Predominately within poverty area.
III. Contained Predominately outside of poverty area.
IV. Contained Entirely outside of poverty area.
Collection routes in their respective categories are shown
in Table
The difference between means for Groups I and IV was
statistically significant.^ This implies that refuse genera-
tion per poverty area routes was significantly greater than
refuse generation per non-poverty area route. Combining
Groups II and III and 'then comparing with IV yielded no signi-
ficant difference. This implies that refuse generation per
routes contained partially in the poverty area did not differ
from refuse generation in routes totally outside the poverty
area. The comparison of means of II and III versus I yielded
significant differences.5 This infers that generation in
totally contained poverty area routes is significantly larger
than generation in partially contained poverty area routes.
The inferences that can be drawn from the data serve to
reinforce the concepts presented earlier. First, there is a
significant difference in~ the amount of refuse generated be-
tween inner city residential refuse routes and other residen-
tial routes. Second, since routes are based on approximately
equivalent numbers of housing units, the accumulations of
refuse at any one time are necessarily larger in the inner
city. When this is qompounded with the inner city character-
istic of high density, probably the cause of the higher
generation^, this accumulation problem becomes acute. In
this context, containerization becomes an acute problem.
61
-------
TABLE 20
WILMINGTON TRASH COLLECTION ROUTES
Ia .
Route
B-7
A-10
A-12
B-12
A-13
B-13
A-14
B-14
A-15
A-16
B-16
A-17
B-17
A-18
Average
Loads/Week
3.53
3.66
3.59
4.16
3.56
4.06
3.27
4.39
4.56
4.74
4.86
4.29
4.24
3.99
lib
Route
B-3 ,
B-6
A-9
A-ll
B-ll
Average
Loads/Week
4.38
3.54
3.65
3.63
3.54
IIIC
Route
A-6
A-8
B-10
Average
Loads/Week
3.54
3.48
4.16
IV5
Route
A-l
B-l
A-2
B-2
A-3
A-4
B-4
A-5
B-5
A-7
B-8
B-9
B-15
B-18
Average
Loads/Week
3.95
3.44
3.87
3.43
3.61
3.04
3.09
3.31
3.40
3.51
3.23
4.00
3.89
3.91
to
aMean «= 4.06; variance = .2398
^Mean * 3.74; variance was not calculated
cMean = 3.75; variance was not calculated
dMean = 3.54; variance = .1085
-------
Larger accumulations of refuse proximate to more people
necessarily implies that containers used in the inner city
must be larger, stronger and more accessible to the local
residents.
V.B.2 Abandoned Automobiles
In the period July 1, 1970 to June 30, 1971, 958 aban-
doned automobiles were removed from the streets of Wilmington.
Monthly totals ranged from 40 in December 1970 to 147 in July
1970. In a random sample of 100 abandoned cars, 72 were
found to have been abandoned within the Census Bureau poverty
area. In other words, the probability of having an abandoned
auto in the poverty area was 2.67 times as great as having
one in another city location.
The city does not incur any direct costs due to the
abandoned auto problem. However, substantial indirect costs
are involved. First, the police force must ticket all aban-
doned autos and notify a private towing contractor to have it
towed away. Second, abandoned autos serve as a breeding place
for rats and other vermin whose control often becomes a muni-
cipal responsibility. Third, disposal of the abandoned auto
eventually ends up as a city responsibility after all salvage
has taken place. Finally, it was estimated by city officials
that a three day to two week lead time exists between contrac-
tor notification and vehicle removal. During this time traf-
fic is obstructed, children use them for playing areas and
the visual aesthetics of a neighborhood are severely impair-
ed. Although not direct or even tangible, these are signifi-
cant costs to be borne by the city.
V.B.3 Street Cleaning
Depending upon parking regulations, Wilmington utilizes
either manual or mechanical means for street cleaning. Manual
routes are located predominantly (12 of 16) within the Census "
Bureau poverty area. In contrast, mechanical routes are pre-
dominantly (15 of 19) located outside of the poverty area.
Data was collected for the months of April and May 1972.
Frequency of service, total miles traversed, and tons of re-
fuse collected were recorded. The statistic
tons x frequency of service
miles
was calculated for all routes. In both manual and mechanical
routes, no significant difference was found between non-poverty
area and poverty area routes. The same was true for total tons
collected, tons per miles and frequency of service. (Due to the
different technologies employed, differences between manual and
mechanical were not evaluated.) In other words, the streets are
just as dirty in the poverty areas as outside of them.
In our opinion, additional data (this study was based on
only two months) would indicate a differential impact on the
inner city, i.e. streets located in the poverty area would
generate more refuse and require a greater frequency of service.
63
-------
V.B.4 Special Pickups
Old furniture, broken appliances, or any other refuse
too large to be easily handled during scheduled routes is
classified as a special pickup. In order to have this refuse
removed, a resident must call the Department of Public Works
and request removal. Contingent upon their availability,
trucks are dispatched to collect the refuse.
A random sample of ten days during May-June 1972, indi-
cated 354 requests for pickup were called in. Of these, 156
or 41 percent originated in the inner city. Lead time between
call in and eventual service was estimated to be one week or
less.
The existence of special pick up items on inner city
streets and alleys precipitates many of the same problems
associated with abandoned automobiles. They serve as breed-
ing places, for rats and vermin. They become play toys for
neighborhood children who lack recreational facilities. Sca-
vengers dismantle and remove the salvagable components leav-
ing the valueless shell strewn over the street. Finally,
aesthetics of the neighborhood are severely impaired, inflic-
ting possible psychological harm upon the residents.
V.B.5 The Inner City Solid Waste Problem
To understand why the inner city has acute solid waste
problems, one must delve into its character. Deteriorating
physical plant combined with high density conditions are the
basic problems. The generally lower socio-economic status of
the residents serve to magnify the problem. Streets crowded
with automobiles not only produce significant air pollution
but also seriously hamper the movement of collection vehicles.
Rampant crime imparts fear to residents and inhibits neighbor-
hood cooperation in the solution of neighborhood problems.
Numerous frustrations with urban life manifest themselves
in solid waste problems. The existence of vast amounts of
substandard housing provide little incentive to keep streets,
alleys and back yards free from debris. Lack of education and
opportunity serve to further destroy these incentives.
Conditions dictated by economics magnify the problems.
Eating habits based on below poverty level incomes create
food wastes, as residents are forced to purchase cheaper, low-
er quality food stuffs. Dilapidated furniture and worn out
appliances become more prevalent as residents cannot afford
to maintain the old or purchase new household wares.
Decreasing city tax bases and increasing demand for city
services, especially among poverty communities, can result in
cut backs in collection frequency or street cleaning. Refuse
that was collected bi-weekly may now only be collected weekly.
Accumulations become more severe. The ultimate result is
more refuse in streets and alleys proximate to residents who
have neither the means nor the incentive to deal with the
problem.
64
-------
Inner city solid waste problems form a vicious cycle.
The presence of solid waste in the streets, alleys and hall-
ways precipitates more litter, more collection problems. As
collection lags behind generation, the problem magnifies.
Solutions to inner city solid waste problems must im-
pinge directly on these sources. Collection must be made
more efficient, more frequent. (Some areas of New York City
have collections daily while others only have it weekly.)
Systems that provide incentives to both manufacturers and
consumers must be developed. Better housing, higher standards
of living and education must also be made part of that system.
In summary, the following conclusions about inner city
solid waste problems may be drawn:
• Solid waste generation in the inner city tends to
be larger per route of approximately equivalent
housing units than generation in other parts of
the city.
• Due to increased density, lack of recreational
facilities and the increased generation rate,
accumulation and containerization problems in
the inner city are especially acute.
• The frequency of abandoned cars in the inner city
is much larger than in other,areas of the city.
• Generation of special pickup refuse is dispropor-
tionately higher in poverty areas than throughout
the remainder of the city.
• Processing and disposal of inner city solid waste
constitutes a significant city government problem.
V.C Health Hazards
Quantitative understanding of solid waste/disease rela-
tionships is non-existent. Therefore, a discussion on health
effects must be very general and qualitative in nature. The
health effects of solid waste in the inner city can be divi-
ded in two general categories: direct and indirect.
Direct health effects can be illustrated by the presence
of rats and other vermin in the inner city. It is estimated
that between 60 and 90 percent of all rat bites occur in the
inner city.^ Solid waste accumulations serve as breeding
places for disease carriers such as rats, flies, mosquitos,
and others. The presence of these household pests precipi-
tates the use of pesticides in order to control them.
The disposal of solid waste pollutes the air and water.
Incineration releases noxious gases and particulates in the
air. Waste dumped into waterways destroys plant and animal
life. Sanitary land fills and open dumps can result in meth-
ane generation and contamination of ground and surface waters.
Solid waste accumulations are also fire hazards. The
Director of Environmental Services of the District of Colum-
bia, James P. Alexander, testified before Congress that Opera-
tion Clean Sweep resulted in fewer fires.
65
-------
Finally, the psychological impact of inner city solid
waste is substantial. The presence of poor housing and the
accumulation of solid waste are obviously interrelated.
Frustration over environmental conditions can lead to crime,
and withdrawal from community efforts to improve the neigh-
borhood environment. This can result in further deteriora-
tion and abandonment.
V.D The Impact of Solid Waste Legislation
Solid waste legislation has been primarily directed to-
ward the development of solid waste management techniques and
providing technical and financial assistance to solid waste
management agencies. The major impact in the inner city has
been in the funding of demonstration grants and providing
technical assistance.
In reality, there are no solid waste standards. EPA
programs are geared to having local government improve their
solid waste management. New collection vehicles and systems,
programs in containerization and training programs have con-
stituted the major thrust of EPA action.
Federal programs in the inner city have made some short
term impact upon the solid waste problem. Using EPA techni-
cal assistance, the city of Cleveland, Ohio was able to save
$3 million by improving the efficiency of the waste collec-
tion system. Certain containerization demonstration grants
have had considerable success. Plastic bags have been adopt-
ed by some communities in an effort to attack the containeri-
zation problem. Community action programs, such as the
District of Columbia's Operation Clean Sweep have also been
moderately successful in providing some short term solutions.
Other Federal action in solid waste has been to stimu-
late recycling through tax exempt bonds. This permits pri-
vate industry to finance recycling facilities with tax exempt
industrial development bonds. The intended outcome of this
program is to make recycling an economically competitive
method for municipal solid waste disposal. This program
would have direct benefits to center city environments by
easing the disposal problem now confronting many areas.
Contemplated EPA actions in the areas of inner city
solid waste include
1. Upgrading urban waste disposal services generally-
2. Improved handling and storage of wastes in existing
housing.
3. Developing improved waste handling and storage
methods in public housing.
4. Encouraging inner city businessmen to participate
in refuse handling enterprise.
5. Supporting inner city cleanup campaigns.
66
-------
In summary, proposed EPA action will do much to attack
the inner city solid waste problem. The eventual cure, how-
ever, will require some additional programs. It is not enough
to remove the waste generated. Rather, the character of the
waste must change. Recycling must be economically encouraged.
Biodegradable products need to be developed. Consumption
patterns must be altered. Above all, the conditions aggrava-
ting the solid waste problem must be removed. This implies
better education and economic opportunities for center city
residents and removal of poverty as an urban characteristic.
67
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. American Chemical Society, Cleaning our Environment
(Washington, D.C.: American Chemical Society, 1969), p. 165.
2. Richard D. Vaughn, "National Solid Waste Survey and
Interpretation," National Survey of Community Solid Waste
Practices (1968), p. 47.
3. Census Bureau poverty areas are determined by an index of
five equally weighted poverty-linked characteristics:
1. Percent of families with cash incomes below $3000 for
previous year.
2. Percent of children under 18 years old not living with
both parents.
3. Percent of males 25 years old and over with less than
8 years of'school completed.
4. Percent of unskilled males (laborers and service
workers) aged 14 or over in the employed civilian
labor force.
5. Percent of all housing units dilapidated or lacking
some or all plumbing facilities.
After the index was developed for each tract, the lowest
economic quartile were designated as poverty areas. There-
fore , 41 percent of the special pickups generated were genera-
ted by the lowest economic quartile of the population"!
(Source; Maps of Major Concentrations of Poverty in SMSAs of
250,000 or More Population, O.E.O. 1966).
4. p<.005,t = 3.30, 26 df.
5. p<.01,t = 1.367, 20 df.
6. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Residential Solid
Waste Generated in Low Income Areas, by George R. Davidson,
Jr., (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972).
7. Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Quality
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1971), p. 197.
68
-------
SECTION VI
VI.A Introduction NOISE
In a sense, the magnitude of the noise problem is propor-
tional to the number of people whose lives are significantly
degraded by noise.1 Noise is defined as unwanted sound.
Essentially, sound can be described as vibration in an elastic
medium. In analyzing center city-surburban noise differentials,
population characteristics such as age play a crucial role.
With age there is a reduction in the decibel range which can
be heard. Both physiological and psychological factors deter-
mine whether the noise is "unwanted sound." It is necessary
to consider individual perception in analyzing sounds.
Often when measurements of noise are taken, citizen per-
ception is analyzed from surveys in different locales. Re-
sults are then compared to actual measurements which are moni-
tored in the area. This gives an important comparison of
annoyance and the actual intensity of the noise present in an
environment.
VI.B Noise Measurement
There are various manners in which to measure noise.
Sound level, sound pressure level, sound power, sound inten-
sity, phons and sones are some of the terms relating to noise
levels. Noise can be measured in the total amount of acous-
tical energy radiating into the air per unit of time from a
source. This is sound power, but the common expression for
magnitude or level of noise is .the decibel. Based on a stan-
dard reference value computed using atmospheric pressure, the
decibel, dB, is a measure on a logrithmic scale of the magni-
tude of a particular quantity of noise.2
The limits of the human listener in acoustic energy is
between 2-20,000 hertz (Hz.)3. However, the human ear does not
respond directly to energy, but rather to the sound pressure.4
When sound enters the external ear the aural reflex is set
into motion by the tympani and stapidius, two small muscles
in the middle ear. The eardrum and the three bones of the
middle ear transmit vibrations to the fluid filled inner ear.
Vibration of fluid sets up a complex of waves in the cochlea
which exerts pressure on the hair cells of the organ of corti.
The auditory portion of the cranial nerve terminates at the
hair cells. Fluid vibrations are coded into impulses which
the brain interprets. Using the smallest sound pressure that
normal ears can hear, 0.00002 microbars, decibel levels were
developed with this level being the, reference level of 1.0
decibel. Because the ear does not respond to all frequencies
equally, scales were devised to relate to the different sensi-
tivity levels. To obtain a basis to measure the middle fre-
quencies which the human ear best responds to, a weighted
scale was developed reducing the effects of low and high fre-
quencies. The sound level is said to be A-weighted. Thus,
most common measurements of noise are done in units of
69
-------
A-weighted decibels (dBA) when concerned with the effects on
people.
VI.B.I Ambient Noise
Residual or ambient noise is the fairly constant lower
noise level in an environment. Studies done by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency for the Report to Congress on Noise
displayed a varying degree of ambient noise in environments
such as rural farms, small town residentials, suburban resi-
dential, and urban residential.5 These outdoor noise levels
were collected and mean dBA levels computed for city, subur-
ban and detached housing. Results point to a higher median
noise level (73.0 dBA daytime, 65.5 dBA nighttime) in the
c;Lty than in the suburban or detached housing (50.9 dBA day-
time, 44.2 dBA nighttime).6 Irving Hoch pointed out in Urban
Scale and Environmental Quality that outdoor noise levels in
the central section of large cities are on the order of twice
the perceived level in the residential areas of suburbia or
small towns.7 This doubling of perceived level indicates a
ten decibel increase. Residual noise levels in suburban and
rural areas seldom interfere with normal speech communication.
However, in urban communities, especially the very noisy down-
town urban residential areas, speech interference is frequent.
In the study "Transportation Noise and Noise from Equipment
Powered by the Internal Combustion Engine" by Wyle Laborator-
ies, types of communities were listed with corresponding
16-35 dBA for wilderness and rural to 56-75 dBA for very
noisy central city areas during daytime hours. Similarly, a
Bolt, Beranek and Newman study, reported even higher daytime
noise levels (see Figure 1) in various cities, particularly
in areas with heavy bus and truck traffic.®
iAmbient noise levels in the center city are higher than
average residential levels. The residents of center cities
are exposed to 30 to 40 decibels greater than residents of
suburban or rural areas. The primary reason for the greater
intensity is the concentration and combination of noise
sources present in the urban center which are not present in
suburbia. A study done in Inglewood, California presented to
the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution in 1972 displayed
the levels of ambient noise for different environmental areas.
Centraj. city residents are exposed to noise levels which
combine residential, commercial and industrial noises. Other
sources of noise adding to the noise levels of the central
city are construction activity and traffic. Intensity and
types of construction (e.g», industrial and commercial rather
than residential) are influencing factors on the noise level.
Intensity of traffic in the urban areas, including type of
vehicles—trucks, cars, motorcycles, etc.—and quantity per
unit of time, also compounds the noise level. Studies done
in Canada by Thiessen and Olsen of the National Research Coun-
cil in Ottawa indicate that ambient'noise in the urban
70
-------
environment is distinctly higher than rural areas with a
primary factor being motor vehicle noise.
It has been established that the center city environment
is definitely noisier than less densely populated areas of
suburbia. There are many compounding factors to noise pollu-
tion in the center city. Review of the general pollution
sources causing greatest noise levels in the center city dis-
plays the complexity of monitoring specific noises. For this
analysis, noise sources in the center city are classed as
industrial, commercial, municipal, mobile and domestic. These
are summarized in Table 21.
VLB.2 Industrial Noise
Usually, industrial and commercial operations are loca-
ted in heavily populated urban areas due to the large propor-
tion of skilled and semiskilled workers.9 The residual noise
in the community surrounding the industrial site is generally
raised by groups of plants and businesses. In 1967 the Depart-
ment of Commerce Statistical Abstracts reported that there
were 311,000 industrial establishments in the United States.
A large proportion of these are in urban areas where they can
add to the residual noise environment of the city. In the
1972 Report to Congress on Noise, industrial activities as
potential noise producing sources, are grouped into four basic
types: product fabrication, including metal fabrication and
molding, product assembly, power generation and process plants,
Noise levels of a glass manufacturing plant, a power plant and
an automobile assembly plant.located proximate to the center
city were monitored. One interesting feature of the report
is a comparison of residual noise levels at various community
sites with residual noise levels at the plant property lines.
A glass manufacturing plant produced a residual noise level
of 68 dBA, which was 9-24 decibels higher than the community
residual noise levels, in proximity to this location. The
major noise source was high pressure air used for cooling and
operation of the glass molding machines. In a second example,
residual noise level at the power plant property line was 8-0
dBA at the peak weekday measurement, which is 29-31 decibels
higher than community residual noise nearest this site. A
major source of noise at the power plant is the steam turbo-
generator or gas turbine generator.
Another example of increased residual noise is the auto-
mobile assembly plant. The highest residual noise level at
the plant property line was 62 dBA, which range from 12 to 14
decibels louder than the residual levels in the neighboring
community nearest the location. In sum, it seems likely that
the higher residual noise levels will have detrimental effects
on the surrounding area and the residents living there.
Generally, there are five major categories of industrial
plant noise sources.10 At the operators position associated
with these processes the noise levels produced range from
80 dBA (blowers) to 122 dBA (pneumatic chippers)-1! Other
specific noise levels emitted from industrial equipment are
71
-------
TABLE 21
SOURCES OF DIFFERENTIAL POLLUTION
Source
Noise Levels
(Maximum)
Industrial Equipment*
Blowers
Pneumatic Chippers
Oxygen Torch
Textile Loom
Bench Lathe
Milling Machine
80 dBA
122 dBA
126 dBA
122 dBA
95 dBA
90 dBA
Municipal or Commercial Construction**
Compacters
Front Loaders
Backhoes
Tractors
Scrapers, graders
Pavers
Generators
Pneumatic Wrenches
Trucks
Concrete mixers
Cranes
Jack hammers, rock drills
Impact Pile Drivers
Pavement Breakers
75 dBA
85 dBA
93 dBA
95 dBA
93 dBA
88 dBA
82 dBA
89 dBA
93 dBA
88 dBA
88 dBA
98 dBA
106 dBA
115 dBA
Source
** Source:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Improving
the Inner City Environment, by Task Force on
Environmental Problems of the Inner-City (1971).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to Congress
and the President on Noise.
72
-------
TABLE 21 (Continued)
SOURCES OF DIFFERENTIAL POLLUTION
Source
Noise Levels
(Maximum)
Mobile Sources**
Sports Car
Standard Car
Medium Trucks
Motorcycles
Utility, maintenance Vehicles
Highway buses
City and School Buses
Light Trucks
Freight, Passenger Trains
Rapid Transit
Trolley Cars
Subway Trains
90 dBA
73-80 dBA
88 dBA
88-95 dBA
88 dBA
86 dBA
85 dBA
86 dBA
94 dBA
86 dBA
68-80 dBA
100 dBA
Domestic Sources**
Alarm clock
Clothes Washer
Vacuum
Toilet Flush
Food Blender
Lawn Mower
85 dBA
82 dBA
72 dBA
65 dBA
100 dBA
90 dBA
** Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to Congress
and the President on Noise.
73
-------
the oxygen torch (126 dBA), textile loom (122 dBA), bench
lathe (95 dBA) and milling machine (90 dBA) ,12 Each of these
sources emits high intensity noise and would raise the resi-
dual noise level in the plant itself and the neighboring area
if the facilities were not sound tight.
VI.B.3 Commercial Noise
Many commercial operations include equipment similar to
that used in industrial operations. A newspaper press, for
example, produces 101 decibels and a key punch machine 82
decibels. Commercial businesses which require constant load-
ing and unloading of vehicles contribute to the residual noise
level in the central city. Additionally, nightclubs or other
entertainment spots produce high levels of noise: discothe-
ques have been known to produce noise levels of 120 decibels.
Noise levels in shopping areas, restaurants, even the stock
exchange,"are increased considerably when they are filled with
people. Normal conversation produces 60 dBA, but with
increased density this volume would be raised.
It has also been pointed out earlier in the report that
construction in the inner city is noisier than in suburban
construction. A major component of construction noise is
associated with exhaust and engine casing of engine powered
equipment. Construction equipment constantly vary in terms
of load and rpm during normal operation, which adds to the
peaks in residual noise.13 some of the peak noise emissions
from specific types of heavy construction equipment are:
compacters (75 dBA), front loaders (85 dBA), backhoes (93 dBA) ,
tractors (95 dBA), scrapers and graders (93 dBA), pavers
(88 dBA), trucks (93 dBA), concrete mixers (88 dBA), cranes
(88 dBA), generators (82 dBA), pneumatic wrenches (89 dBA) ,
jack hammers and rock drills (98 dBA) , impact pile drivers
(106 dBA) and pavement breakers (115 dBA)-14
It can be seen that with a combination of sources con-
centrated at several sites the noise level is quite intense.
During construction of roads and highways, for example, levels
of 84r88 decibels are not uncommon. Public works construction
raises the noise level considerably for the surrounding area.
Other sources of municipal noise are sirens from police
or fire emergency equipment, which reach noise levels of 95
dBA. Street cleaning operations, (i.e., street sweepers)
produce noise to 87 dBA. Garbage collection noise levels
sometimes reach 83 dBA and are often a frequent subject of
complaint from residents in the center city.15
VLB.4Mobile Noise
Rail vehicles and aircraft constitute another source of
noise pollution in the center city. Noise levels associated
with the former are presented in the publication "Transporta-
tion Noise and Noise from Equipment Powered" b,y the Internal
Combustion Engine".16 Included are freight and passenger
trains (94 dB) , rapid transit (86 dB) , trolley cars (new,
74
-------
68 dB-old, 80 dB) and subway trains (100 dB). The impact of
these mobile sources on the noise level in the center city
varies from region to region. For example, subway noise is
common in some of the larger cities such as New York. In
contrast, center city residents in Baltimore have to contend
with the din emanating from trains. Similarly, San Francisco's
trolley cars assault the ears, but most residents enjoy the
nostalgia associated with transportation from a bygone era.
Generally, aircraft flight patterns run over the center
city area. The Subcommittee Hearings on Noise in 1972 dis-
played aerial maps of California flight patterns in relation
to the center city. Approach noise levels at 1000 feet range
from 82 dB for propeller aircraft to 100 dB for four engine
turbofan and take-off noise levels from 90 dB to 105 dB,
respectively. Long and medium range aircraft, including
Boeing 747, 707 and 727 have approach levels ranging from
90-100 dB and takeoff levels from 100-105 dB.l? Jet aircraft
noise at 200 feet can reach levels of 150 decibels. There-
fore, those areas closest to approach and takeoff are sub-
jected to highest intensities of aircraft noise. One speci-
fic example is Inglewood, California whose residents have
been adversely affected by noise levels from L. A. Interna-
tional Airport.
Frequent complaints from suburban areas involve aircraft
noise; however, these complaints may be the result of lower
residual noise levels in suburban areas compared to those in
the inner city. Most airports are located close to urban
centers, and the people here are subjected to that portion of
the flight producing the greatest amount of noise.
VLB. 5 Domestic Noise
The last category of noise sources, domestic, includes
products used by the person in his home environment. Some
of the items which would generally be present in the center
city home are: alarm clock (85 dB), clothes washer (82 dB),
vacuum (72 dB), toilet flush (65 dB), perhaps food blender
(100 dB) and lawn mower (90 dB, at operators position).
Two points are worth noting. First, although domestic
sources are minor in comparison to other noise sources, home
appliances do contribute to the overall noise level. Second,
the fact that some of the items are more prevalent in subur-
ban homes (e.g., lawn mowers) does not mean that center city
residents necessarily benefit from their absence. For exam-
ple, lack of air conditioning in most center city homes makes
it necessary to leave doors and windows open. Thus, many
outside noises cannot be shut out during hot weather months.
Furthermore, electrical appliances found in center city homes
are frequently older and usually of inferior quality compared
to those in more affluent suburban homes. The center city
resident may have to buy cheaper models, or keep older appli-
ances which probably do not have quieting devices.
75
-------
With consideration given to the environment of the cen-
ter city, it seems likely that these residents are exposed to
greater noise levels. It has been shown that the center city
has commercial, urban industrial, urban traffic and residen-
tial noises which contribute to a high ambient noise level.
Residents are exposed to high intensity noises at home, as
well as at work. Census Bureau statistics of occupational
information for metropolitan-nonmetropolitan residences show
more center city residents work in services and operatives
where noise levels are higher than clerical, professional, or
other quieter occupations. Therefore, working center city
residents are often exposed to longer hours of high noise
levels and must return home to environments louder than subur-
ban areas.
In addition to the array of noise sources already describ-
ed, the tall, flat surface buildings in the inner city cause
energy reflection. The sound energy can be propagated as long
as sufficient energy exists to keep the particles in motion.1«
Shrubbery and trees would lessen this reflecting action.
Unfortunately, there is little greenery in the center city.
VI.C Health Hazards
Although the higher noise levels present in the center
city imply detrimental health effects, documentation is rare.
Hence, the present discussion must rely on indirect evidence
of physiological and psychological damage resulting from
differential exposure to extreme noise levels. Sounds most
people are subjected to in the central city include noises
exceeding the danger level of 80 dBA. (For example, heavy
traffic (90 dBA), subways (100 dBA) and heavy duty power
equipment (110 dBA).
The natural decline in audibility with age is called
presbycusis. According to Kryter, the amount of presbycusis
may be directly related to exposure to noise in everyday liv-
ing. 19 The term "sociocusis" is used sometimes to show the
relation between environmental noise and hearing damage. The
noises most dangerous to hearing are those which continue over
time, e.g., sirens and jet engines.20 Discomfort is the first
sign of noise deafness. If the sound is loud enough, pain
will occur. This may be accompanied by an uncomfortable ring-
ing known as tinnitus.
There are other effects of noise on human health. Noise
directly alters the rhythm of the heartbeat, increases the
level of cholesterol in the blood and raises blood pressure.21
Moderate noises can cause small blood vessels to constrict
and impede blood flow. The blood vessels in the brain dilate
with noise exposure, which may result in headaches. In his
paper, "The Effects of Noise on Health," Jansen points out
that blood circulation does not adapt to continuing noise
exposure. Vasoconstriction was first observed at 60-70 dBA
and as sound intensity increased the condition became more
pronounced. Similarly, Alice Suter of the National Associa-
tion of Hearing and Speech Agencies suggests that the process
76
-------
of vascular constriction does not adapt and limits the supply
of blood to the ear.22 Lack of proper blood supply to the
ear over time would contribute to old age hearing loss . Wor-
kers exposed to high noise levels have a higher incidence of
cardiovascular disease, ear, nose, and throat disorders than
workers in less noisy surroundings . Other stressful effects
of noise are changes in secretion of endocrine hormones and
kidney functions. Continued stress may increase susceptibi-
lity to infection, gastrointestinal ulcers or high blood pres-
sure .
The more subtle affects of noise are psychological .
People working in noisy surroundings tend to be more agressive
and distrustful. A noisy home environment may cause fatigue,
irritability and, in extreme cases, can lead to hallucinations
and suicidal and homocidal tendencies if sleep is disrupted
over long periods. 23 Curiously, suddenly removing loud noises
from the environment could also affect an individual's psycho-
logical state. The city dweller, coming in contact with high
outdoor and indoor noises , becomes accustomed to the sounds .
In a Report to Congress in 1937, it was pointed out that, in
characteristically noisy places, sudden silences frequently
prove to be oppressive for those accustomed to varying
sounds . 24
'VI. D The Impact of Noise Legislation
The Clean Air Amendments of 1970 established the Office
of Noise Abatement in the Environmental Protection Agency.
With the development of this office, investigation, planning
and legislation of noise levels is now underway. Present
authority for EPA is limited. However, the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969 may have considerable effect on
projects where noise is a consideration. The Act requires
agencies of the Federal government to consider environmental
impact in deciding on project development.2 5
The proposed Noise Control Act would allow EPA to set
standards limiting the noise-generation characteristics of
construction and transportation equipment and other equipment
powered by the internal combustion engines . 2*> The Third
Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality describes
the proposed authority for the Administrator of EPA to require
labeling of household products and appliances .2<7 "The pend-
ing Noise Control Act of 1972, passed by the U.S. House of
Representatives in February 1972, would bar State and local
governments from applying any but Federal noise standards to
products covered by Federal law."28 The Act would provide
authorization for EPA to assist State and local governments
in matters concerned with noise control. Additionally, the
bill (S. 1016) gives EPA authority to set aircraft noise stan-
dards. This power currently is held by the Federal Aviation
Administration .
77
-------
It should be emphasized that coordination and coopera-
tion among Federal, state and local authorities is essential
for proper noise control. Though specific powers have not
yet been granted to the Environmental Protection Agency to
construct noise standards and regulations, there are other
Federal agencies which have policies dealing with noise.
Under the Department of Transportation the Federal High-
ways Act and the Airport and Airway Development Act now give
consideration to noise levels. Because of their interstate
nature it would seem natural for Federal regulation to include
truck and commercial vehicle noise. The amended Federal Avia-
tion Act of 1958 gives the Administrator of the FAA power to
fix standards for the measurement of aircraft noise and regu-
lations for noise control and abatement.29 Public Law 90-411
specifically requires the FAA to establish and enforce regu-
lations to control aircraft noise.30 Noise standards and
maximum noise levels for certification of all new subsonic
transport airplanes is established under this law. Maximum
levels are 93 and 108'EPNdB31 depending on type and size of
aircraft.32
The Department of Housing and Urban Development also has
noise control legislation. "It is HUD's general policy to
foster the creation of controls and standards for community
noise abatement and control by general purpose agencies of
State and local governments, and to support these activities
by minimum national standards by which to protect citizens
against the encroachment of noise into their communities and
places of residence."33 Noise is divided into three group-
ings, which can be defined as standards: (1) acceptable,
(2) discretionary—normally acceptable or normally unaccept-
able, (3) unacceptable.34 Presently, noise exposure for
sleeping quarters is considered acceptable if interior noise
levels resulting from exterior noise sources and interior
building sources "do not exceed 55 dBA for more than an accu-
mulation of 60 minutes in any 24-hour period; and do not ex-
ceed 45 dBA for more than 30 minutes during night time sleep-
ing hours from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.; and do not exceed 45 dBA
for more than an accumulation of eight hours in any 2 4-hour
day. "35 The Housing Act of 1964 and National Housing Act
give HUD authority for loan insurance for rehabilitation and
major home or property improvements.36 Residents of new homes
built with HUD aid are protected against extreme noise expo-
sure.
Another Federal plan to control noise is the responsibi-
lity of the General Services Administration (GSA). Maximum
allowable noise levels for"selected construction equipment
used on Federal projects have been set.37 Bids taken after
June 30, 1972 will include noise levels for specific equip-
ment, thus, encouraging the development of quieter machinery.
The Department of Health, Education and Welfare also acts
in Federal noise control. The Occupational Safety and Health
Act limits noise exposure for workers. This act protects wor-
kers by limiting exposure of 90 dBA to eight hours, and any
noise of 115 decibels to 15 minutes.38 Noise levels are also
78
-------
restricted in hospitals and other health facilities under
HEW's control.
The proposed legislation for EPA in combination with
existing noise controls will affect emission sources. The
penalty for violation of the regulations proposed in the bill
before the Congress is a fine of not more than $25,000 for
each violation. The Environmental Protection Agency has power
to assess a civil penalty for a violation with the district
courts of the United States having jurisdiction of actions
brought by the government.
In order to examine the probable impact of current and
proposed legislation designed to combat noise pollution, the
emission sources previously described can be classified as
internal and external. The former are noise sources indige-
nous to the center city (i.e., residential, municipal, and
commercial); the latter are outside sources over which center
city inhabitants have little or no control (i.e., industrial
and mobile).
The HUD, HEW and proposed EPA regulations are designed
to protect the urban resident from extreme noise levels.
There would be limits on the noise emissions from manufactur-
ed products. Codes for building or rehabilitating would limit
noise levels in the home. The HUD standards previously men-
tioned are primarily concerned with sleeping quarters and may
only affect those residents moving to new homes or renovated
buildings. The Federal legislation would only adversely
affect the residents of the center city by price increases
on products with new quieting devices.
Earlier in the report it was stated that a great deal of
construction in the inner city is controlled by the munici-
pality. The HUD noise regulatipns would have to be maintained
in the projects if funding assistance were needed. This would
dictate installation of proper sound proofing to fulfill the
requirements for the 'acceptable1 standard under HUD's regu-
lations. Construction equipment would have to be classified
according to decibel emissions to coincide with GSA policies.
Under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, municipal
employees are protected from extreme noise levels. Decibel
levels have to be held at or below the 90 decibel level for
a working day. Protective devices must be supplied if noise
levels are greater than the safety regulations. Municipal
authorities act'in planning and land use allocation and would
be subject to FAA discretion if new airports were proposed.
The FAA has the power to dictate where facilities will be
built.
The basic same regulations also affect the commercial
businesses in the center city. Restrictions on transport
vehicles, trucks, vans, etc., included in the Federal High-
ways Act or the proposed EPA standards would affect noise
emissions from these vehicles. Commercial construction would
be restricted in the same manner as municipal work.
Some "internal" emission sources also qualify as exter-
nal sources of noise, i.e. those which bring pollution into
the city. For example, residents do not have control of the
79
-------
immigration of mobile vehicles into the center city. Indus-
tries are not necessary for the make-up of a center city,
though often they will be present in urban areas. Generally
speaking, the Federal noise regulations which would affect
industry are HEW occupational standards for employees, con-
struction limits found with GSA regulations and the proposed
legislation on manufactured products which will be handled by
EPA. The Department of Transportation has regulatory powers
over automobiles, some rapid transit, aircraft and other trans-
portation vehicles. Aircraft noise would be controlled or
limited by the FAA.
Generally, the Federal legislation seems to have little
power over the noise sources which are present in the center
city. Greater control is exercised by local or State govern-
ments. Local governments deal with specific locales and the
problems characteristic to the area. Perhaps Federal legis-
lation or standards would help bring uniform environmental
conditions. It must be emphasized that investigation into
possible outcomes of uniform Federal control is necessary.
It may be found that Federal legislation could actually take
away basic rights of the individual citizen.
80
-------
FOOTNOTES
1, The diffusion model is a mathematical analysis of pollu-
tant emissions, metrological conditions, and typographical
features. The purpose is to provide approximate spatial dis-
tributions of long term and seasonal average pollutant concen-
trations. Topography is also reflected in the model when it
affects meterological conditions. Meterological factors
include wind, speed, direction, and mixing heights. Health,
Education, and Welfare; Public Health Service; National Air
Pollution Control Administration; Division of Air Quality and
Emissions Data (Durham, North Carolina), pp. 1-36.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator speak-
ing to U.S. Congress and the President on Noise, February,
1972, Doc. No. 92-63, p. 221.
3. A hertz is equal to a cycle per second.
4. Environmental Protection Agency to U. S. Congress and the
President on Noise.
5. Environmental Protection Agency to U.S. Congress and
President on Noise, pp. 360.
6. Ibid., pp. 2-15.
7. Irving Hoch, "Urban Scale and Environmental Quality,"
Resources and Environmental Implications of U.S. Population
Control, ed. by Ronald G. Ridker (to be published), p. 39.
8. Blazier et al., Chicago Urban Noise Survey, Part 1,
wNoise in the Urban Environment"(Chicago: Bolt, Beranek, and
Newman, Inc., 1970).
9. James Q. Wilson, Metropolitan Enigma (Harvard University
Press, 1968).
10. Five major categories of industrial plant sources:
impact, including punch, presses, stamping, hammers; mechani-
cal, which involves machinery unbalance, gears, bearings;
fluid flows concerned with fans, blowers, compressors, valves;
combustion, including furnaces and flare sticks; and electro-
mechanical devices such as motors, generators, transformers.
Report to the President and U.S. Congress on Noise, "pp. 2-89.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Improving the
Inner-City Environment," 1971.
12. Ibid.
13. Dietrich, Franken, Jones, Analysis of Community Noise
and A Plan for Noise Control for the City of Boston Air Pollu-
tion Control Commission, Report 2069 (March, 1971).
81
-------
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency report to President
and U.S. Congress on Noise.
15. Environmental Protection Agency, Community Noise, by
Wyle Laboratories (1971) .
16. Environmental Protection Agency, Transportation Noise
and Noise from Equipment Powered by InEerhal Combustion
Engines, by Wyle Laboratories (1971) .
17. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Improving the Inner
City Environment, by Task Force on Environmental Problems of
the Inner-City (1971) .
18. Environmental Protection Agency, Report to the President
and U.S. Congress on Noise.
19. Earl Kryter, The Effects of Noise on Man (New York:
Academic Press, 1970) .
20. Theodore Berland, Smithsonian Magazine, July, 1972,
pp. 15-21.
21. Ibid., p. 17.
»
22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise
Abatement and Control, The Social Impact of Noise (Washington,
B.C.: Government Printing Office , 1971) .
23. Berland, Smithsonian Magazine.
24. Environmental Protection Agency, The Social Impact of
Noise.
25. James L. Hildenbrand, "Noise Pollution: An Introduction
to the Problem and an Outline for Future Legal Research,"
Columbia Law Review, April, 1970, pp. 652-692.
26. Council on Environmental Quality, The Third Annual Report
(Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972) .
27. Ibid., p. 132.
28. Ibid., p. 210.
29. Ibid., p. 681.
30. U.S. 'Department of Housing and Urban Development and
U.S. Department of Transportation. Metropolitan Aircraft
Noise Abatement Policy Study by Northeastern Illinois Plan-
nihg Commission (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office,
1971) .
82
-------
31. EPNdB—effective perceived noise level. This includes
"the effects of strong tones and long duration of noise expo-
sure in order to evaluate the qualities of aircraft noise
that are particularly offensive to persons on the ground."
(Congressional Record - Extensions of Remarks, October 29,
1969, Compilation of State and Local Ordinances on Noise
Control.)
32. Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Metropolitan
Aircraft Noise Abatement Policy Study, p. 104.
33. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
"Transmittal Noise," #1390.2 (Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office), p. 1.
34. Ibid., p. 3.
35. Ibid., p. 9-
36. Department of Housing and Urban Development and Depart-
ment of Transportation, Metropolitan Aircraft Noise Abatement
Policy Study.
37. Council on Environmental Quality, Third Annual Report.
38. Federal Register of Rules and Regulations, "Noise Limits
Under Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970," XXXIX,
No. 105 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1971).
83
-------
VILA Radiation
SECTION VII
RADIATION AND CLIMATIC CHANGES
For the general population the most significant amounts
of radiation exposure are due to natural background sources
and medical applications.1 The background consists of cosmic
radiation and radioactivity naturally existing in the elements
of the soil, water and air as well as within our bodies. The
estimated dose from this source is from 100 to.125 millirems
(mrem) per year.2 The medical uses of x-rays,' fluoroscopy
ana radioisotopes account for the exposure to patients of an
estimated average annual genetically significant dose of .60
to 95 millirems.3
Although nuclear power plants have increased over the
last decade in terms of electrical energy output, their con-
tribution to environmental radiation remains relatively small.
A 1969 study of thirteen operating power plants concluded
that the annual dose to the total population living within
fifty miles of these sites averages about 0.01 mrem.4 This is
well below 1% of both the radiation protection guidelines and
typical natural background exposure. The problem of radio-
activity from the testing of nuclear devices has decreased
severalfold over the past few years as a result of the mora-
torium on atmospheric testing. Measurements of fallout debris
exhibit a marked decline after peaking in the early 1960's.
The U.S.-U.S.S.R. atmospheric testing agreement was ratified
in August 1963 by the U.S.5
The current Federal regulations call for a maximum of
500 mrem per year (for whole body exposure) from all man made
sources excluding medical sources for individual members of
the general public, and 170 millirems per capita* per year for
population groups.6 The measurements for the general popula-
tion show that the exposure is below the maximum Federal limit,
No increased exposure for center city populations is found
from gross radioactivity.
VII.B Nohionizing Radiation - Electromagnetic Waves
During the last twenty-five years, electromagnetic radia-
tion in the environment has increased by several orders of
magnitude. This is radiated in the microwave and radiofre-
quency C^f) regions of the nonionizing electromagnetic spec-
trum. The sources of this include AM, FM and TV broadcasting,
microwave ovens, and radar devices. Electromagnetic radia-
tion is propagated in the form of waves which can be measured
in several ways. Frequency is measured in hertz (Hz), wave-
length in meters, energy in joules or electron volts, power
in watts and densities in watts per square meter (or milli-
watt per square centimeter) , Exposure dose to this type of
radiation is measured in terms of exposure power density and
the duration of exposure (such as milliwatt per square centi-
meter for one hour). The American National Standards
84
-------
Institute has recommended that occupational exposure for
frequencies between 10MHz and lOGHz (that is 106 to 109 hertz)
not exceed 10mw/cm2 for periods of .1 hour or longer.
Studies are now being done by the Office of Radiological
programs and the Office of Research and Monitoring of EPA to
determine two things: (1) the environmental levels that this
radiation has reached in cities, and (2) the biological
effects of exposure to this radiation.
An example of the first type of investigation is a study
of eight large metropolitan areas of the United States. The
total number of AM, FM and TV stations was taken and the total
power in megawatts was derived from the output of each sta-
tion. The results are presented in Figure 1 along with the
population of each area. San Francisco stands out by its
13 megawatts (13,000,000 watts) of effective radiated power
in a city of only 4 million people and less than 40 broadcast
stations. Philadelphia and Chicago are found to have the next
highest amounts of power, about 9.0 and 7.5 megawatts respec-
tively. Determinations such as this one may be useful in
identifying populations that receive the greatest exposure.
In general, there is greater exposure where there are concen-
trations of people in urban areas.
In order to determine the typical levels of rf and micro-
wave radiation that result from manmade sources in an urban
environment, measurements were made of peak power densities
in the Washington, B.C. area during the summer of 1969.
Table -743L- shows the highest levels measured (approximately
0.008 mw/cm2) which originated primarily from broadcast tow-
ers and airport installations.7 Figure 2 shows a map with the
location of the monitoring sites.
TABLE 22
MAXIMUM OBSERVED POWER DENSITY LEVELS
IN FOUR FREQUENCY BANDS
Frequency
(MHz)
Site
Power density
exposure
(mW/cm2)
Less than 400
400 - 1,000
1,000 - 3,000
3,000 - 10,000
Holy Cross Hospital
Montgomery Mall
National Airport
National Airport
3.9 x 10~4
1.1 x lO-5
-7.7 x 10~3
1.4 x 10~4
Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
11 Radiofrequency and Microwave Radiation Levels," p. 61.
85
-------
The concern over possible health effects from human
exposure to electromagnetic radiation grows as the sources
of the radiation keep increasing, it is known that above
exposures of 10 mw/cm^ there are definite hazards related to
the heat or thermal limits which critical tissues can stand.
But very little is known about the more subtle effects from
long term, low level exposures. Some reports describe physio-
logical, biochemical and genetic alterations in plants and
animals as well as behavioral and psychological changes in
animals. A number of biological effects have been observed
following microwave exposure.8 The studies are primarily done
with animals and the effects include cataract induction, ab-
normalities in cell function and central nervous system
effects. One form of biological hazard which can exist at
present environmental field strengths•is interference with
cardiac pacemakers.9
VII.C Health Hazards
The Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Coun-
cil (ERMAC) wrote a report assessing the biological hazards
of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation in December 1971.
The report stressed that there may be a potential hazard and
that "man may soon enter an era of energy pollution." People
living in urban areas where most broadcasting stations are
located represent the population group with the most exposure
to this type of radiation pollution. The exposure dose is
still below the recommended U.S. maximum limit of 10 mw/cm2.
The Federal government is now doing research to determine if
there is a need for standards because of possible biological
effects and, if so, what they should be.
VII.D Climatic Changes
The city environment is known to produce climatic changes
in comparison with rural environs. An especially significant
change is the temperature difference which is found to be con-
sistently higher in cities than outside of cities. The "heat
island effect" describes this temperature difference. Annual
averages of the heat island have been reported between 0.5°C
and 1.2QC.10 This discussion will present the research find-
ings on this effect in Cincinnati, Ohio. The causes of the
problem and the health effects will be reviewed. A case study
of a heat wave in St. Louis will be presented. Some sugges-
tions are made for dealing with the problem.
VII.D.I Heat Island Effect
In a study of the heat island effect, urban-suburban
temperature measurements were taken in Cincinnati, Ohio dur-
ing August 1969. The results displayed in Figure 3 show that
the suburban temperatures are consistently lower than those
recorded in urban areas from 2:00 PM through 10:00 PM. The
ranges between average afternoon (2-3:30 PM) and average
86
-------
evening (8:30-10:00 PM) temperatures over paved areas were
31.3 to 27.0°C at the urban site and 29.5 to 21.9°C at the
suburban site. Further, the temperatures taken above grassy
surfaces are lower than above paved surfaces in both the urban
and suburban environments.H
The Stanford Research Institute has reported an average
heat island temperature of 1.2OC higher near the downtown area
than the typical area of its environs.12 They point out that
the highest temperatures of a city occur in that part of the
downtown area with "densely packed three-to-five story build-
ings and parking lots." Higher urban temperatures seem to be
directly related to the amount of concrete and asphalt surface
area.
The temperature abnormalities in cities are caused by the
retention of solar heat in the physical urban structure. In
summer the buildings, pavement and concrete of the inner city
absorb and store larger amounts of solar radiation than do
the vegetation and soil typical of rural areas. At night the
urban air is kept warmer by slow radiative losses of the ab-
sorbed heat. "A nocturnal urban heat island in excess of 8°C
occurs occasionally in most large cities."13 Less of the
solar energy is used for evaporation in the city than in the
country because precipitation just runs off of the streets
and buildings. "The blanket of pollutants" absorbs part of
the upward-directed thermal radiation emitted from the surface
and re-emits downward or into the ambient air. Reduced wind
speed between the buildings decreases the city's ventilation.
In winter, man-made energy causes the same effects as solar
energy. In fact, the effects are even more pronounced. Arti-
ficial heat results from combustion for heating, power genera-
tion, industry and transportation.14
VII. D. 2 Health Hazards
In order to cope with environmental heat, man has several
physiological mechanisms such as vasodilation and sweating.
When the body is overburdened by the heat load, these physio-
logical reactions are stepped up and lead to physical break-
downs or illnesses. The four major categories of heat-induced
illnesses are heat exhaustion, dehydration, heat cramps, and
heat stroke. When the heat stress is great enough then a
stroke (which endangers the functioning of some vital tissue)
can lead to death.1* The normal relationship between tempera-
ture and mortality shows a decrease in the summer months.
But when there is an urban heat wave episode the number of
deaths markedly increases.16 in gt. Louis, Missouri during
the month of July 1966 there were 570 "excess deaths"!"7 from
all causes. During that same time, heat was attributed as
the primary cause of death in 246 out of 1420 death certifi-
cates (40 more stated heat as a contributing cause). Mortal-
ity from all causes increased by 56 percent in St. Louis from
the urban heat wave of July 1966.18
87
-------
Stanley Schuman did a study of the patterns of the deaths
in St. Louis during the same heat wave. He found that certain
subgroups were at a substantially higher risk than others. The
high risk groups included persons over age sixty-five, census
tract residents with low incomes, crowding or poor housing and
patientswith certain diseases. His findings are shown in
Table •?r2-**o5f the high and low risk tracts and the characteris-
tics found within them.1^
TABLE 23
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS Ol' SELECTED CENSUS TRACTS3
IN ST. LOUIS, JULY, 1966
High-risk tracts13 Low-risk
Demogr aphi c
Characteristics
tracts0 City
of St
Ldl MC Gfd NW Gdv Louis
Population (thou-
sands, est. 1965)
Excess deaths
Number
Percent
Median Age
Race (%nonwhite)
23.7 15.9 58.6 28.8 18.7
52
+260
35.1
38.9
Median family income $3600
Crowding (no. persons/
room) 0.70
25
+179
26.2
52.8
$3400
57
+110
20.6
97.9
$3500
-8
-18
40.5
11.1
$6200
-3
-10
43.3
0.0
$6700
728
618
+55.8
33.6
35.8
$5300
0.83 0.72 0.53 <0.50 0.64
aCensus data from 1960.
bHigh-risk tracts are: Ldl = Lindell, MC = Mill Creek, Gfd =
Garfield.
^Low-risk tracts are: NW = Northwest, Gdv = Gardenville.
Source: Schuman, "Patterns of Urban Heat-Wave Deaths."
The heat island effect is clearly an urban problem as the
building density and street surface can be shown to cause the
increased temperature. This effect should be considered in
the urban planning process. "More land could be allowed for
parks with grass and trees which help to decrease the tempera-
ture. Building materials of lower conductivity could also
reduce the heating effect. In some instances where the extra
heat may be a benefit, such as in colder latitudes, planning
can be done to enhance the effect.
Heat waves should be included in emergency warnings to
urban areas along with air inversions (which compound the air
pollution problem). The significant increase in the death
88
-------
rate in large cities during these heat waves shows the magni-
tude this problem has reached. There are the "high risk
tracts" of inner city, poor and unhealthy people who are the
most susceptible to the effects of the heat island. Their
situation now is beyond the urban planning stages and needs
corrective help before the new city developments will be
available.
89
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. J. B. Little, "Environmental Hazards - Ionizing Radiation,"
New England Journal of Medicine, CCLXXV (October, 1966), pp.
929-938. " '
2. (One millirem equals l/1000th of a rem. Rem stands for
"roentgen equivalent man" and reflects an absorbed dose in
human tissues.)
3. Commission on Environmental Quality 1971, Environmental
Quality, p. 222. The "genetically significant dose" means
the average dose to the sexual organs of persons of child-
bearing age.
4. Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Quality,
1971, p. 222.
5. The Mitre Corporation, Environmental Trends, (Washington,
D.C., 1971), p. 4.
6. Council on Environmental Quality, Environmental Quality,
1971, p. 221. The population groups regulation is based upon
a suitable sample of those exposed.
7. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bureau
of Radiological Health, "Radiofrequency and Microwave Radiation
Levels from Man-made Sources in the Washington, D.C. Area,"
by Stephen W. Smith, et al., USDHEW Publication No. (FDA)
72-8015 BRH/DEP 72-5 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing
Office, 1971.
8. U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, "A Partial Inventory of Microwave
Towers, Broadcasting Transmitters, and Fixed Radar by States
and Regions," Report BRH/DEP 70-15 (Washington, D.C.: Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1970), p. 6.
9. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Bureau
of Radiological Health, "Electromagnetic Radiation Interference
with Cardiac Pacemakers," by P- S. Ruggera and R. L. Elder,
Report BRH/DEP 71-5 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing
Office, 1971) .
10. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
Health Service, "City Air - Better or Worse," Air over Cities,
by Landsberg, Technical Report A62-5 (Washington, D.C.: Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1962), pp. 1-22.
11. J. F. Clarke, et al., "Comparison of the Comfort Condi-
tions in Different Urban and Suburban Micro-environments,"
International Journal of Biometerology, XV, No. 1 (1971),
41-54.
90
-------
12. F. L. Ludwig and J. H. S. Kealoha, Urban Climatological
Studies. Final Report, Contr. OCD-DAHC-20-67-C-0136, (Menlo
Park, California: Stanford Research Institute, 1968) .
13. Clarke, "Comparison of Comfort Conditions," p. 41.
14. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
Health Service, National Air Pollution Control Administration,
"The Climate of Cities: Survey of Recent Literature," by James
T. Peterson (Raleigh, N.C., 1969) pp. 9-10.
15. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public
Health Service, National Center for Air Pollution Control,
"Heat Stress," Seminar on Human Biometeorology, by Austin F.
Henschel (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1964),
pp. 95-108.
16. Paul H. Kutschenreuter, "Some Effects of Weather on Mor-
tality," Seminar on Human Biometeorology (Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1964), pp. 81-94.
17. The number of "excess deaths" in any one month is calcu-
lated by just finding the differences between the number of
deaths in the month with the greatest number of deaths (from
heat) and the months preceding and following it. The differ-
ences are then averaged.
18. Stanley H. Schuman, "Patterns of Urban Heat-Wave Deaths
and Implications for Prevention: Data from New York and St.
Louis during July 1966," Environmental Research, No. 1, (1972),
68.
19. Ibid, p. 70.
91
-------
SECTION VIII
FEDERAL POLLUTION CONTROLS: RAMIFICATIONS
OF UNIFORM ENFORCEMENT1
VIII .A Introduction
The research task of this report is three-quarters ful-
filled. It is the purpose of this final section of the re-
port to utilize the data and analytical information provided
heretofore in an effort to bring the question of uniform
application of Federal pollution controls on the center city
locale to a logical closure. Specific hypotheses are derived
from which it is urged that further research be conducted.
It is felt that the research objective of this report has been
achieved and indicates that empirical research is needed. It
is hoped that the analysis provided in this concluding section
will lay the foundation for empirical exploration.
Essentially, application of uniform Federal pollution
enforcement to the metropolitan community will differentially
affect the center city and suburban locales. A criterion.of
uniformity will mean that an initial effort must be made in
the center city in order to bring its environment on a parity
basis with that of the suburb. A secondary effort will mean
bringing both the suburban and center city locales on par with
Federal environmental standards. Thus, it appears prima facie, ,
that under the application of uniform pollution controls the
center city will undergo an additional process compared to
the suburban locale. Any imposition of uniform Federal pollu-
tion controls will place a stress on the economic and social
sectors of the center city.
In this concluding section a functional approach is "taken
with respect to the economic and social costs associated with
the application of uniform pollution controls. Within this
functional theoretical framework, the two types of systemic
ramifications are discussed. Operational hypotheses are
developed as logical consequences of uniform pollution con-
trol applied to the center city locale.
First, an economic theory of the center city is present-
ed. Within this framework, the economic costs of uniform
enforcement are predicted on the basis of the costs associa-
ted with the externalities of production and the economic base
function of the center city as a locus of employment. Second,
the social costs of uniform enforcement are viewed within the
framework of the center city as a complex of social and cul-
tural functions. Functions intricately related to the envir-
onment. Primarily, the social costs are categorized into the
structural and demographic variables effected by the applica-
tion of-uniform Federal pollution controls to the center city.
Viil.B Economic and Social Ramifications of Uniform Pollution
Enforcement
The free enterprise system is based on the concept that
land, labor, capita-l and entrepreneurship have some cost
92
-------
structure associated with their employment. Competition
through the mechanism of the price system allocates these
scarce resources to those consumers whose demand and, hence,
whose willingness to pay, is greatest. Theoretically, all
costs of a product are borne by the manufacturer who passes
them on to the consumer in an equitable fashion.
Unfortunately, this is not economic reality- Certain
costs of production have been externalized. They have been
transferred to society in general at the benefit of a few.
The costs being externalized manifest themselves as pollu-
tion. Allowing these externalities has destroyed much of the
natural environment. These allowances have also stimulated
economic growth and provided the world's highest standard of
living. In the early parts of this report the impact of these
externalities upon the center city was established. An ob-
vious question still remains. What will be the specific
economic effects of enforcing pollution controls in the cen-
ter city?"
A recent study listed four major effects of pollution
controls upon the economy:
1. A reduction of the efficiency of capital in the
aggregate production function;
2. An increase in the prices of consumer and capital
goods;
3. An increase in the cost of capital per unit output;
4. The generation of new output and employment in
industries producing abatement facilities through
pollution control investments.
Generally, the first three effects can be considered
negative; the fourth, is positive, but not large enough to off-
set the previous ones. The magnitude of each of these effects
will depend upon the three interrelated factors of city size,
industrial mix, and location and employment mix.
Assuming that controls are uniformly enforced, the smaller
the city the more severe the economic impact of pollution con-
trols. There are several reasons for this. First, the exis-
tence of marginal industries in small towns is a well known
phenomenon. These industries can be characterized by old,
low efficiency plants that are kept open because of the sev-
ere political repercussions of closing them. Usually, these
plants are part of a much larger company with many other pro-
duction facilities. In the case of the small town, a decrea-
sing efficiency of capital and increasing capital costs can
be sufficient impacts to force closure. Also, since no pollu-
tion abatement equipment is produced in the town, any benefits
accruing to new output and employment generated are totally
external. When the plant is faced with the decision of opera-
ting at a loss or closing down, the latter becomes the chosen
alternative in most cases. (It is interesting to note that
93
-------
protection of the environment can be used as a cry for closing
down inefficient production facilities and replacing them with
newer,ones in different areas. Due to locational efficiencies
accruing to industries near major transportation facilities,
and production efficiencies in new plants, it is doubtful that
plants closed down in small towns would ever be rebuilt there.)
After the plant closes, it is predicted that unemployment will
rise, people will move out and the town will die.
In a large city, the closing qlown of a single plant would
have less severe effects. Theoretically, workers could move
from high polluting production facilities to low polluting
ones as long as the required skills were similar. Further,
the effects of decreasing capital efficiency and increasing
cost of capital will be less severe in low polluting indus-
tries since little expenditures for pollution control are re-
quired. The economy of the metropolitan area might also sup-
port some, pollution abatement equipment industries, and there-
fore experience some economic benefit. Concurrent to the
growth in the abatement industry, will be growth in the ancil-
liary services such as barber shops, department stores, etc.,
At this point a judgment must be made. Will the center
city function as part of the metropolitan system? Or, will
the effects of pollution control be similar to those of the
small town? Physically, the center city is part of the over-
all metropolitan system. The unskilled worker of the center
city tends to resist migration, and seeks other local employ-
ment. Even if he wanted to migrate and seek work elsewhere
in the metropolitan area, it is doubtful whether he could
afford it. By living and working within the inner city, a
resident saves considerably on transportation costs. A typi-
cal resident might be faced with the problem of less net in-
come at a future job because of transportation jcosts. This
problem may become more acute when considered in the context
of the requirements for mobile emission devices on automobiles.
Cost of these devices is estimated at $300 per vehicle. A
price rise of $300 per automobile becomes a highly regres-
sive tax for the center city resident given the high propor-
tion of low incomes. It is possible that a cost increase of
that amount could virtually eliminate the automobile as an
alternative means of transportation in the center city. The
question of whether or not these effects will occur can also
be viewed in the context of the economic mix of the center
city.
Depending upon the economic mix of a center city, effects
of pollution control could be very different. To draw on two
examples at opposite ends of the spectrum is appropriate to
illustrate this point. Assume a single industry city produ-
cing anti-pollution devices in a zero polluting production
process. Also assume all production is exported out of the
city. In this case, the imposition of pollution controls
would turn this city into a boom town. New output and employ-
ment would be generated thus precipitating the development of
a large group of ancilliary services. Even though prices
would rise on goods imported into the city, the magnitude of
94
-------
the positive effects associated with local growth and develop-
ment would probably more than compensate for the rise in
prices. The net effect is beneficial to the city.
In contrast, assume a single industry city (using a heavy
polluting production process, e.g. cement) producing a pro-
duct only for consumption within the city. In this case, de-
creasing efficiency of capital, rising cost of capital and
higher prices would have drastic effects upon the community.
Since all production is consumed within the city, the total
cost of pollution abatement is assumed by the residents. As
prices rise, quantity demanded decreases, wages fall and the
company is forced to close its doors. This precipitates the
closing of the ancilliary service industries and the city
dies.
These two somewhat unreasonable examples illustrate a
major point. Both production and consumption of a city's
economic output must be considered to analyze the effects of
pollution controls. A reasonable way to approach this pro-
blem is through economic base analysis.2 cities which have a
major portion of their basic employment in heavy polluting
industries will be less affected than communities whose non
basic industries are heavy polluters. Similarly, a heavy con-
centration of non polluting basic industries will cause large
benefits to accrue to the city in question.
The implications of this for center city populaces are
obvious. Those residents who are employed in basic industries
will feel the effects of pollution control first. Effects
will run the gamut from shut down to boom town depending upon
the characteristics of the product and production processes.
Non basic employment will be affected after the effects are
felt in the basic industries. Since they supply services to
the basic industries, non basic employment can be viewed as
the more unstable, for they are at the mercy of local market
fluctuations.
At this time the question of economic stability in the
center city can be approached. Depending upon the economic
base of the community, the effect of environmental controls
on stability will vary. For example, if a heavy polluting
basic industry is required to make ever-increasing invest-
ments in plant and equipment for environmental purposes, then
consumption in the city will be induced to grow at a rate
which would appear to symbolize growth and stability. How-
ever, the achievement of environmental objectives will cause
a slow down in the investment function. Acting through the
accelerator, this slow down will detrimentally affect con-
sumption and indicate a cyclical, if not declining, urban
economy. This scenario assumes benefits of increased indus-
trial investment accrue only to the city in question. In
reality this is not the case. Because no one urban area could
be self-sufficient, the detrimental effects of pollution con-
trol can not necessarily be balanced by the positive effects.
The scenario viewed above would only be correct for basic
industries producing pollution control equipment whose invest-
ment serves to increase the efficiency of capital rather than
95
-------
decrease it. Further, the rising prices necessitated by the
increasing cost of capital per unit of output will change the
demand-supply relationship of the firm impinging upon the
firm's ability to finance pollution expenditures. What
appeared to be an obvious conclusion has again been changed
by the addition of a structural factor. Earlier labor mobi-
lity reversed a conclusion. Now the interdependency of urban
areas performs the same function.
Again, the discussion is applicable to the center city.
Depending on the relationship of the urban area to other ur-
ban areas, impacts on center cities will differ. A relative-
ly economically dependent urban area will experience more
violent fluctuations caused by pollution control than will a
relatively economically independent urban area. As for the
center cities, the more violent fluctuations experienced by
an urban area, the more violent the effects on the center city.
If we hypothesize that center city employment is predomi-
nately basic, unemployment trends will tend to follow that of
the urban area as a whole. If we hypothesize a predominately
non-basic employment, unemployment fluctuations will be grea-
ter than those in the urban area as a whole. This can be
attributed to the presence of an employment multiplier effect
between the basic and non-basic industries.
To further analyze the effects of pollution controls,
one must deal with the employment mix of the center city.
Employment mix pertains to the number of employees at each
income level. The obvious implication is that the high in-
come persons would experience less of the effects of pollution
controls than low income persons. Price rises are more easily
absorbed. Since these people are usually better educated, the
jobs are more secure. Their mobility is higher and hence,
greater opportunities are afforded to them. None of these
characteristics are true for center city residents who are
predominately poor, aged and disproportionately black. .The
phrase describing employment stability here is last hired,
first fired. As indicated earlier, mobility is seriously
hampered by cultural and economic factors. In other words,
because the employment mix is heavily weighted toward the low
side, the effects of pollution control will be more severe in
the center city. Unemployment will be higher. Ability to
absorb price increases on consumer goods will be lower.
VIII.C Summary of Macro Impacts
The severity of economic impacts from pollution controls
upon the center city depends upon three interrelated factors:
city size, industrial mix and employment mix. Generally, the
center city functions much like a one industry dependent small
town. Because of this, the industrial mix is very basic, i.e.
most goods produced there are exported. Finally, the employ-
ment mix is heavily weighted toward the lower income side.
All of these factors imply very strongly that enforcing pollu-
tion controls uniformly will have significant detrimental eco-
nomic impacts upon the center city. Economic impacts which
96
-------
are more difficult to bear than those of urban areas as a
whole.
It is now worthwhile to view some specific economic im-
pacts of pollution controls on the center city resident.
Where possible, dollar values will be used to illustrate the
impacts.
Vlii.D Impact of Air Pollution Control
The major legislative act to consider in air pollution
control is the Clean Air Act (CAA) plus all of its various
amendments. The general economic effects of implementation
of this act have been examined. Indications are that imple-
mentation of CAA by 1975 in all states will have the follow-
ing general economic effects:
Manufacturing Production — decrease 1.5%
Manufacturing Investment — decrease 21.0%
Personal Income — decrease 0.6%
Government Revenue — decrease 0.7%
Unemployment — increase 0.9%
This assumes no government assistance in the form of tax
writeoffs, exemptions, investment tax credits, grants or loans
and loan guarantees. The figures represent national averages.
In reality, the heavily industrialized area of the Northeast
and Great Lakes will be most severely impacted. Furthermore,
within these regions, center cities will be hurt the worst.
Some general impacts to be considered are rent increases,
unemployment increases, and decreasing health costs.
Rent increases will be precipitated by a lack of invest-
ment capital flowing into the center city housing market. A
tightening housing market will be manifested in increasing
rents. Also, municipal taxes and utility rates will increase
as utilities comply with CAA and municipal governments deal
with the ever-increasing city tax base. All of this implies
a higher cost of shelter for the center city resident. A rise
in unemployment via the mechanisms described earlier is inevi-
table. Given the employment mix of the center city, the rer-
sults of enforcing CAA might increase center city unemploy-
ment two or three times the national average.
Decreasing health costs are an obvious benefit of air
pollution control legislation. Loye and Siskin^ argue the
following cost saving would accrue if air pollution in major
urban areas was lowered by 50 percent:
Cost Saving/
Disease^ Decline in Incidence Year (millions)
Bronchitis 25 - 50% $250 - $500
Lung Cancer 25% 33
All Respiratory Disease 25% 1222
Cardiovascular Disease 10% 468
All Cancer 15% 390
Total $2363 - $2513
97
-------
This is approximately 4.5 percent of all costs of morta-
lity and morbidity. Although these savings would.not accrue
equally across urban areas, substantial benefits would accrue
to center city residents over the long term. However, cer-
tain negative social costs are attached to declining mortality.
These implications are drawn later in this report.
In an effort to comply with CAA, it is possible that cer-
tain cities (EPA identified New York, Chicago, Philadelphia,
Los Angeles, Denver and Washington) will have to limit auto-
mobile use in the downtown area.4 The effects of this type
of action on local merchants who provide employment for center
city residents are unknown over the long term. Certain cities
have banned automobile traffic in downtown shopping areas at
selected times with mixed results. One point must be stress-
ed. Limiting access to the center city also serves to limit
access out of the center city. Unless there is some alterna-
tive means of transportation (e.g. mass transit) actions in
this direction could wreak havoc with the urban economy and
the center city resident.
VIII.E Impact of Water Pollution Controls
Both industries and municipal governments will be taking
action in efforts to eliminate water pollution. Federal law
limits effluent discharge by industry into waterways. The
law requires the use of the best practicable technology for
effluent control by 1973. Certain industries such as paper,
chemicals, oil, plastics and textiles will be the most affec-
ted by the requirements. The degree that production facili-
ties of these industries are located in center cities will
determine the effect of these pollution controls upon the
residents. Unemployment would be the major effect caused by
controls on these industries.
Governmental action to curb water pollution will be dir-
ected in three major areas that will have substantial impact
upon the center city resident: drinking water, waste water
treatment and recreational facilities. In efforts to improve
drinking water, the Federal government monitors and classifies
municipal water supplies according to pressure, and health
requirements. Impacts of this action upon center city resi-
dents is negligible. However, if a government were to outlaw
lead pipes used for drinking water transmission in an effort
to improve city water quality, there would be significant
effects upon center city residents. First, those residents
who owned homes with lead piping would be required to replace
it with copper or some other acceptable material. Similarly,
landlords would be required to replace all lead piping their
housing units or face condemnation. Neither resident nor
landlord could bear the cost of removal and replacement. A
reasonable estimate for this type of work would be $1500 to
$2000 per unit.5 Landlords would be unable to sustain these
expenditures without raising rents. Home owners would also
be exposed to economic hardship if forced to bear the cost.
Although municipal or Federal funding of this type of program
98
-------
is a possibility, the revenues would have to come from taxes
which would be unfair to those not receiving the benefits.
Whereas this might be tolerable on a scale such as the Federal
programs today, the cost of replacing all piping in homes
built before copper (around 1945) and plastics (around 1965)
were.used would be absolutely staggering.
Governmental action to improve waste water treatment in-
volves funding and construction of sewers and sewage treat-
ment plants. Although the Federal government is financing 75
percent of the cost many cities will still have trouble rais-
ing the needed capital. Increased taxes and sewer connection
fees along with some type of long term financing, e.g. munici-
pal bonds, seem to be the only reasonable methods for raising
the necessary capital. In any case, the center city resident
will be forced to assume some of the costs. An interesting
point arises when one considers the effects of public works
construction. The fact that government expenditures in an
area stimulate local economics is well known. In fact, pub-
lic works expenditures can be used to revive urban economics
suffering from other pollution control impacts. The benefits
accruing to the center city economy because of the public
works project might well exceed the costs incurred by the
residents.
A final area of government action will be the improve-
ment of water based recreational facilities. The proximity
and availability of the improved water based facility will
determine its usage patterns among center city residents.
Taxing the center city resident to improve facilities that
are relatively unaccessible to the center city is subsidizing
other areas of the city at the center city's expense. To the ex-
tent that the improved facilities are available to the center
city resident will determine the impact of this effort upon
the center city.
VIII.F Impact of Noise Pollution Control
The major sources of urban noise were discussed earlier
in this report. Noise levels were shown to be higher in the
center city than in the urban area as a whole. The costs of
"quieting" the center city would probably not have much effect
upon center city residents. Obvious exceptions to this would
be industrial noise and noise from transportation vehicles.
Forcing center city industries to quiet their production
processes or move to outside areas that permit existing noise
levels causes unemployment to rise. -The mechanism being simi-
lar to that of air and water pollution controls. Similarly,
effecting noise controls upon transportation facilities would
result in higher user costs. This would be true for buses,
subways and other mass transit vehicles. Traffic noise could
be lowered by the rerouting of all non essential traffic.
However, the problem would not be solved, only transferred to
another area.
99
-------
VIII. G Impact of Solid Waste Pollution Control
The basic economic question in solid waste pollution con-
trol is who will pay for the necessary effort to achieve a
cleaner, more livable center city. Over 75 percent of solid
waste collection and disposal costs are directly paid in the
form of taxes, user charges or fees for service.
Because the center city resident pays less taxes and
generates equal or greater waste than his suburban counter-
part, the service being provided (assuming equal performance
levels) has greater economic efficiency in the center city.
Therefore, any increased service level in the center city
without a differential tax increase to the center city resi-
dent provides him a positive economic gain. Similarly, the
development of alternative means of solid waste disposal pro-
vide a net economic gain to the center city resident because
of the relatively small center city tax base.
VIII.H Some Other Impacts of Pollution Controls
The economic impacts of pollution control upon the cen-
ter city in the areas of radiation and pesticides are very
small. The area of pesticides, however, is worth mentioning.
Eliminating pesticide pollution in the center city would pre-
cipitate rapid growth in the numbers of household pests. If
single use, non toxic pesticides were developed and marketed,
there would be a net economic gain. Household pests would be
eliminated and a major health hazard would be minimized.
However, if the use of agricultural pesticides was severely
curbed, negative effects in the form of higher food prices
would face the center city resident.
VIII.H.I Social Costs
It is felt that the center city is more than an economi-
cally determined subsystem. To the extent that application
of uniform environmental controls will affect the entire sys-
tem of the center city, it is necessary to follow its logical
ramifications to the center city as a social structure. The
question of uniform pollution control as a diseconomy to the
employment base of the center city has been well pursued.
As indicated at the outset of this report, the critical struc-
tural factors influencing any move to improve the center city
environment should be age, size and density. It will be shown
now, that these three factors are associated with the proba-
ble social costs involved in uniform enforcement of -Federal
pollution controls in the center city. The social costs to
be examined here are transportation, housing, age distribu-
tion, the labor force and migration.
The obvious result of applying uniform Federal controls
is positive from the standpoint of the center city. That is,
a metropolitan center city locale which meets Federal pollu-
tion standards would be an upgraded environment. Given the
unique characteristics of the center city, the negative
100
-------
implications of uniform enforcement may be less obvious.
Paramount among these are social costs.
It has been,-suggested by classical urban theorists that
the city is a complex of social and cultural factors consti-
tuting a distinct way of life. It is argued here that the
environment can be considered an inherent component of the
center city life style. Environmental concerns then become
life-style concerns. The question then becomes one how does
uniform enforcement of pollution controls disrupt the life
style of the center city population? Further, it can be ask-
ed whether or not elevating the center city environment to
comply with Federal standards will produce stressful living
conditions in terms of certain social parameters. Finally,
it is felt that measuring social ramifications is a valid
technique in assessing the equity of applying uniform pollu-
tion controls to the center city locale.
VIII.H.2 Housing
Housing problems associated with uniform enforcement
are primarily those resulting from structural obsolescence
and overcrowding of center city dwelling units. According to
the National Commission on Urban Problems, a greater incidence
of substandard and crowded housing units exists in the center
city than in the suburban locale. The Commission also points
out that housing problems in center city poverty areas are
more acute than in the center city as a whole. It is hypothe-
sized that application of current and proposed Federal envir-
onmental controls may increase the proportion of substandard
housing in the center city. Air, vater and noise controls
would significantly alter the types of currently acceptable
internal heating, plumbing and insulating systems in center
city houses. For example, if all landlords and homeowners in
the center city were required to insulate housing units to
meet Federal noise standards, the result might be abandonment
of the housing unit rather than paying the dollar costs of
insulation. Investigation is needed to determine whether or
not present housing structures in the center city can with1-
stand the installation of new heating, water and insulation
systems. Further, if abandonment of center city housing units
is a probable outcome of uniform enforcement, research is need-
ed to determine the resulting relocation needs and preferences
of the center city resident. One possibility to an abandoned
house when relief housing is unavailable or nonexistent, is
squatter settlements. It is hoped that this latter alterna-
tive is not within the realm of possibilities, but it is high-
ly improbable. Empirical research would provide a basis on
which to calculate the probability of all possible outcomes
to the question of center city housing and uniform pollution
controls.
VIII. H. 3 Transportation
The second area of social consequences of uniform enfor-
cement is transportation. It was shown in the discussion on.
101
-------
the demographic composition of the center city that the popu-
lation of the center city is disproportionately black. It
was also pointed out that the center city has a higher percent
of the population over age 65 and a lower median income than
the suburbs. First, it can be assumed that a population with
a large percent aged and lower income families would be depen-
dent on public transportation. This assumption may not neces-
sarily hold for blacks,6 but for the argument here, its valid-
ity is assumed. Second, if application of uniform environmen-
tal controls reduces the number of automobiles or buses,in
the center city either through increased costs or restrictive
entry measures, it is hypothesized that transportation for
center city residents may prove to be oppressive. Lack of
adequate transportation to places of employment, medical c(are
and schools may put these places out of the reach of the aver-
age center city resident.
The application of a Federal pollution control which re-
duces the availability of public transportation in the center
city would have the effect of increasing an already severe
problem. Data for the 123 largest cities in the Metropolitan
U.S. indicates that the emphasis of local governments is to-
ward municipal highway expenditures and away from public trans-
portation. The more local governments allocate monies to
highways, the less the number of buses in the city.7 A more
significant problem with present public transportation is the
relationship between increased demand and supply functions in
the center city. It is assumed that a characteristically poor
and nonwhite center city population would transmit a greater
need for public transportation than the suburban population.
The reliance on commuter transportation, especially the auto-
mobile , reduces the suburban demand on local, interurban
transportation. It would appear then that as the center city
poor and black population increased, the supply of public
transportation would also increase. Further, it is hypothe-
sized that as population density increased in the center city,
public transportation would also increase. The latter would
alleviate traffic congestion and the associated pollution pro-
blems. Empirical findings indicate no relationship between
the number of buses and increased population density within
the center city, locale (r=.09). Similar findings were evi-
dence for change in percent poor and change in percent non-
white populations. The interpretation of the findings indi-
cates that increased public transportation demands as measur-
ed by increases in the center city poor and nonwhite popula-
tions, is not met by increased supply, as measured by the
number of buses in the center city-8
It is argued here that consideration of the current
transportation picture in the center city must be made before
uniform Federal pollution controls are applied. The data
show that the center city locales of the metropolitan area
have a critical shortage of public transportation. Moreover,
municipal governments apparently are' unresponsive to increas-
ed transportation needs. The most significant finding in the
analysis of transportation in the center city was the fact
102
-------
that approximately 67 percent of the variation in bus short-
ages in the center city is explained by increased population
size Cr-,821. rt is suggested that this inadequate supply of
public transportation has forced center city and suburban
workers to. rely heavily on private automobiles. The "Survey
of Working Conditions, 1970" found that 70 percent of the
workers interviewed rode to work in their own cars or motor-
cycle's . 9
VIII.H.4 Age Distribution
Age distribution is the third major category in which
application of Federal pollution controls may produce signi-
ficant changes in the social structure of the center city.
It is proposed that the imposition of any Federal control
which decreases environmental health affects may conceivably
alter birth and death rates in the center city. It is hypo-
thesized that deaths related to air pollution episodes and
excessive heat may be reduced through environmental controls.
Data presented earlier pointed out that high risk populations
for heat-related deaths are the poor, aged and black resi-
dents of the center city.10 Further, infant populations ex-
posed to higher lead concentrations,11 virus contamination
of water1^ and excessive heat1^ in the center city has been
shown to contribute to the infant mortality rates.
Second, the dynamics of the age structure of the center
city works in conjunction with improved health conditions
and corresponding drops in the mortality rates. A center
city affected by the application of uniform Federal environ-
mental controls will probably improve the health conditions
in the area. It is hypothesized that such an impact on health
conditions would be evidenced in a declining mortality rate.
The most marked decline would be in the very young and very
old segments of the 'population, those under 10 years of age
and over SO.1^ The subsequent drop in infant and aged deaths
as a result of Federal environmental controls will provide a
center city population with a larger proportion young and
aged than exists currently. Further, there is evidence to
suggest an effect on increased birth rates. If empirical
evidence can be established between virus induced spontaneous
abortions and potentially hazardous virus contaminated drink-
ing water, then it is possible to predict a relationship be-
tween improved drinking water and increased birth rates.!5
VIII.E.5 Labor Force Participation
The impact of uniform Federal enforcement of pollution
controls and the ramifications to the economic base of the
center city has been thoroughly analyzed. However, the conse-
quences to the labor force and the implications of migration
of workers remains to be discussed. First, it is proposed
that one important impact of uniform Federal pollution con-
trols on the center city will be decreased labor force parti-
cipation for certain sectors of the center city population.
103
-------
Second, it is proposed that a decreased labor force will pro-
duce increased out-migration from the center city.
One method of analyzing the degree of labor force parti-
cipation for a population is the unemployment rate. It is
hypothesized that the greatest impact of applying uniform
environmental controls will be decreased labor force partici-
pation of the center city minority populations. A utilization
of race-specific labor force participation data adequately
reflect this predicted negative change in labor force partici-
pation rates. Again, it appears that the ramifications of
uniform Federal pollution controls to the center -city will
confound an already negative situation. Unemployment rates
in 1970 for all males in the center city locale was 4.9 per-
cent compared to a 3.6 percent rate in the suburbs. For fe-
males, the rates were reversed 5.0 percent and 5.2 percent
respectively. (These figures reflect the fact that most su-
burban females are classified as housewives and do not parti-
cipate in the labor force). For the black population in the
center city, the male unemployment rate was 7.5 percent. The
figure was 7.8 percent for unemployment for black females in
the center city for 1970.
Consequently, the labor force participation for the cen-
ter city male population, as measured by unemployment rates
in 1970 was 1.3 percent less than the suburban labor force
participation. For females, the center city-suburban differ-
ence was negligible, a 0.2 percent increase in unemployment
for suburban women. A control for race indicates a 3.9 per-
cent increase in unemployment for black center city males
compared to white suburban males. In addition, the race-
specific figures for the female metropolitan population shows
a higher unemployment rate for black center city females than
the white suburban and white center city females. (7.5 per-
cent compared to 5.2 percent and 5.0 percent respectively) .
It was pointed out in the section of this paper on sour-
ces and nature of water pollution that certain industries con-
tributed heavily to the differential level of water pollution
in the center city. The mean values for black participation
rates in. thirteen industries range from 6.6 percent to 21.8
percent. The grand mean is 14.2 percent. With respect to
the previous discussion on the impact of uniform Federal
pollution controls on center city transportation, it is sig-
nificant that 21.8 percent of black participation in the
metropolitan labor force is in local and interurban transit.
On the average, almost 14 percent (13.9%) of the black labor
force participation is in contract construction. An astonish-
ing 29.0 percent of this participation is in Atlanta and
another 26.6 percent in Philadelphia.
The association between contract construction and differ-
ential noise levels in the center city was reported earlier.
It is hypothesized that noise pollution control which affects
contract construction will consequently affect the labor
participation rates for that industry. It is predicted that
this will be a negative effect, thus reducing the participa-
tion rate of workers in this industrial sector particularly
104
-------
for the black population. The phenomenon of the "last hired,
first fired" may become operative.
VIII.H.6 Migration
To the extent that application of uniform Federal pollu-
tion controls increases unemployment in the center city, it
is possible that massive out-migration may take place over a
substantial period of time. The population will seek employ-
ment outside of the center city. Second, if the controls have
a differential effect on any particular region within the
metropolitan United States, regional migration may occur.
For example, it has been shown in the earlier section of this
report that air pollution differentials between the center city
and suburban locales are greatest in the northeast region.
Consequently, the application of a uniform Federal air pollu-
tion control will predictably have its most severe impact on
the northeastern center cities. It can be hypothesized that
workers in that region will respond to increased unemployment
by moving to another region. Further, it is predicted that
the migration patterns will be across regions such that a wor-
ker in a northeastern center city will migrate to a center
city locale of another region. Moreover, the possibility of
a regional center city to suburb migration is not at all im-
probable. Regardless of the direction of the move, any sud-
den changes in out-migration from the center city will have
the effect of redistributing the present metropolitan United
States population.
VIII.I Conclusion
In conclusion, the logical consequences of the applica-
tion of uniform Federal pollution controls in metropolitan
communities will be indeterminate changes in the economic,
social and demographic structure of center city locales.
Further empirical research in the field of uniform Federal
environmental controls is seriously needed before definitive
conclusions can be reached about the direction and magnitude
of expected change. The data presented in this report have
been used to develop specific hypotheses for empirical test.
Specifically, it is hypothesized that the application of uni-
form Federal pollution controls will:
• decrease the mortality rates in center city locales
• increase the population under age 10 and over age 50
years in the center city
• increase the birth rate in the center city
• increase center city transportation problems for the
poor and aged
• increase center city housing problems, especially
increase housing abandonment
• decrease the labor force participation through
increased unemployment, especially for the black
population
105
-------
increase regional and local out-migration over the
long term
decrease center city population density
increase particular regional center city and suburban
densities
decrease the absolute number of marginal industries
shift the economic base of the center city, thus
creating severe unemployment problems in certain
sectors.
106
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. The reader should be advised that several references and
footnotes could not be located prior to final reproduction of
Section 8.0.
2. Industries which export are considered to be the generator
of the local economy- These are termed basic industries.
Industries which serve the local market are termed non basic.
By calculating ratios (between basic and non basic industries
and assuming that these relationships hold constant over the
forecast period, the economic growth and stability of a com-
munity may be projected. Usually these ratios are expressed
with employment data. A good reference for economic base
studies is Charles M. Tiebout, The Community Economic Base
Study/ Supplementary Paper No. 16 (New York, Committee for
Economic Development).
3. Lester B. Loye and Eugene P. Siskin, "Air Pollution and
Human Health," Science (August 21, 1970), pp. 723-732. See
pages 729-730 in particular.
4. Wall Street Journal, February 1, 1971, p. 2.
5. Costs would vary significantly depending upon the number
of plumbing fixtures present, the amount of pipe required and
the availability of piping substitutes (some areas require
the use of certain types of piping). Replacement of plumbing
would involve removal and replacement of walls, ceilings and
floors. Also, costs would be significantly higher in large
metropolitan areas than in small towns because of wage differ-
entials . (These estimates are based upon discussions with
Mr. Irving Kursh, Secretary-Treasurer of Bells Supply Co.,
Inc., Wilmington, Del.)
6. Differential consumption patterns for the black popula-
tion would suggest a greater reliance on private automobiles.
7. Pamela C. Cooper, "Factors Affecting Resource Allocation
Within U.S. Cities" (Unpublished manuscript). A multiple
regression analysis evidenced a negative zero-order correla-
tion between municipal per capita highway expenditure and
number of buses (r= -.08) .
8. Ibid. Zero order correlations (r=.01).
9. University of Michigan Survey Research Center, "Survey of
Working Conditions - Final Report" (1970), p. 247.
10. House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
Safe prinking Water.
11. Ibid.
107
-------
12. Stanley H. Schuman, "Patterns of Urban Heat-wave Deaths
and Implications for Prevention," Environmental Research, V,
No. 1, p. 68.
13. U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Labor and Public
Welfare, Lead Based Paint Poisoning Amendments of 1972,
Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Labor and
Public Welfare, March, 1972, pp. 9-10.
14. The mechanism through which improved health conditions
effect age composition is discussed by Bogue in Principles
of Demography.
15. A suggested association between spontaneous abortions
and potentially hazardous drinking water is presented in
Safe Drinking Water, pp. 379-404.
108
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
/. Repcrtlfo.
i A• • t- -tier No.
w
4. Title
Studies In Environment - Volume III - Pollution and the
Municipality
7. Auihor(s) Pamela Cooper, Samuel Kursh, Jeanie Rae Wakeland,
Margo Van Winkle, Mary Zoller
9. Organization
S. Report Date
6,
S. Performing Organization
Report If o.
In. ProitctNo.
I!. Ccr.iracilGrant No.
801473
13. Type of Report and
Period Covered
IS. Supplementary
Environmental Protection Agency ,: ?^*
Environmental Protection Agency Report
Number EPA-600/5-73-012c
16. Abstract Recent studies have focused attention on the fact that residents of inner-city
neighborhoods are subject to greater amounts of pollutants than are other neighborhoods
of large cities. In this study, Pollution and the Municipality, the premise is set forth
and investigated at the metropolitan scale, seeking to discover differences of impact be-
tween the center city and its suburbs.
The report hypothesizes differentials of a generalized metropolitan area, by
pollutant types, by interpreting diverse information sources. The findings were looked
at in the light of standards imposed by federal and state regulation, first uniformly
enforced, then implications for variable enforcement.
17a. Descriptors
Inner-city, pollution standards, enforcement.
17b. Identifiers
17c. COIVKR Field & Group
IS. Av^Hahiii-y 19. Se nitrify Crass.
(Report)
20. Security Class,
21. Nj.of
Pages
22. Price ^
Send To:
WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
WASHINGTON. D. C. 2O24O
A Stricter John Gerba I l.^nrution Environmental Protection Agency
* U. 8. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1974 731-936/343
------- |