AL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
Train Takes
Russell E. Train was sworn in Sept.
14 as the second administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
Earlier, the Senate voted, 85 to 0, to
confirm his appointment.
The former chairman of the Coun-
cil on Environmental Quality (CEQ),
an advisory post, Train moves to
leadership of an executive and enforce-
ment agency at a time of critical
change. After his nomination was an-
nounced late in July, he said that the
"first early excitement" of the en-
vironmental movement is over, and the
Nation must now settle down to the
hard, tough work of carrying out its
commitments.
"EPA is an independent regulatory
agency with a strong independent
character. I made that clear to the
President, and he agrees with me," said
Train, promising vigorous enforcement
of antipollution laws.
LAWYER, CONSERVATIONIST
Train is 53 years old, a lawyer,
former judge, and active conservation-
ist.
As chairman of the CEQ since it
was established early in 1970, Train
was President Nixon's principal adviser
on environmental matters. He led the
Council's work of setting up the
-photo by Ernest Bucci
EPA Administrator Russell E. Train takes oath of office Sept. 14 from Attorney
General Elliott Richardson while Mrs. Train holds the Bible.
impact-statement system for reviewing
the environmental effects of all major
Federal government actions before
they are undertaken.
Train said he had sought the ap-
pointment to succeed William D.
Ruckelshaus, now Deputy Attorney
General of the United States. Train
said "Ruckelshaus got EPA off to a
great start. .. But I'm my own man
and expect to be developing my own
programs." Train said he welcomed
the shift from an advisory to an execu-
tive role in environmental protection.
Train is a lifelong resident of Wash-
ington. He was graduated from Prince-
ton University in 1941, served five
years in the Field Artillery during
World War II, advancing from second
lieutenant to major, and then earned a
law degree at Columbia University.
IN FEDERAL SERVICE
He was admitted to the District of
Columbia bar in 1949 and for the next
eight years served in a number of legal
staff posts for Congressional commit-
tees and the Treasury Department.
President Eisenhower appointed
him in 1957 as a judge of the U.S. Tax
Court, a post Train resigned in 1965 to
become president of the Conservation
Foundation. He was a founder and
first president of the African Wildlife
Leadership Foundation and vice-
president of the World Wildlife Fund.
President Nixon named him as an
Undersecretary of the Interior in
1969. He has represented the United
States at several international con-
ferences on conservation and environ-
mental matters.
Train was married in 1954 to the
former Aileen Bowdoin. They have
four children.
-------
New Rules Encourage Public Action
Though Comments Are Scanty
You can invite people to take part
in water pollution control, but you
cannot make them do so.
That rueful conclusion was in the
background when EPA recently
adopted regulations to encourage pub-
lic participation in carrying out the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972.
To the disappointment of some
EPA officials, there had been scant
public participation in setting up the
rules for public participation.
The regulations were formally
adopted Aug. 17, about six months
after they had been proposed, and dur-
ing the 60-day period provided for
public comments and suggestions only
90 comments were submitted through-
out the country.
"Is the American public really
interested in pollution control? Some-
times we wonder," wrote Frank Cor-
rado, public affairs director for Region
V, Chicago, in the regional newsletter.
'This meagre response took place
in spite of a very serious attempt by
EPA and major citizen groups to in-
volve the public in the commenting
process," said Corrado. "It is particu-
larly disheartening in the light of the
intentions of Congress to encourage
public participation by inserting such a
'public section* in the law."
The new regulations emphasize the
public hearing as the chief tool for
public participation in all stages of
water pollution control projects and
actions. The regulations outline policy
and general requirements, including:
• Sufficient advance notice mailed
to interested persons and groups
and to news media, supplying
agenda and other elements of
the hearings.
• Hearing times and locations set
to facilitate attendance and testi-
mony by interested and affected
persons and organizations.
• Documents pertinent to the
proposed action made available
in advance of the hearing.
• Hearing records made available
for public inspection for a rea-
sonable tune to allow submission
of supplementary statements.
NPDES Is Prime Target
For Public Involvement
The Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act calls for public participa-
tion in the "permit system"—offic-
ially known as the National
' Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES)-which is in the
process of being taken over by the
States.
The regulation of waste dis-
charges into surface waters is criti-
cal to the Act's ultimate success
and should be of direct interest to
the public.
Public involvement in NPDES is
required when a State first asks to
take over the program in its borders
and proposes its rules and proce-
dures for issuing or denying per-
mits.
The public is involved again
whenever a State agency with per-
mit authonty (or EPA in the ab-
sence of a State program) takes
steps to issue a permit.
Last May California was granted
permit authority, the first State to
win it. By mid-September four
other States had completed formal
application for such authority, and
hearings had been set for them:
Connecticut, Kansas, Michigan, and
Oregon.
Eight States have applications in
various stages of completion. They
are Delaware, Idaho, Maryland,
Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Texas,
Virginia, and Washington.
The law's deadline for having the
NPDES in operation is Dec. 31,
1974.
Specific requirements are spelled
out in the program regulations.
Evidence of efforts to enlist public
comment must be included in State
agency reports to EPA on water clean-
up plans, construction grant applica-
tions, and State or area regulations. If
the public input is considered inade-
quate, EPA "may disapprove or su-
spend action ... or require the spon-
soring agency to obtain additional
public participation, prior to final
action."
Of the 90 comments concerning the
new regulations, 52 were from private
citizens or citizen groups and the rest
from State and local governmental
bodies. Many changes were made in
the final regulations in response to the
comments, notably in strengthening
public involvement at the State level,
encouraging public reporting of viola-
tions, and reducing redundancies and
unnecessary paper work.
The paucity of comments on public
participation rules may be due to their
abstract and technical nature. " The
amendments adopted last fall fill 98
pages, and that's just the law itself,"
said Corrado. "Regulations and guide-
lines to spell out how the law will be
applied will run to hundreds of addi-
tional pages. To engage the interest
and active concern of citizens in such
abstract legal pnnciples is uphill
work."
There are usually lots of comment
and plenty of interest in local and
specific water pollution issues. Last
winter in southeast Florida more than
350 persons attended hearings on the
use of ocean outfalls to dispose of
treated sewage waste water. More than
100 comments, both oral and written,
were made at three hearings, and the
transcript filled 1,465 pages.
The EPA Bulletin is published monthly by
the Office of Public Affairs to inform State
and local environmental officials of EPA's
research, standard-setting, and enforcement
work.
Van V. Trumbull, Editor
Room W218, Waterside Mall
Washington, D.C. 20460
Tel. (202) 755-0872
-------
This "smog chamber" was dedicated Aug. 13 at Pittsboro, N.C., for air pollution
studies by EPA and University of North Carolina researchers. From the left are
Drs. Donald Fox and Lyman Ripperton, UNC, Chapel Hill; and Drs. A. Paul
AltschuUer and Basil Dimitriades of EPA's North Carolina Research Center.
Smog Chamber Helps Study
of Air Pollutant Interactions
Using a new outdoor "smog cham-
ber," scientists from EPA and the Uni-
versity of North Carolina are investi-
gating the interactions of three kinds
of atmospheric pollutants that make
up urban smog.
The chamber is designed to study
smog formation on a scale larger than
can be accomplished in the laboratory,
to find out more about the complex
reactions by which emissions of hydro-
carbons and nitrogen oxides, on ex-
posure to sunlight, are converted to
photochemical oxidants. All three are
components of smog, and the chemis-
try of their interaction is not fully un-
derstood.
The cooperative project is particu-
larly concerned with synergistic effects
(e.g., when two or more pollutants
combine to produce an effect that is
greater than the sum of their separate
effects) and with conflicting control
actions. (Some kinds of control of
hydrocarbons from vehicle engines in-
crease the output of nitrogen oxides.)
To conduct field experiments under
controlled conditions, EPA and the
University cooperated to build the
smog chamber at Pittsboro, about 16
miles southwest of Chapel Hill and
Research Triangle Park. The chamber
resembles an A-frame vacation house
sheathed in clear plastic. It is 30 feet
wide, 40 feet long, and 20 feet high,
enclosing a volume of 1,200 cubic
feet. Gas supplies, instruments and a
computer are housed in an adjoining
small hut.
Scientists can control mixtures of
the three pollutants in the chamber
and expose them to sunlight. Dr. Basil
Dimitriades, EPA project officer, said
the chamber's size and outdoor loca-
tion make it possible to create condi-
tions that closely resemble those in the
atmosphere of a polluted city.
The UNC researchers have designed
and assembled a complex array of
scientific instruments and have pro-
grammed their operations on a com-
puter. The computer actuates the in-
struments, charges the chamber with
the correct mixture of pollutants, and
subsequently monitors the chemical
reactions that take place.
STATE ORDERS
NOx CONTROLS
ON OLD CARS
Starting January 1, California will
require owners of 1966- to 1970-
model cars in 16 metropolitan coun-
ties to install devices to reduce nitro-
gen oxide emissions.
In three big-city areas (South Coast
Air Basin, San Francisco Bay, and San
Diego County), installation is already
required on resale or first California
registration of vehicles of these five
model years. This program started
Oct. 1.
The installation program, first or-
dered by State authorities in May, was
halted soon after it began, when it be-
came evident that five of the six ap-
proved devices caused the engines' ex-
haust valves to deteriorate.
The devices are to two types:
vacuum spark advance disconnect plus
some engine adjustment, and exhaust
gas recycle plus spark retard.
After a restudy of the devices' ef-
fectiveness, the State Air Resources
Board determined that the reported
valve damage occurred only at sus-
tained high speeds (above 60 MPH),
when the spark retard caused engine
overheating. The manufacturers have
modified their devices and their instal-
lation instructions to correct this de-
ficiency.
Installation will be spread over a
ten-month period starting in January,
according to the final digit of the ve-
hicle's license plate.
The Board is seeking to limit the
scope of the program, now required by
law for all 1966-1970 vehicles, by the
time of motor vehicle registration in
1975. The Board believes that in some
areas of the State having no air pollu-
tion problems the retrofit program
would not be cost-effective.
The retrofit devices price is set by
law at not more than $35, plus a tax
on parts only. The devices reduce ni-
trogen oxide emissions by an average
of 40 to 55 percent, and their fuel
penalty in city driving averages 3 to 10
percent.
-------
$11.2-Billion Air Cleanup Cost Seen
Five years from now the annual
cost of curbing air pollution under the
Clean Air Act will total SI 1.2 billion,
a new EPA study estimates.
Control of mobile emission
sources-mainly cars and trucks—will
take S6.5 billion, more than half the
total. Stationary fuel burning, includ-
ing steam-electric power stations, will
account for S3.4 billion, and pollution
controls in 27 different industries will
cost $1.3 billion, the study said.
Capital investment in air pollution
control pursuant to the Clean Air Act
will total S23.3 billion by fiscal 1978
according to the report. This sum is
cumulative over the eight years that
will have elapsed since the Act took
effect in 1970.
The SI 1.2 billion annual cost ex-
pected in fiscal 1978 includes all in-
terest, amortization, and depreciation
of capital investment as well as current
operation and maintenance costs for
that year, but it does not include the
cost to government agencies for pollu-
tion control monitoring and enforce-
ment.
The gist of the report, "The Cost of
Clean Air," is summarized in the ad-
joining table. Shown are the present
amounts of five kinds of pollutant
Non-Degradation Rules Seek
To Protect Clean-Air Areas
Four possible ways have been pro-
posed by EPA to prevent "significant
deterioration" of air quality in regions
having air cleaner than Federal
standards require.
The Agency will issue regulations
embodying one or more of the propos-
als after considering testimony given at
public hearings held recently in Wash-
ington, Atlanta, Denver, Dallas, and
San Francisco, and written comments
received at the Agency through Oct.
15.
The so-called "non-degradation"
rules are required by a U.S. District
Court order, affirmed by the Supreme
Court, that the Clean Air Act requires
the prevention of significant deteriora-
tion of air quality in areas where the
air is cleaner than is needed to meet
the standards set by EPA to protect
public health and welfare.
EPA's final regulations will repre-
sent a policy of controlled industrial
growth, rather than "no growth," in
clean-air areas.
The four proposals are:
• Quality Increment Plan—for
maximum allowable increases in
sulfur dioxide and particulates in
all areas where 1972 levels were
below Federal ambient stan-
dards. These would be, for SC«2,
14 micrograms per cubic meter
(annual average), 100
(24-hour average), and 300
(3-hour average); for particu-
lates, 10 Jim3 (annual), and 30
/nm3 (24-hour).
• Emission Limitation Plan-ceil-
ings on emissions of certain
pollutants, measured from new
sources or 1972 baseline levels,
whichever is greater. For sulfur
dioxide these would be 10 tons
annually per square mile of area,
or 20 percent over the baseline;
for particulates, 3 tons per
square mile or 20 percent over
baseline levels.
• Local Definition-States would
determine for each new source
whether it would cause signifi-
cant deterioration. But EPA
must approve the State's proce-
dure and reserves the right to
cancel any approval of construc-
tion.
• Deterioration Zones Plan—States
would classify areas into two
zones, the first having very strict
requirements, essentially ban-
ning industrial development, and
the second permitting sulfur
dioxide and particulate increases
to the levels of the Quality In-
crement Plan. State public hear-
ings would be required before
establishing the strict zones.
emissions in tons per year from various
sources, the percentage decreases ex-
pected from control measures called
for in the Act, and the estimated costs
in cumulative capital investment and
annual carrying charges.
'The Cost of Clean Air" is the
latest in a series of reports to Congress
submitted by EPA in accordance with
the Clean Air Act's requirement to
make annual five-year forecasts of pol-
lution control effectiveness and costs.
Unlike previous reports in the ser-
ies, the new one includes cost data not
only for the types of emissions for
which EPA has promulgated national
air quality standards, but also for: (1)
newly adopted performance standards
for five stationary and industrial
sources, (2) newly proposed standards
for seven other stationary sources, and
(3) three specific hazardous pollutants.
The study's estimates of impacts,
benefits, and costs are based as far as
possible on actual regulations in State
implementation plans submitted to
and approved by EPA.
NEW BASE YEAR
The latest report employs a new
base year, 1970, permitting the use of
data from the latest national census,
and all costs are given in 1970 dollars.
The report cites the "uncertainties
involved in forecasting even five years
into the future." The evaluations are
based on present technology, and no
allowance is made for innovation.
"Rarely in this century" says the re-
port, "would such a five-year extra-
polation have held true."
Five pollution sources were listed as
"not controlled," and no emission re-
ductions or control costs were esti-
mated for them. They include acciden-
tal fires (forest fires, building fires, and
some agricultural burning), that are
substantial pollution sources not
amenable to process control; minor in-
dustries (coking, carbon black) for
which the only apparent remedy is
new technology; and the sand, stone,
and limestone industries, that produce
only particulates on a local scale.
"The Cost of Clean Air" was sub-
mitted to the House and Senate
Committees on Public Works and will
be printed as a Senate Document.
-------
Annual Pollution Emissions by Type and Source, Expected Decreases by 1978, and Estimated Costs
Annual Emissions Without Further Control
(in thousands of tons)
Expected Decreases
in Emission Levels
in Fiscal Year 1978
Total Control Cost
(1970 dollars
in millions)
Emission Sources
All Mobile Sources
Solid Waste Disposal
Sewage Incinerators
Industrial Boilers
Steam-electric Power
Sta. Combust. Sub-total
Metals:
Iron and Steel
Gray Iron Foundries
Ferroalloys
Primary Copper
Primary Lead & Zinc
Primary Mercury
Primary Aluminum
Brass, Bronze
Secondary Lead
Secondary Zinc
Secondary Aluminum
Fuels Industries.
Coal Cleaning
Petroleum Refineries
Petroleum Prod. & Storage
Natural Gas
Solvent Dry Cleaning
Agriculture & Forests:
Grain Handling
Feed Plants
Forest Products
Kraft (Sulfate) Pulp
Construction:
Asbestos
Asphalt Batching
Cement
Chemicals:
Lime
Nitric Acid
Phosphate Fertilizer
Sulfuric Acid
Industrial Sub-total
Sources Not Controlled:
Coking
Carbon Black
Accidental Fires
Sand and Stone
Limestone
Sub-Total Not Controlled
National Total
Part-
icles
900
2.981
12
6,867
4,083
13,943
690
61
111
79
51
15
75
12
16
7
1
71
225
—
—
-
1,306
233
84
960
707
2.184
432
687
_
348
-
8.355
153
237
4.877
2,935
390
8.592
31 ,790
sox co
1,150 159,300
5,320
- -
7,774
28,150
35,924 5,320
4,092
586
- -
4,451
570
- -
- -
— —
— -
— —
- -
— —
4.403 10,490
- -
540
- -
- -
— —
275
- -
— —
— —
- -
— —
— —
— —
830
10,794 15,443
437 555
— —
194 21.150
- -
— —
631 21,205
48,499 201 ,268
(per cei
Part-
HC NOX icles SOX CO
27,850 16,250 0 0 14
7,283 - 93 88
98
2,069 82 79
16,053 88 81
7,283 18,122
93 0
- - 80 90
98
- 95 81
- 96 50
- - 93
- 96
- - 97
92
- 98
- - 7
- - 94
169 - 60 98 69
2,043
- - 96
16
- 98
- 98
23 2 80 85
- - 92
- - 84
- - 72
- - 91
- - 88
115
- 91
- 69
2,228 117
183 2
— -
3,623 1,593
-
— —
3,623 1,593
40,986 36,082 -
5
111 Cumul.
In vest -
HC NOX ment
7 8 13,920
87 512
12
4O 879
15 2.900
4,303
526
581
249
818
45
1
796
14
16
8
3
27
95 335
60 159
44
10 2
537
22
00 71
108
8
306
184
45
90 17
40
169
5,130
23,353
Annual
Cost in
FY 1978
6,465
242
2
1,342
1,860
3,446
179
168
66
178
12
1
209
3
4
2
2
3
46
0
12
0
113
4
7
46
3
70
73
13
5
23
29
1,269
11,180
-------
Sewage Plant Uses Farm as 'Filter'
The Nation's largest sewage recy-
cling system, which will use 10,000
acres of cropland as a "living filter",
started operations this summer in
Muskegon County, Michigan.
Sewage from the City of Muskegon,
nearby towns, and several large indus-
trial plants is now being pumped to
the new $42-million plant 11 miles
east of Muskegon for secondary treat-
ment, storage, and (starting this fall)
irrigation of farmland as a gigantic nat-
ural filter.
Four old municipal treatment sys-
tems have been shut down and several
direct discharges from industrial plants
halted, eliminating the discharge of
polluted wastes into lakes and streams
that drain into Lake Michigan.
When the new system is operating
at full capacity it will handle all
domestic sewage from the county of
approximately 150,000 persons, and
all industrial waste water from five
major industries. It is designed to serve
the county's requirements at least
through 1992, when the population is
expected to be 170,000 and the aver-
age sewage flow 43.4 million gallons
per day.
The Muskegon system uses sewage
effluent (after the equivalent of sec-
Living filter of plants and soil provides
tertiary treatment, removing nutrients,
decomposing organic matter, and neu-
tralizing other pollutants in the water.
To Muskegon
River
Force main
from Muskegon
> Drainage ditches
— -».—-». Main drain pipes
A Drainage pumping stations
Sketch shows Muskegon's "living filter" layout. Raw sewage goes first to aerated
treatment lagoons (1, 2, and 3), then to settling lagoon (4) and outlet lagoon (5).
Chlorinated effluent is then pumped to spray rigs (circles). Dotted lines show
drainage system. Storage basins hold effluent in wet seasons and winter.
ondary treatment) as irrigation water
on cropland under carefully controlled
conditions. The soil-plant complex will
act as a living filter to remove nutri-
ents and any remaining bacteria or
other contaminants. The filtered
water, collected by buried drains,
receives the equivalent of tertiary
treatment and can be discharged to
natural surface waters without degrad-
ing them.
AERATION FIRST
The raw sewage goes first to a series
of three aeration lagoons, each 32,400
square meters (8 acres) in area and 4.6
meters (16 feet) deep. Floating aera-
tors and turbine mixers near the
lagoon bottom keep solids in suspen-
sion and speed the bacterial break-
down of organic matter. After three
days the sewage is pumped to one of
two large storage lagoons totaling 6.9
million square meters (1,700 acres).
Here solids settle out, and the waste
water has received the equivalent of
secondary treatment.
The liquid effluent is then chlori-
nated to kill pathogenic organisms and
sprayed on nearly 8,000 acres of adja-
cent farmland through rotating spray-
ing machines like those used in irriga-
tion farming.
The county let contracts this sum-
mer for the installation of the first
spray irrigators, and they will begin
operating some time this fall. It will
take four or five months for the stor-
age lagoons to fill up.
The storage lagoons are carefully
constructed to keep the sewage efflu-
ent from seeping into the ground-
Basin and lagoon dikes are lined with
clay and surrounded by ditches to con-
trol seepage into groundwater. Well-
points permit continual monitoring.
-------
water. Lagoon side walls are coated
with impermeable soil cement, and a
120-meter-wide blanket of clay has
been laid at the edge of each storage
lagoon. Any seepage through the
bottom's central area will be diverted
by a natural clay stratum 18 meters
down and must travel horizontally
through at least 120 meters of filtering
sand. Moreover, a drainage ditch sur-
rounding the lagoons will intercept
such seepage, and it will be pumped
back into the lagoon.
In the final "living filter" treat-
ment, the chlorinated effluent water
will be sprayed on porous, sandy, soil
that is low in natural nutrients. Crops
will use some of the water and most
of the nutrients. Remaining organic
matter will be decomposed by soil
bacteria. Suspended matter and heavy
metals will be absorbed by clay parti-
cles. The complex natural filtering
process will also remove viruses, de-
composing them into harmless protein.
DRAINAGE CONTROLLED
The entire irrigation area has been
underlaid with preforated tile drains,
collector pipes, and drainage ditches to
control groundwater levels and insure
that the site does not become water-
logged and unfit for cultivation. The
drainage system also permits monitor-
ing the quality of water passing
through the filter. Water finally dis-
charged to streams and lakes will meet
Federal water quality standards.
Crops to be grown on the sewage-
irrigated land include corn, beans,
onions, winter wheat and other grains,
and legumes. Comparative crops will
be grown on border strips and in areas
between the sprayed circles. At every
stage of the farming operations, scien-
tists from the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources, EPA, and various
universities will check on the quality
of plants, soils, and water.
The large storage lagoons are neces-
sary to withhold irrigation in times of
heavy rain and in the winter months
when the ground is frozen.
What happens to the settled solid
material, the sludge? It will be dredged
periodically from the bottom of the
storage lagoons, and applied to border
strips and between-circle areas. The
lagoons are so large that system engi-
neers think it will be five years before
Spray rigs like this one will apply treated effluent to soil through downward,
low-pressure nozzles to minimize air dispersion. Rig may have a radius up to 397
meters (1300 ft) and rotate once a day or more slowly.
New Law Controls Building
In New Jersey's Coastal Area
A new State law regulating develop-
ment and construction on New
Jersey's seacoast went into effect Sept.
20.
Called the Coastal Area Facility
Review Act, the measure is designed to
protect the shore environment by
providing for approval by the State
Department of Environmental Protec-
tion (DEP) before any major construc-
tion.
the first sludge dredging will be neces-
sary.
A detailed technical article on the
Muskegon project was published in the
May issue of Civil Engineering, the
magazine of the American Society of
Civil Engineers. Authors are three men
from EPA's Region V Office in
Chicago: Eugene I. Chaiken, and
Stephen Poloncsik, sanitary engineers,
and Carl D. Wilson, physical scientist.
The new law regulates the types of
construction that will be permitted in
the coastal zone—from Raritan Bay
just south of Staten Island to the Dela-
ware Memorial Bridge—including elec-
tric power plants, harbor and dredging
operations, manufacturing facilities,
and all housing developments of 25 or
more dwelling units.
Any person or company proposing
to construct such facilities in the
coastal zone must first file an applica-
tion with the Department and an en-
vironmental impact statement detail-
ing the expected adverse effects on
water, air, shoreline, and wildlife and
describing what steps will be taken to
minimize such effects.
Departmental decisions may be
appealed to a Coastal Area Review
Board consisting of the Commissioners
of Labor and Industry, Community
Affairs, and the DEP.
-------
Pesticide Office Moves Fast industry controls
Against Rabid Bats, Skunks Ahead of Schedule
Are you threatened by rabid bats or
skunks? Is a particular farm crop en-
dangered by pests that can only be
controlled by an environmentally
harmful pesticide?
In emergencies like these, EPA's
Pesticides Programs Office is prepared
to move quickly to approve limited,
local application of a pesticide not
registered for that particular use.
Requests for such emergency clear-
ance should be made to the nearest
EPA Regional Office The pesticides
officer there makes sure the request is
properly documented as to need and
supervision before forwarding the
request to headquarters.
Recent emergency clearances dealt
with bats in California and Pennsyl-
vania, rabid skunks in Texas, and Mon-
tana, an outbreak of the Colorado po-
tato beetle in New York, and a plague
of thistle caterpillars in North and
South Dakota and Minnesota.
Rabies in wild animals, particularly
bats, occurred this summer in Santa
Clara County, Calif., and 27 rabid bats
were found. EPA granted the county
health department's request to use
DDT on the bat rookeries, on a site-
by-site basis, administered by the
county agricultural commissioner
under the State's permit system. A
seminar was held to train local pest
control operators, and the commis-
sioner was authorized to use 200
pounds of 50% DDT in wettable
powder form up to Oct. 31. A com-
plete report is required at the conclu-
sion of the project.
In Concho County, Texas, and
portions of Menard and McCulloch
Counties, permission was given to use
a strychnine alkaloid in eggs to control
rabid skunks. This project is being
supervised by the State Veterinary
Public Health Division and will also
end on Oct. 31. A similar treatment
was allowed in seven counties of north-
eastern Montana.
On Long Island, N.Y., a temporary
permit was granted to use carbofuran
on 15,000 acres of potato fields in-
fested with the Colorado potato
beetle. Only one application at half a
pound per acre was allowed.
In the Dakotas and Minnesota, a
heavy infestation of thistle caterpillars,
which change to Painted Lady butter-
flies, was countered by a temporary
permit to use toxaphene. The sun-
flower seed crop on nearly 500,000
acres was threatened.
Use of DDT to control bats in a
private home in Chester County, Pa.,
was allowed, under supervision of
State public health officers. These bats
were not rabid, just bothersome.
In Chattanooga
Control of industrial air pollution
in Chattanooga, Term., is ahead of
schedule, according to the Chatta-
nooga-Hamilton County Air Pollution
Control Bureau.
All sources met the first reduction
of visible smoke emissions to Ringel-
mann No. 2 by the deadline last fall,
and most have now reached the Rin-
gelmann No. 1 level, which will not
become mandatory until July 1,1974,
a year before the Federal deadline, the
Bureau announced.
Of the 191 stationary air pollution
sources registered in the city and coun-
ty, 140 now meet all applicable re-
quirements of the air pollution control
regulations, 23 are working on compli-
ance plans or have applied for permits,
19 are operating under temporary
permits while debugging newly in-
stalled control devices, and four minor
sources are operating under variances
while working on their emission con-
trols.
The Five remaining sources, how-
ever, are engaged in litigation with the
Air Pollution Control Board, appealing
Board rulings, suing, or being sued. All
five are major sources of air pollution:
four manufacturers and an Army am-
munition plant.
Use of funds for printing this publication approved by the Director of the Office Management and Budget (Dec. 6. 1971).
90909 "II OOVDIHO
HO *3>IQVM N 1
AciVaen «A N93«
N«QI1 *M nOVA3Tlll
TM tf RT
t!3AO~ldlN3 A J.I Nnj.MOddO "IV HO 3 NV
OOCt 3SH 3 J.V M Md tlOd AJ.-lVN3d
A3N3OV NOlJ.33J.OHd 1 w J. N3WNOMI AN3 -S
OIVcJ S33J ONV 39VJ.SOd
09»OZ 'D'a 1NO10NIHSVM
AON3OV NOIJ.33J.O&d -|VlN3WNOaiAN3
S3J.V1S Q31INn
------- |