EN VIRONMENTA L
                NEWS
                SUMMA R Y            Januar>31
     Office of Public Affairs     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency      Washington, D.C. 20460
NO-GROWTH LAW RULED ILLEGAL
        In "landmark case with nationwide implications",  U.S.  District  Court  in San  Fran
cisco strikes down '72 Petalurna, Calif,  law limiting new  housing  units  to  500 a  -ear,
notes Wash. Star (1/25/74), San Francisco Chronicle (1/18/74).  Suit, brought by  local
developers, National  Association of Home Builders,  charged  that city  has  burden  of  just
ification when restricting mobility.1 Court says Petaluma  plan  violation of "constitution
 al  right to travel," and establish residence.
                                   ************************
NIXON ASKS FOR TWO-YEAR DELAY IN EMISSION STANDARDS
      Nixon's energy message to Congress  (1/23/74)  calls  for two-year  postponement of
EPA '75 interim auto standards requiring  65-70% reduction of hydrocarbons,  carbon monox-
ide from '70 levels, observes N.Y.  Times  (1/24/74).   Also wants  further  delay  in reducim
NOX emissions....Other key recommendations:   (1) Speed-up of nuclear plant  licensing,
construction; (2) increased federal  money for urban  transportation, more "flexibility"
spending it; (3) expansion of leasing for oil, gas  exploration on outer  continental shell
and (4) relaxation of Clean Air Act requirements for electric utilities, to accomodate
switch from oil  to coal	His proposed FY '75 budget  requests:  (1) $178.5 miTion, pol-
lution control research: (2) about  $169 million, fnMnn r«»s*arc!vs (3)  $154.5 million, re-
jis-i-ch and development for such areas as  solar, geothermal  energy; and (4)  almost $116
million to general energy conservation (such as transportation improvements)	Nixon's
energy message "confirme-.1.. .the environmentalists'  fears  of a major setback,"  feels Bal-
timore Sun (1/24/74). "The overwhelming omphasis was on increasing energy supplies...al-
most no mention of the impact on the environment of the various  proposals."   Sun,  citing
"half-hearted opposition" of EPA to auto emission del a;/', says  agency "showing less  force
under...Train."	Mr. Nixon's energy proposals delaying environmental  progress  "repre-
sent a step backward for the administration.   The American Public  Health  Association  es-
timates that...proposals for relaxing clean air standards could  cause a 20 to 40 per
cent increase in heart and lung disease due to air pollution." (Baltimore Sun, 1/25/74)

      IN RELATED DEVELOPMENTS.  Citing provision in Congressional  energy  bill  permitting
Federal Energy Office to compel electric power companies, other  industries to switch
from oil  back to coal, N.Y. Times (1/23/74) believes "no one is  yet  certain  that this
flight from the standards of the Clean Air Act is necessary,"  since  principal  Author  of
energy bill, Sen. Jackson (D-Wash.), has discovered discrepancies  between Federal,  oil
company statistics "so significant as to raise fundamental  questions whether existing
data systems provide any rational basis for policy making."
                               ******************************
NIXON IMPOUNDMENT RULED II
      Ruling on N.Y.  City,  Detroit  class  action, asking  for full allotment of sewage

-------
                                                       ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS SUMMARY
 treatment funds under '72 Clean Water Act, U.S. Court of Appeals,  D.C.,  upholds  District
 court ruling that Nixon illegally impounded $6 billion in pollution  funds  (See 1/17/74
 News Summary).  Court specified it's not ordering money spent,  rather ordering it be al-
 located to states for planning purposes; judges "express no opinion" whether funds could
 be withheld at later step in spending process  (Wash.  Post, 1/25/74).

 I	INRELATED DEVELOPMENTS.  EPA's Queries  tells  industry reps  that agency facing
 Tiany  difficulties implementing '72 Clean Water Act,  notes Kansa?  City Star (1/17/74)
   ne fundamental  [problem]	is a consistent  failure to anticipate  and  allow for the
 tforklcad implications of the new requirements."...."Fifteen frantic  and  often frustra-
 ting months after enactment of the legislation, th.e  federal  cleanup  people now concede
 -hat Congress set overly ambitious goals within impossibly   brief  deadlines   EPA has
 found itself at times trying to deaT with speciffc pollution problems before'broad, over
  li policy had been finally set in certain areas...industry,  even where wanting to do the
  ight thing, has  sensed  EPA's own uncertainty  and has been understandably reluctant
 nake costly plant changes for fear of being told, before too long, to go back and do it
 all  over differently."(Kansas City Times. 1/21/74)....On orders of House Subcommittee on
    Conservation and Natural  Resources,GAO has  been conducting, since June, '73, hush-
 hush investigation of EPA regional  offices,announces  Philadelphia  Evening Bulletin
 J/18/74).  Subcommittee  "concerned" that EPA not conducting  environmental impact studies
 ^or sewage  grant  program; "source close  to  subcommittee" says investigation not directed
 :oward criminal  allegations, rather is a "fact-finding  study."

                              *******************************

 QUARLES  THREATENS POWER  PLANTS WITH CRIMINAL SANCTIONS
      Citing  recent  hearings  proving  that effective pollution-control technology availa-
ble at reasonable  cost,  EPA's Quarles says agency will-start cracking down on "many plants"
stalling on installation of sulfur dioxide control equipment, and, if "good faith" not
shown, they may be prosecuted under  '70 Clean Air Act to tune of $25,000 for each day's
violation, reports N.Y   Times (1/23/74). Wall St. Journal (1/23/74). Possible repercus-
sions:  Conflict with Federal Energy Office  (which wants switch to high^sulfur coal) •
heavy utility lobbying effort if changeover  involves substantial cost.  Lonham Crawford,
)res., power  industry trade association, says none of the EPA "feasible" controls have
 proven...reliability on a full-scale electric generating plant..."

                              ******************************

TRAIN GETS PRAISE, CENSURE
      Syndicated columnist Nicholas von Hoffman in Wash. Post (1/21/74):  "A few people
in the government, like Russell Train...are suggesting that some very large changes  are
in order, but in this administration,  a guy like that has two strikes against him.   Not
only is he an ecology minded fellow, which makes him some kind of nut, but he also  labors
under the handicap of an impeccable personal and public reputation."	Citing Train's
Jan. 16 press conference, Denver Post (1/20/74) relates that, "Train persistently said
he wasn t [being "Steamrollered" by energy crisis, oil companies], then laid out an  en-
 vironmental program that consisted chiefly of rolling back deadlines for environmental
 legislation and easing up on polluters." Post says Train rejected tough  statement  puttir
 agency on Offensive; adds that "EPA isn't looking after the environment," and "possibly
 as a result of his approach to environmental  protection, Train is losing able Bob  San-
                                                            ,, lack

-------
    ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS SUMMARY
POLLUTION SOLUTION: $1 MILLION TO NIXON?

       "More  than  $1 million was funneled into.. .Nixon's reeledtion campaign by fa.ig busi-
nessmen associated with a special administration commission that tried to soften pollu-
tion controls," says Minneapolis Tribune (1/20/74). Georgetown Um'v. law professor Will-
iam Rodgers  says  National Industrial Pollution  Control Council, set up in '70 by Maurice
Stans  to "counter the  impact of environmentalists seeking tight controls on industrial
pollution,"  has published some p.r. material and useful data, "but it has served more
importantly  as a  lobbying forum for industries  chafing under the regulatory bit."
TRAIN  BLASTS  "UNCONSCIONABLE"  EMISSION ADS

       Train asks  Federal Trade Commission to investigate "new wave" of fuel ads advising
removal of emission control equipment to save gas, reports Wash. Star (1/21/74).  Train
says ads may  be  "false and misleading. . .at best, only a 5 percent improvement in fuel
economy (overall). ..could be achieved by removing the equipment."

       IN RELATED  DEVELOPMENTS. EPA  "quietly" testing late-model cars to determine gas
savings if  emission controls  removed, states Bergen County, N.J. Record (1/15/74).
Officials insist  tests don't signal change in EPA anti -pollution controls, nor were
they conducted under Congressional, other federal pressure—in spite of numerous  inqui-
ries to EPA from  White House,  Congress on what might represent "good compromise"  be-
tween  clean air,  energy shortage.

       IN OTHER EMISSION DEVELOPMENTS.  In face of increased motorcycle sales (owing  to
fuel shortage, auto pollution  limitations), EPA announces it will propose emission stan-
dards  for two-wheelers, reports Wash. Post (1/18/74).  Train says, "On. ..average, an un-
controlled motorcycle emits 20 times more hydrocarbons per vehicle mile traveled than  an
automobile controlled to  '76 standards.". . .Letter from Philip Robinson, spokesman for
Lead Industries Assn., to N.Y. Times  (1/21/74) says, "The EPA long ago determined lead
must be removed from gasoline"!  TTFfer making this decision the agency then began a searc
for a  scientific  basis on which to justify this decision. ..The bulk of scientific evi-
dence  still concludes that the public faces no risk from lead in the air.  Thus,  EPA is
pushing for a measure that will cost the nation dearly in terms of dollars and energy
supplies.". .. .Train says he'll seek legislation forcing Detroit to build cars using  less
gasoline, says Chicago Tribune (1/17/74). He said plan, still being developed in EPA,
might  involve taxes to discourage production of heavy, high- horsepower cars; perhaps
requirement that  average car get 13.5 m.p.g.

                               *****************************

TUNNEY KNOCKS EPA ON SOLID WASTE

       Sen. Tunney (D-Calif.),  who believes energy from burning garbage "could light  all
of America's  homes and commercial businesses," criticizes EPA for its view that federal
government should not "at this time" directly finance waste-burning plants but only  lend
"technical assistance." (San  Francisco Chronicle.  1/18/74)

                               ****v -V*********************


PASSAGE OF  LAND  USE BILL SEh/I THIS YEAR
- Rep. Udall  (D-AHz.) tells National Assn^of Home Builders that land use bill ap-

-------
                                                     ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS SUMMARY
proved with bipartisan support by House Interior  Committee  1/22/74 and will pass Congres
this year.  Adds that sanctions not likely to  bee  imposed on states not setting up their
own planning procedures.   (Wash.  Post, 1/24/74)
MICHIGAN NOISE LAW RULED VOID
     Michigan Court of Appeals rules Muskegon  noise ordinance unconstitutional on ground
of vagueness, notes Detroit News  (1/20/74).  Court  says regs gave police unlimited dis-
cretion in charging violators.Ruling stemmed from  '71  incident in which United Pente-
costal Church was cited for making too much  noise  with amplified music, prayers.

     IN OTHER NOISE DEVELOPMENTS.   N.Y.  state  will promulgate outdoor noise reas in abou
three months, with strictest controls in non-commercial  lands such as wilderness  areas
(Long Island Press. 1/9/74).
                                       ******************************

OIL DRILLERS WANT ALL OF NATIONAL  FOREST
     U.S. Forest Service admits  oil  companies trying to lease all 251,000 acres of South
ern Illinois' Shawnee National Forest  for oil, natural gas drilling, relates Chicago
Sun-Times (1/16/74).  Encompassed by  lease applications are several botanical zones con-
taining rare plants;  two proposed  tracts  under Congressional consideration  as untouched
wilderness areas.

-------