ENVIRONMENTAL
NEWS
S UMMA R Y ^19-197<
Office of Public Affairs U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 20460
UNLEADED GAS
In wake of regs requiring 111,000 service stations to begin selling unleaded gas
by 7/1/74 (see 6/28/74 News Summary), AP survey shows most dealers ready for move, but
predicts some problems(Slaem, Ore. Statesman, 7/1/74),(Oregonian, 7/1/74), (Albany, Ore.
Democrat-HeraId. 7/1/74).(N.Y. Times. 7/2/74). "Many high-volume gasoline stations did
not make the July 1 deadline..." reports American Automobile Association(AAA). June sur-
vey of 1,110 stations showed 71-77% counted on meeting fed deadline, but followup survey
found 38% couldn't get necessary equipment. Major problems: (1) Obtaining special noz-
zles for unleaded gas, (2) Locating underground storage tanks and contractors to install
them(Wash. Post, 7/8/74) FEO, retreating from proposal allowing oil companies to sell
unleaded at same price as premium, promulgates rule resulting in unleaded selling for
average of 2.6 cents a gallon below leaded premium grade, and one cent more than regular
(Wall St. Journal, 7/5/74)»(Wash. Star-News. 7/4/74).(N.Y. Times, 7/4/74). Oil industry
"insiders" say industry spending "several billion dollars" in connection with unleaded
gas(Wall St. Journal, 6/28/74). American Petroleum Institute prepares to rebut Arthur D.
Little, Inc. study showing unleaded no more expensive to produce than conventional fuels.
API-alleged flaws in study listed by Oil Daily(6/27/74). Norman Shutler, EPA Mobile
Source Enforcement Director, says that drivers using unleaded gas can expect savings of
$45 a year (based on 15,000 mi. of driving), due to lower maintenance costs (Automotive
News, 7/1/74) Wall St. Journal(6/28/74) reports that automakers seriously worrying
about unleaded gas availability, for fear shortages may adversely affect sales
FURTHER COVERAGE OF UNLEADED GAS DEVELOPMENTS in Chicago Sun-Times(7/1/74). Atlanta Jour-
nal(7/3/74), Seattle Times(7/1/74). and (6/29/74), San Juan Star(6/29/74). Oregonian(7/2/
74) Omaha World-Herald(6/25/74), commenting on EPA unleaded regs, says, "An unben-
ding Washington bureaucracy is again imposing burdens on service station and car owners
...While cleaning up the air should get top attention, the unleaded gas requirement has
been imposed on the nation without adequate planning and without regard for the cost and
headaches facing service station owners and car drivers." Quotes Rep. John McCollister
(R-Neb.): "This is another example of bureaucratic decisions made in Washington which
never take into account the problems imposed on small businessmen who must implement then
and the customers who must live with them." Oregonian(7/1/74): "Ultimately the cat-
alytic converters can be expected to either accidentally poison themselves on leaded gas-
oline or simply fail to function. This will trigger another massive recall, which in the
end will again pilfer the consumer's raided pocketbook."
IN OTHER AUTO POLLUTION DEVELOPMENTS. EPA notifies big three automakers, Volks-
wagen that up to 1.4 million of their '72 models may be recalled for violation of pollu-
tion standards. Carmakers given 10 days for response to EPA findings, and then agency
would start issuing recall orders(Wall St. Journal. 6/26/74),(Wash. Star-News. 6/26/74),
(Baltimore Sun. 6/26/74).(Newsday. 6/26/74).(Cincinnatti Enquirer. 6/26/74),(Automotive
News. 7/1/74). Automakers facing recall "don't expect a big response from car owners,
because repairs could hur1' their gas mileage"(Bergen County Record, 6/26/74). Says one
auto "spokesman": "On a safety-related recall, where there is the possibility of injur-
ies, only about 70 percent of the cars are ever brought in. We don't expect that many
with a pollution recall, since a lot of motorists have been disconnecting that kind of
equipment." ....'."WHAT IF CATALYSTS AREN'T THE BEST WAY TO CONTROL EMISSIONS?" asks Wall
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS SUMMARY
St. Journal(6/28/74). Gives reasons why they may not: (1) Chrysler, Ford "hint" that
they can produce clean-burning stratified-charge engines by late '70's, thus eliminating
big expenditures for conversion to unleaded gas, (2) "Continuing speculation" that cata-
lysts may spew out dangerous sulfur emissions JOHN PATTISON, professor of environ
mental engineering, Univ. of Cincinnati, still thinks valid a statement of '73 NAS re-
port, that he co-authored, which says, "Knowledge of the devices, the diagnostic equip-
ment and the number of mechanics," is inadequate to handle servicing of '75 emission con
trol devices(Automotive News, 7/8/74). Pattison cites Northrup Corp. study which shows
that better-than-average mechanics scored no better than 50% accuracy in fixing conven-
tional items on deliberately disabled cars. Automakers, however, feel that servicing
catalysts will be easier than servicing '74 emission controls WHILE CONSERVING
FUEL IS MERITORIOUS, Cincinnati Enquirer(6/24/74) warns motorists against removing emis-
sion controls: "Incorrectly removed pollution-control devices can release carbon monox-
ides, oxides of nitrogen, hydrocarbons and other potentially poisonous chemical agencies
that can aggravate respiratory problems such as emphysema or asthma. Quite apart from
the health menace, of course, are the legal perils...every motorist needs to understand
his responsibilities as a potential polluter and to weigh those perils against the pros-
pect of increasing his gasoline mileage. Not many will choose economy as preferable to
good health." SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE adds $10 million to $7 million voted
by House for EPA research into development of more efficient, cleaner auto engines
TRAIN TELLS NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF MAYORS that EPA will not impose "impossible" or
"clearly unreasonable" deadlines to redvce urban air pollution but "will enforce trans-
portation control requirements"(Automotive News, 7/8/74),(Athens, Ga. Daily News, 6/26/
74) CALIF. SUPREME COURT reverses state Air Resources Board decision to postpone
mandatory installation of smog devices for 1966-'70 cars—Court orders installation to
begin at once(San Francisco Chronicle, 6/28/74).
TUSSOCK MOTH
Forest Service will cancel spraying of 27,000 acres in Coeur D'Alene National
Forest with experimental microbial agents, because tussock moth infestation is disappear
ing naturally (AP in Seattle Times. 7/2/74; Oregonian. 7/3/74; Oregon Statesman, 7/2/74)
Service had planned to spray area with a cultured natural virus and bacterium in effort
to find effective DDT alternative. In addition, 23,000 forest acres in Northwestern U.S
will also escape DDT spraying due to natural demise of tussock population. DDT use will
continue in some other areas DDT OPPONENTS react in "I told you so" fashion: "We
said all along there would be collapse due to natural factors, but the Forest Service
never believed us," says Martin Baker of Washington Environmental Council(Salem, Ore.
Statesman, 7/3/74) Idaho Statesman(7/5/74) comments: "At the height of the debate,
some of the timber spokesmen, and some of their political friends, tried to use the con-
troversy to brand conservationists in general as ill-informed. They made statements
suggesting that the opponents of DDT favored the loss of trees to tussock moths. This
was nonsense...There is considerable evidence of the damage of DDT to fish and wildlife
...Happily, with the natural collapse...not so much DDT will be applied in Northwest
forests. Spraying should be limited to the least possible acreage." EARLIER, Asst
Agr_=ulture Secretary Robert Long said initial sampling of DDT spraying in Northwest
showed 90% mortality rate for moths, adding that Forest Service expects to have DDT-al-
ternatives by time residual insects regenerate. Long criticizes Train for statement
that Forest Service tardy in development of safe DDT substitute: "I don't think Mr.
Train was in possession of all the facts...You can always say that with more money spent
you could have shortened the research period and come up with alternatives sooner, but
you can say that for any program."(AP, Oregon Statesman, 6/28/74),(Oregonian,6/29/74).
ADDITIONAL COVERAGE OF DDT VS. TUSSOCK MOTH DEVELOPMENTS in N.Y. Times (6/29/74),
Eugene, Ore. Register-Guard(7/1/74).
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS SUMMARY
STRIP MINING
House Rules Committee votes to send three strip mine bills to floor: (1) House
Interior Committee bill imposes national environmental standards on mining for first
time, authorizes states to set up their own enforcement programs, requires reclamation of
lands to their original contours, and imposes fee to help pay for restoration of abandon-
ed mine sites; (2) Rep. Hechler(D-W.Va.) bill phases out all strip mining within 13
months; (3) Rep. Hosmer(R-Calif.) bill is least restrictive of the three (he prefers no
legislation, but failed to block reporting of Interior Comm. bill)(N.Y. Times. 7/13/74).
"IN WHAT HAD SOME ASPECTS OF A CAMPAIGN TOUR," reports N.Y. Times (7/14/74). "[Train]
traversed strip mining areas of the West this week spreading the message: 'We shouldn't
panic and trade off short-term energy gains for long-term environmental values.1" Times
quotes Train as saying he favors "strict controls on surface mining, prohibition of min-
ing where subsequent restoration of the land was impossible, no large-scale resumption
of coal leasing on Federal land, greatly expanded Government and private research on re-
vegetation of mined tracts, major efforts at all governmental levels to deal with the .
great current and prospective social impacts of Western energy development and a closer
look at the need for shipping Western coal to the east." QUARLES DISCLOSES HIS "DE-
FECTION" from Administration policy opposing strict strip-mine reclamation law(N.Y.Times,
7/12/74). Speaking in Dubois, Pa., a "community where strip mining...has left massive
scars on the land," Quarles says, "Legislation to control strip mining is the key to ex-
panded use of coal. Without it, coal's potential for alleviating the energy crisis will
remain open to attack" by environmentalists. "If ever a sense of urgency was needed, it
is needed now. The effort to achieve effective strip mine legislation"during this ses-
sion of Congress is in trouble." Quarles says that before House strip mine vote, repre-
sentatives "will have been cornered by lobbyists and bombarded by statistics. And yet,
after all of this, few of them will know what you know or will have seen what you have
seen. They will not have seen the miles of ugly scars which encircle the mountains like
the coils of an angry snake. They will not have seen the gutted hillsides, raked by the
claws of rushing water. They will not have seen the streams choked with sediment. Most
of them will never know the acrid stench of a pond or marsh fouled by acid runoff of mine
water. Few of them will ever hear the roar of a power shovel as it chews into a hillside
The nation needs more coal. Much of it will have to be strip mined. This cannot be a-
voided. What can be avoided, however, is the senseless destruction which has marked
strip mining in the past...No longer will we tolerate those who care only about quick
profits, and nothing for the land. The days of the big raid on our nation's resources
are over. Controlled development of these resources is the only acceptable course."
IN LETTER TO SEN. JACKSON(D-WASH.) and four "key" Congressmen, FEA head Sawhill
"toned down estimates in previous letter which embraced the coal industry argument that
the [House Interior Committee bill] would sharply curtail needed coal production."
Sawhill still considers Committee bill "unacceptable," but says he'll back compromise
measure with "appropriate balance between national energy needs and protecting the envi-
ronment. " (Wash._Po£t, 7/10/74) AFTER "A PROLONGED INTERNAL STRUGGLE," United Mine
Workers comes out in support of Interior Committee bill (N.Y. Times, 7/10/74) "IF- A
HUGE AREA OF THE WEST. ..IS NOT TO BE TURNED INTO ANOTHER APPALACHIA," says N.Y. Times
(7/14/74), "the House...will have to pass the strip-mining bill...The measure is far from
the 'punitive1 restraint described by the shrill lobbies of the coal and power companies.
On the contrary, if represents the minimum protection that the land requires; such im-
provements as the bill needs are in the direction of more stringent controls."
"THE STRIP MINING BILL", says Wall St. Journal(7/8/74). "strikes us as a reasonable at-
tempt 1:0 reconcile envirc nental and energy needs. Indeed, it seems to us that if you
were trying to think up ways to ensure that environmental regulations are unreasonable,
the best one would be for industry to resist reasonable efforts by resorting to confusing
the issue and crying doom." Washington Star-News(7/5/74) says measure "is attuned
realistically to the great environmental challenge in this field, and also to energy-
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS SUMMARY
crisis concerns. It offers strong hope of relief for a nation with more than 2 million
acres blighted by unrestored strip mines...and a need for much more coal mining to fuel
its oil-short economy." ADDITIONAL FEATURE COVERAGE in Louisville Courier-Journal
(7/8/74), Wall St. Journal(7/16/74).
RESERVE MINING
Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin request to stay Eighth Circuit Court of Ap-
peals order permitting Reserve to resume dumping taconite tailings rebuffed without com-
ment by Supreme Court(N.Y. Times. 7/11/74)(Wall St. Journal. 7/10/74)(Wash. Post. 7/11/
74) ALTHOUGH "IT APPEARS that" Reserve "will indeed" be permanently stopped from
dumping, Wash. Post(7/8/74) claims that affected states "agree" that they face "Pyrrhic
•victory." According to one attorney in case, Eighth Circuit Court interpretation of
iwhat constitutes a public health risk (documentation to a scientific certainty that peo-
ple will die in future, or that actual deaths have already occurred), if left uncontra-
dicted, "will be a far greater environmental disaster for the country than all this pol-
luting of Lake Superior over the years." Post says fear of Eighth Circuit Court inter-
pretation handicapping other antipollution efforts throughout the U.S. was what prompted
appeal to Supreme Court. Environmental Health Letter(7/1/74) also discusses Circuit
Court's "interesting philosophy" on proof of health effects, and Wash. Post(7/13/74) com-
ments: "The appellate court's definition of an actionable health hazard...means, essen-
tially, that the public has little protection against unknowns, however ominous, and that
communities may be forced to serve as industrial tasters, swallowing strange or subtle
•poisons for 20 to 40 years to see what happens." JUDGE MILES LORD, who originally
•closed Reserve, rejects cost arguments and says company must find sound way to dispose
!of wastes from "the ecology point of view."(Wash. Post. 7/3/74). Lauding him for this
statement, N.Y. Times(7/7/74) says, "...Lord continues to set an example of social con-
.science...while [Reserve] continues to put profits above the public health and the envi-
ronment of three states."
CCC-Vdl
A3N39V NOU3310Hd 1V1N3HNOMIAN3
QlVd 833J ONV 39VlSOd
09*02 'O'Cl 'N013NIHSVW
------- |