CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
December 16, 1969
Page 39318
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the Senator from West Virginia yield?
Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. I am happy to yield to the distinguished Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE).
Mr. President, I ask for order in the Senate and ask that staff members be told to take their seats or leave the Chamber.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order and all staff members will take their seats.
Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. President, I ask the Chair to enforce this order during the remainder of the afternoon.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair instructs the Sergeant at Arms to carry out this order.
The Senator from Maine may proceed.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I am privileged to cosponsor this amendment and would like to emphasize its long-range impact in the field of pollution control.
The Air Quality Act of 1967 dealt with the creation of air quality control regions, establishing air quality criteria, and developing air quality standards. These have to do with the mechanics of finally enforcing pollution control and achieving effective pollution control. In the long term, their effectiveness depends upon greatly expanded research.
In the amendment sponsored by the distinguished chairman of the Public Works Committee, Senator RANDOLPH, we undertook to set the research goals which have since been endorsed by the National Air Quality Control Administration. In its publication this year called "The Cost of Clean Air," that agency, in its first report to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, estimated a 5-year plan for expenditures on research ought to amount to $255 million.
Mr. President, in the Air Quality Act of 1967, we undertook to establish such goals for research. We have had disappointing results since that time.
For example, in 1968, following enactment of the Air Quality Act of 1967, authorization was for $35 million. Under section 104, the budget request was $16 million.
Mr. President, in 1969 the authorization reached the level of $90 million. The budget request was for $31.3 million. The appropriation was for $18.7 million. The 1970 authorization was cut back from the level of $90 million to $45 million. The appropriations have not kept pace with the authorizations, and so the budget request this year, as mentioned by the Senator from West Virginia, is $21.9 million, instead of approaching the $90 million level we had envisioned.
This has produced the following record in the two critical areas of pollution control; namely, sulfur oxides control and motor vehicle emissions.
With respect to the sulfur oxides, the expenditure for control research started at $9.3 million in 1968 and has reached a level of $13.3 million in the present budget request.
In the case of motor vehicle emissions, $1.9 million in 1968 to the level of $3.4 million in this year's budget request.
Obviously, we have not been successful in stimulating the kind of research effort without which the Air Quality Act of 1967 cannot hope to be effective.
It is as simple as that.
Mr. President, section 104 of the Air Quality Act of 1967 was an important feature of that landmark legislation. This provision, sponsored by the chairman of the Committee on Public Works, Senator JENNINGS RANDOLPH, placed special research emphasis on development of technology to control fuel combustion byproducts. Of particular importance was the concern for development of the technology to control automobile emissions and emissions of oxides of sulfur resulting from combustion of coal and oil.
Development of advanced technology to control sulfur oxides is important now. Across the Nation air quality standards are being set for particulate matter and sulfur oxides. Public hearings on standards have been held in numerous air quality control regions. Plans for implementation of those standards are in the process of development.
Those plans for implementation will depend on the availability of technology, alternative fuels, and other methods of reducing air pollution. Control technology for oxides of sulfur, one of the two pollutants for which standards are being set, other than alternative fuels and low sulfur fuels, is not available. It was primarily for this purpose that this section was enacted in 1967.
There is limited supply of low sulfur coal which will be available in most communities to meet standards now. But a major technological breakthrough will be required to assure compliance with the standards which have been proposed and which meet the Nation's energy demands at the same time.
Another area where more research is needed is in developing alternatives to the internal combustion engine and a more effective means of controlling the existing engine. Too little has been done in this area. The administration has been weak in its response to the need to develop this technology. The automobile industry has been guilty of delay.
The National Air Pollution Control Administration is charged with the responsibility to develop national emission standards for motor vehicles. Those standards are related to technical and economic feasibility. Without additional funds to stimulate research into control techniques for internal combustion engines and to stimulate the development of alternatives to internal combustion, upgrading of those standards will be delayed unnecessarily. The National Air Pollution Control Administration has the competence and the program to implement research in this area if the funds are provided.
According to the first "Cost of Clean Air" report from the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare:
A 5 year (fiscal 1968-72) plan for this program (Sec. 104) called for expenditures by the National Air Pollution Control Administration of some $255 million. While actual expenditures may be much lower, this figure provides an indication of the magnitude of effort considered necessary in this area.
We simply cannot control or hope to control sulfur oxides, which so directly achieve higher mortality rates in cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and other cities across the country, unless we find ways to deal with these kinds of emissions.
Section 104 – the research section – and the funding of section 104 are critical to this effort. The same can be said of motor vehicle emissions. Motor vehicle emissions constitute something like 60 percent of the pollution load in this country.
Again, we are not going to deal with that one unless we develop the technology.
Thus, I applaud the amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a letter which I addressed to the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, the Senator from Washington (Mr. MAGNUSON), on November 25, 1969, covering section 104; and in addition, a statement indicating the areas of research which would be explored if the additional appropriation is approved by the Senate this afternoon.
There being no objection, the letter and statement were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,
Washington, D.C.,
November 25, 1969.
HON. WARREN G. MAGNUSON,
Chairman, Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, Education, and Welfare, and Related Agencies,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR WARREN: As you know, the Air Quality Act of 1967 is a far-reaching and critically important measure authorizing major Federal support for a national program of air quality enhancement. Substantial progress is being made toward the implementation of this program.
However, our capacity to pollute exceeds our capacity to control pollution. For example, in the absence of control, sulfur oxide air pollution levels will continue to increase for the next ten years.
This situation need not continue. The Air Quality Act of 1967 provided adequate authority to develop necessary technology. However, appropriation and budget requests for that program have been inadequate. In 1969 the Administration requested $31.3 million for Section 104. Only $18.7 million were appropriated. For FY 1970 the Administration only requested $18.7 million for Section 104.
The effect of these reduced appropriations will be continued delay in the development of sulfur oxide and motor vehicle emissions control technology. Standards are now being set by the States under the Air Quality Act for particulates and sulfur oxides, but effective long-term implementation of the sulfur oxide standards may be delayed in the absence of technically feasible control systems.
Senate and House conferees have agreed to authorize $45 million to carry out Section 104 in FY 1970 but, as mentioned above, the Administration requested only $18.7 million. The House did not appropriate any funds for this section in the absence of an authorization.
As you know, research and demonstration efforts to control emissions from motor vehicles and to develop alternatives to the internal combustion engine are carried out with Section 104 funds. This effort only received approximately $4 million in 1969 for new propulsion systems as well as control methods applicable to existing systems. This is obviously inadequate.
During recent hearings before your Subcommittee, Mr. C. C. Johnson agreed with Senator Case on the current status of sulfur oxide control technology: "In other words, we are at a very primitive state of the art here." Air pollution control technologies must keep pace with the standards setting procedure by the states and the Federal program must be strengthened in this area.
Yet, at this crucial time, the Administration reduced the fiscal 1970 budget of the Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service by 13 percent, or $30 million. Environmental quality must become a more important priority. If the Administration does not recognize this need, then the Congress, you must make up the slack.
Your efforts to strengthen this program by providing adequate funding for research relating to the development of new and improved methods to control fuel combustion by-products will assist in indicating Congressional concern.
We urge you to consider an increase in the Section 104 appropriation to the authorized level of $45 million, with a directive to emphasize development of sulfur oxide and motor vehicle emission controls technology.
If we can be of further assistance in this matter, please let me know.
Sincerely,
EDMUND S. MUSKIE. HOWARD H. BAKER, Jr. BIRCH BAYH. THOMAS F. EAGLETON. JOSEPH M. MONTOYA. JENNINGS RANDOLPH. WILLIAM B. SPONG, Jr.
PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS OF $45 MILLION FOR SECTION 104
(Prepared by NAPCA for Senate Appropriations Committee)
The proposed amendment of $25,100,000 over the House action which provided $19,900,000 for Section 104 Research and Development and the 1969 carry-over of $1 million would be used to accelerate work in the areas of developing new and improved methods for the prevention and control of air pollution resulting from combustion of fuels. This will involve activities related to fuel desulfurization including emission cleaning processes such as the wet and dry lime stone and fluid bed combustion processes.
In the area of fuel desulfurization, projects to be supported will include mine sampling and equipment evaluation; detail plant and test program design; reject identification and utilization; procurement, construction, and operation of prototype plants; and project evaluation and control.
Work on the wet and dry limestone injection processes will be accelerated, especially that which involves the testing and demonstration of wet limestone scrubbing. Construction of a coal-fired power plant will be initiated to test potentially feasible fluid bed combustion systems.
In addition to the above work on fuels, special emphasis will be placed on work related to motor vehicle emission and development of unconventional power systems. The National Air Pollution Control Administration is presently prepared to provide an additional $5 million for support of this effort should the necessary funds be made available.
In order to properly manage research and development activities of this magnitude, 100 additional positions are necessary. The existing staff has reached the point where any additional work load in terms of new or expanded programs could present serious problems in our ability to undertake such work and still adhere to sound project management and procurement practices.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, this money can be spent. It must be spent if we are to come to grips with the problem which I think is energizing the concern and, indeed, the excitement of American citizens by the millions from coast to coast.
The Senate, this afternoon, has the opportunity to indicate, by appropriations of relatively small amounts, its concern in this field.
Before I close, Mr. President, I should like to compliment the distinguished Senator from Washington (Mr. MAGNUSON) and the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. COTTON) for the support and encouragement they have given us from their vantage point on the subcommittee.
Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. I thank the distinguished Senator from Maine whose consistent efforts in this field have been nationally recognized.
Certainly, my effort this afternoon is not an attempt to pre-empt in any way the work that he has done. I could not do it.
My senior colleague from West Virginia has also been a leader in this field, and has worked very effectively with the help of the Senator from Maine [Mr. MUSKIE].
As a member of the Appropriations Committee I have been interested, and it is merely in this capacity that I have offered the amendment this afternoon which has been co-authored by those to whom I referred earlier.
Mr. MUSKIE. The Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) and I both recognize that the objectives laid down in the authorization legislation cannot possibly succeed unless we have partners equally motivated and equally energized on the Appropriations Committee.
So we welcome with enthusiasm the support we are getting from the Appropriations Committee in the persons of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) and the distinguished Senator from Delaware (Mr. BOGGS), who also serves on the subcommittee and the distinguished Chairman and the ranking Republican member of the Subcommittee, Mr. COTTON.