September 22, 1970
Page 33106
NATIONAL AIR QUALITY STANDARDS ACT OF 1970:
The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill (S. 4358) to amend the Clean Air Act, and for other purposes.
Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, yesterday the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) quoted a paragraph from a letter written by Mr. E. N. Cole. I believe. the Senator used the paragraph out of context to support an argument diametrically opposite to the burden of the entire letter.
A copy of the letter was sent to me and to other Senators. I ask unanimous consent that the complete text of the letter be printed in the RE CORD.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
GENERAL MOTORS CORP.,
Detroit,
September,17, 1970.
Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: I was distressed to learn that the Senate Public Works Committee has voted approval of an air pollution bill which would require that 1975-model cars have a 90 per cent reduction in emissions from 1970 levels.
As you may recall, in our meeting August 25 I stated that General Motors does not at this time know how 'to get production' vehicles down to the emission levels that your bill would require for 1975 models. Accomplishment of these goals, as far as we now know, simply is not technologically possible within the time frame required.
Many persons appear to have the impression that your bill seeks to clean up 90 per cent of auto emissions. Instead, the bill actually would require more extreme reductions. Specifically, your bill requires reductions 90 per cent below the low levels already achieved as of 1970. As a result, the following reductions would be required, compared to 1960 pre-control levels: hydrocarbons, 98 %, carbon monoxide, 97.5%. As to nitrogen oxides and particulates we would be required to reduce them 90% each within five years' after publication of health criteria for them. Moreover, we would have to achieve even greater reductions than these for the various emissions, as the bill requires us to warrant that every car we build remains within the standards for 50,000 miles. Our ability to achieve the required particulates reduction would depend absolutely on the availability of unleaded fuel.
My purpose in writing to you is to emphasize as strongly as possible that General. Motors presently does not have the technological capability to make 1975 model production vehicles that would achieve emission levels the legislation requires. We are aware that there has been a reluctance among some in Washington to accept this statement.
General Motors has committed itself publicly to eliminating the automobile's part of the pollution problem at the earliest possible date. We are making good progress toward that goal. Some of the experimental engines and control systems in our Research Laboratories have achieved very low emissions under laboratory conditions. This experimental hardware has encouraged us to believe that we will be able to meet the federal government's proposed 1975 standards, which would result in reductions of 95% and 86% in hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide, respectively, compared to control vehicles.
Remarkable low emissions can be achieved with experimental laboratory cars without any regard to mass production manufacturing tolerances, durability, maintenance, cost, and conditions of customer use. It is quite another thing to engineer control systems that can be mass-produced and operated under all conditions, and still meet stringent standards over the lifetime of the vehicle, as would be required by the warranty provisions.
The legislation, in effect, is asking the automobile industry to mass-produce systems developed through space age technology. There is a distinct difference between hand building one moon rocket at a time and the requirement that your legislation, would impose – manufacturing millions of units that would have the same close tolerances that space hardware demands.
I urge you to consider amending the legislation to give the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare authority to determine administratively (1) the air quality needs to meet health requirements and (2) whether the technology exists to permit the mass production of long-lived automotive control systems which would perform at this level.
In view of the great interest of members of Congress and the public in this important matter, I am taking the liberty of sending copies of this letter to others who are vitally concerned, as you are, with this subject.
Sincerely,
E. N. COLE