ing seasons from the meteorological standpoint, we have studied five of these areas, and of these five we feel that about three of these areas will not meet the standards as they have been approved. The basic area, of course, is the Denver metropolitan area, the second area is the Pueblo area, and the third area is the Grand Junction area. Senator MUSKIE. So that these are three areas which ought to take action in accordance with the standards which you have developed? Mr. PALOMBA. Our preliminary data would indicate this. Senator MUSKIE. Now, if the legislation which you have recommend is enacted and these areas do nothing about it, what would be the next step? Mr. PALOMBA. I don't know. Senator MUSKIE. That is a political question which I perhaps ought not to ask you to respond to. Let me put it a different way. Do you consider that the indications in these areas which you have pinpointed are such that action ought to be taken to control some of the sources of the air pollution? Mr. HAVER. Very definitely. Mr. PALOMBA. I would concur. Senator MUSKIE. You all agree with that. Your concept now is that your duty is to point to the problem, then place the responsibility at the local government to deal with, and you will worry about it from that point on when they fail? Mr. HAVER. That is true. But Dr. Reese has another comment he would like to make. Dr. REESE. I would just like to say this legislation is not exactly what we did recommend. There are many changes in it already. I think Dr. Cleere will get into some of the background, however. There is a Governor's committee which is studying this whole general metropolitan-wide enforcement in various areas, and because of this fact I think there are some recognized deficiencies in the present law that probably will be ironed out and made a little stronger and more workable in future years. Senator MUSKIE. Did your committee recommend a specific piece of legislation? Dr. REESE. No, we didn't. We recommended some specific provisions or approaches in such things as definite State emission standards, probably, in areas that do not meet the standards. Senator MUSKIE. Do you have a copy of your recommendations? Dr. REESE. No, I don't believe these have been made available. We could. Senator MUSKIE. May we have a copy for the record? Mr. REESE. Yes, sir. Senator MUSKIE. Could we have a copy, also, of the legislation which has been introduced for the record? Mr. HAVER. Certainly. Senator MUSKIE. Is there any other material of this kind that might be useful? You see, we want the record of these hearings to be useful in other areas of the country, and since you are at an earlier stage in the evolution of your pollution problem than Los Angeles, for instance, your experience might be more valuable than Los Angeles. Los Angeles is in the position of dealing with the problem after it assumed major proportions. You are in the position of trying to prevent the development of the problem. This would be more typical of most of the country than the situation in Los Angeles. Any material you can provide for the record that would be useful to other areas struggling with a newly emerging problem, we would appreciate it. Mr. HAVER. We can produce that. Senator MUSKIE. On this question of motor vehicle devices, I would like to explore that a little. We have just come from Los Angeles. I think it is accurate to say that what they have done in this field. provided an important stimulus to the development of the crankcase blowby device which has been adopted by the New York State Legisthey are now struggling with developing it for old cars. This is going to be more difficult. Under their legislation they have authority, and I think they are exercising that authority, to require the installation of the crankcase blowby device on old cars, I think by the end of 1965. You don't have any legislation of that kind, I take it, I assume that, as you have already testified. Do you think it would be useful legislation from the point of view of Colorado? You have endorsed the crankcase blowby device but apparently as of now you feel that installation on new cars is sufficient to meet your problem. Do you think that your State ought to consider legislation requiring such installation on older cars? Mr. HAVER. Senator, I think that more study is certainly required in Colorado before we can make a recommendation one way or another. The California blowby device is what they call a closed circuit and they have had a lot of trouble with it icing up. The New York blowby device which now is standard equipment on all new cars, and lature is an open circuit which we have coming into Colorado and all States now with the exception of California, the open circuit type. It would take a great deal of money, manpower, and research to set up a committee to enforce blowby device controls on older vehicles. I don't think we are ready to make a recommendation like that at this time. Senator Moss. I wonder if I might have your opinion, also, on the exhaust control devices, which experimentation is now going on, and California seems to be on the verge now of approving two or more of these exhaust control devices, at which point they would become mandatory on cars in that State. Mr. HAVER. The cost still might be considered prohibitive, especially on the old automobiles. There are some automobiles on the road that can be purchased in the used car lot for $100 and these devices cost $125, $150, and the ones that they have been experimenting with would not last 10,000 miles and had to be replaced. The cost of replacing an exhaust control device at $125 to $150 a year is quite excessive, in my opinion. Mr. Palomba has done a great deal more studying on that than I have. Maybe he has some comments to add. Mr. Palomba? Mr. PALOMBA. I think in view of the work that is being done this is a very important thing for Colorado. We feel that in Denver air pollution from automobiles is a significant contributor, that is to say, automobiles do contribute significantly to our problem. We have felt that since it is in its beginning stages that we should wait and see how the problem is handled in California. I think it would be a little presumptuous on our part to go ahead and require these devices when California has invested many millions of dollars in investigating the usefulness and the way it will cure the problem. I think we are proper in sitting back in this particular field and waiting to see how it develops there. I think one thing that is important to point out here is that in Los Angeles they have controlled their stationary sources to the point where automobiles now present a sizeable portion of their problem, almost their entire problem. Unfortunately, here in Colorado and in Denver, the Denver metropolitan area, we have not even controlled our home incinerators. So that there are many things we need to control before we need to worry about the automobiles since the technology on the automobile isn't really that far advanced. Senator Moss. The automobile priority hasn't risen to the point that it has in California as far as you are concerned? Mr. PALOMBA. I think this is true because technologically some of the things that are easier to control from the technological standpoint haven't been controlled, and the automobile, which is a little more difficult and perhaps isn't completely solved, the problem from the automobile is further down the line in our thinking on this. Senator MUSKIE. Thank you. We are glad to have you give us this information for the record and this will be very helpful in the study of this committee. We appreciate your appearance. I will place your exhibits on particulates and gases and the Colorado proposed legislation,1 contained in your statement, in the record at this point. (The exhibits are as follows:) Test PARTICULATES Standard A. Suspended particulates 90 micrograms per cubic meter (average for any 3-month period) Comment: Samples shall be 24-hour collections in standard high-volume air samplers utilizing a Fiberglas filter. Days on which background dust levels are obviously high (blowing dust) shall be disregaded in figuring average. Test B. Coefficient of haze Standard 0.5 Coh unit (average for any 3-month period) Comment: Samples shall be collected on a 1-inch spot through Wattsman No. 4 filter paper at a rate of approximately 0.25 cubic foot per minute for a period of 4 hours or less for each spot. Particulate sampling shall be carried out as follows: Sampling station does not reflect a point source. Sampling station operated on regular every-third-day basis. Comment: This index level is used as an indication of pollution potential and is not related to the level at which damage from direct effects of oxides of nitrogen would be expected. 1 The proposed legislation subsequently became law. The provisions as passed appear in the appendix. Test E. Sulfur dioxide Standard 0.5 part per million for 1 hour-or— 0.1 part per million for 24 hours (1 percent of time during any 3-month period) Sites and conditions of gas sampling shall be chosen as to realistically represent the exposures of persons and property which might be affected. POTENTIAL AIR POLLUTION BASIN Extent of potential air pollution basin shall be determined on the basis of topographic and meteorologic factors. Air pollution Advisory Committee, recommended standards, State of Colorado. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM AIR POLLUTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT ON BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR AN AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAW OUTLINE OF PROPOSED AIR POLLUTION BILL Section 1. Ambient air standards.-It is the policy of the State of Colorado to consider that air quality throughout this State is acceptable where it meets all of the following standards: Particulate sampling under the following conditions: Sampling station does not reflect a point source. Sampling station operated on regular every third day basis. Extent of air pollution basin shall be determined by SHD on the basis of topographic and meteorologic factors. Sites and conditions of gas sampling shall be so chosen as to realistically represent the exposures of persons and property which might be affected. Section 2. Prohibited emission.-Areas that do not meet all standards in section 1 shall be subject to the following prohibited emission: A. A person shall not discharge into the atmosphere from any single source of emission any air contaminant for a period or periods aggregating more than 3 minutes in any 1 hour which is― 1. As dark or darker in shade than Ringelmann No. 2; or 2. Of such opacity as to obscure an observer's view to a degree equal to or greater than does smoke as dark as Ringelmann No. 2. Section 3. Enforcement.-The Colorado State Department of Public Health and the county and district health departments shall enforce the prohibition in section 2. Section 4. Prevention of new air pollution.-Within areas not meeting all the standards in section 1, any person planning to construct a new installation which will or might reasoably be expected to cause a violation of section 2, or which will or might reasonably be expected to contribute to air pollution or make modifications to an existing installation which will or might reasonably be expected to cause a violation of section 2, or to increase the amount or change the effects or the characteristics of the air contaminants discharged, or planning to install an air cleaning device shall submit a report and/or plans and specifications to the Colorado State Department of Public Health for review. Section 5. Prevention of air pollution nuisances.-In all areas of the State, whether meeting all the standards in section 1 or not, no person shall discharge from any source such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause or tend to cause injury or damage to business or property. Section 6. Local air pollution control programs.-City councils and county commissioners are authorized to establish local air pollution control programs or to join with other cities and/or counties to establish joint air pollution control programs. In any case, after 3 years from passage of this act, city councils and county commissioners shall enforce a prohibition against open burning of any type in any parts of their jurisdictions not meeting the standards in section 1. Section 7. Exemptions. (a) Exempted from the prohibitions of this law are smoke from necessary fires set by or permitted by any public officer in the performance of his official duty to abate weeds, to prevent a fire hazard, or to instruct public employees in the methods of firefighting. (b) The prohibitions of this law do not apply to 1. Agricultural operations in the growing of crops or raising of fowls or animals; and 2. The use of equipment in agricultural operations in the growing of crops, or raising of fowls or animals. STATE OF COLORADO, HOUSE BILL NO. 1050 A BILL for An Act Concerning air pollution [Italic indicates new material to be added to existing statute. deletions from existing statute] Stricken matter indicates Be It Enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado: SECTION 1. LEGISLATIVE DECLARATION. It is declared to be the policy of the state of Colorado to maintain a reasonable degree of purity of air resources of the State, which shall be consistent with the public health, welfare, and public enjoyment thereof, the industrial development, propagation, and protection of human, plant, and animal life, and the protection of physical property and other resources, and to that end to require the use of all available practical and reasonable methods to prevent and control air pollution in the state of Colorado. SEC. 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE. It is the purpose of this act to safeguard the air resources of the state from pollution by: (1) Controlling or abating air pollution which shall exist on the effective date of this act; and (2) Preventing new air pollution, under a cooperative program between the state and local governmental units concerning new sources of air pollution. SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. (1) "Air pollution" shall mean the presence in the outdoor atmosphere of one or more of the following: Dust, fume, gas, mist, smoke, vapor, pollen, or any combination thereof, in quantities, with characteristics, and of a duration which are injurious to human, plant, or animal life or to property, or which unreasonably interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life and property throughout areas affected thereby. (2) "Air contaminants" shall mean a particulate or gas, including but not limited to: Smoke, charred paper, dust, soot, grime, carbon, or any particulate matter, or irritating or noxious acids, fumes, or gases, or any combination thereof, but shall not include uncombined water vapor. (3) "Gas" shall mean a formless fluid which occupies space and which can be changed to a liquid or solid state only by increasing pressure with decreased or controlled temperature, or by decreased temperature with increased or controlled pressure. |