and counties included in areas not meeting the ambient air standards. Our experience has pointed up the following major problems in developing new State air pollution programs:

1. ENFORCEMENT WHERE MORE THAN ONE POLITICAL JURISDICTION IS INCLUDED IN THE SAME POLLUTION BASIN

I realize that this is a common problem in communities throughout the Nation. In Colorado, the local affairs study commission has not yet made its recommendations and probably will not for another year. In the meantime, our department is cooperating with the University of Colorado and others in a request for Public Health research funds to finance a study of jurisdictional problems involved in metropolitan environmental health programs including air pollution. We hope this study will produce information which will help the local affairs commission as well as contribute to solution of the many similar problems throughout the country.

2. MONEY

Air pollution programs are expensive. They require highly trained technical personnel, complicated field and laboratory equipment and detailed study and supervision of a vast variety and number of sources. So far in Colorado we have just scratched the surface of the problem, studying its general outlines, and yet we have already felt the influence of budget limitations. As we expand into the much more costly area of applying controls, financial support, both on a State and local governmental basis, will be critical. In this regard, I would like to commend the Muskie subcommittee for recommending and the Congress for passing the Clean Air Act which, among other things, provides for financial assistance for State and local control programs. Such support will unquestionably greatly stimulate and improve control measures in this State.

3. PERSONNEL, EQUIPMENT AND INFORMATION

In air pollution control, as in any other rapidly expanding technical field, there is a great and increasing shortage of trained personnel. Monitoring and sampling equipment is complicated, expensive and even unreliable or nonexistent for certain needs. Gaps in important basic areas of knowledge frequently interfere with program advance. I am pleased to note that the Public Health Service is doing much to overcome these problems. It provides financial support for university educational programs in air pollution and stipends for students, it sponsors development and evaluation of new equipment and it carries out or underwrites research projects in needed fields. In the area of general technical assistance, I have already referred to ways the Public Health Service has helped us in the past. In addition, it has contributed useful advice and some direct service to our studies the last year. Since the Clean Air Act provides for continuation of such assistance, we are planning now to use it in the future. In fact, as we move on to application of controls, it is quite likely that we will request even more help than we have in the past.

4. IMPROVED CONTROL DEVICES

This is a special application of the previous point, but is of fundamental importance if we are to control the problem. Without practical and economic controls for such sources as automobile exhausts and certain industrial processes, we can never adequately clear the air.

5. PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR CONTROL MEASURES

Practically every person, agency, business, and group is involved to some extent in producing, controlling and experiencing pollution. Control measures must be supported in principle and practice, as well as financially, by the community as a whole. To gain this community support, there must be extensive and continuing informational and educational programs on the need for controls and on the steps that must be taken to achieve abatement.

In conclusion, I want to say that Colorado, probably more than other States, does view the threat to its air quality as a serious problem and that the people and governments of Colorado are determined that it will be solved. I am confident that, working together, State and local authorities, with the traditional kinds of Federal help, will succeed and that its clean, mountain air will remain one of Colorado's greatest assets. Thank you.

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you, Dr. Cleere. I apologize for being out of the room at the beginning of your testimony, and I haven't had a chance to review the papers, so some of my questions that are asked may be repetitious, but I think in order to drum this problem home a little repetition might be useful.

I would like to take this opportunity to compliment Colorado and Denver for their concern with this problem. You have a lovely State here; I can only think of one more lovely. And this beautiful climate and beautiful scenery are worth preserving in their own right.

Dr. CLEERE. May I say, if we had some of the Maine lobsters here to go with our climate everything would be perfect.

Senator MUSKIE. Well, we could use some of the beauty you have here to add to our own, too. But I suppose diversity is what makes this country as great as it is.

I think it is wonderful that you have embarked upon the preventive aspect of this problem and I think with the steps you are taking, if you continue traveling down the road, the results of your research and inquiry indicate that you ought to lick this problem before it becomes a critical one.

I would like to ask you a few questions about the approach of the Clean Air Act. I think I can guess what your answers would be, but again we are trying to make a record which will be useful in other States.

As you know, the approach of the Clean Air Act is to help States and communities to help themselves. It is not the approach of the Clean Air Act to turn this problem over to Uncle Sam. Do you agree with that approach?

Dr. CLEERE. Yes, sir; I do.

Senator MUSKIE. Now, there is some risk, I suppose, in terms of dealing with the problem, in taking the approach because so many

communities that ought to be doing something are doing nothing and so many States which ought to be doing something are doing nothing. As a matter of fact, the State effort in this field across the country is almost negligible and the greatest effort has been made at the community level, by and large. So that there is some risk to placing reliance upon levels of government that by and large have done so little. But, as you know, the Clean Air Act provides a program of grants-in-aid to help States and communities to establish programs of their own. How many communities in Colorado have a program now?

Dr. CLEERE. You mean with respect to air pollution control?
Senator MUSKIE. Yes.

Dr. CLEERE. Senator, unfortunately, I wouldn't say there is a real well organized control program maintained by any city or county in the State at the present time. I mean by that we do not have a city or county that we can point to with pride with respect to a wellbalanced program in the area of air pollution control.

I do not mean to say, Senator, that there hasn't been some progress on the part of various municipalities. I do think one of the problems is this matter of jurisdictional responsibility, and I would say that that is true at both the State and local levels.

The legislature in Colorado is giving study to the agency that should be designated as having the responsibility for air pollution control at the State level, and then there is a commission of 100 citizens appointed by Governor Love to study the entire problem of urban affairs and metropolitan affairs as related to governmental structure.

I did mention one study that we hope will be approved. The project application has been developed by the Bureau of Governmental Research and Service at the University of Colorado, collaborating with the State health department and the Boulder City Health Department, aimed at trying to develop the best type of governmental structure that would be desirable in Colorado to meet the environmental health problems, including air pollution.

Senator MUSKIE. So you do have this jurisdictional question to settle, and which was touched upon, I think briefly, in our discussion with Mr. Haver, and pending legislation in the air pollution field. It is the intent of that legislation to settle this jurisdictional question, to some extent, at least; is it not?

Dr. CLEERE. It is a beginning. I don't anticipate it will be settled with any degree of finality in the current session of the Colorado Legislature. I do anticipate that some definite progress will be made, but I think there are some loose ends, so to speak, that will not be really met during the current session. I think the legislators feel that they need additional information from the viewpoint of a final determination with respect to the enforcement authority, which agencies or agency should be vested with the authority to enforce at both the State and local level.

In the present bill, that is under consideration, we think some definite progress has been made with respect to developing minimum acceptable standards by law so that the industries and the communities throughout the entire State will be familiar with what the minimum standards are before a real problem is developed in their own areas.

Senator MUSKIE. As a matter of fact, the enactment of standards. legislation, in itself, might have a favorable impact upon the problem; that is, if everyone knows what standards of performance are being expected at some time in the future, then it may be that there would be an effort on the part of industry on its own initiative, on the part of citizens on their own initiative, to improve their performance. How would you comment on that?

Dr. CLEERE. I think what you have said certainly applies to Colorado. I am heartily in accord with your remarks because I do know we are going to gain a great deal in the nature of an educational and informational program from the studies that have been completed and the legislation that is developed during the past 2 or 3 years in Colorado, and we feel that it will stimulate many communities to go forward with a well-balanced program.

Now, I am not saying this critically of the present administration in Denver at all because the problem related to air pollution, in my opinion, is somewhat comparable to the problem of water pollution in this Denver metropolitan area that became increasingly worse for 20 years. This problem was finally met head on 2 years ago and a favorable vote on a bond issue has resulted in the beginning of the construction of a Metropolitan Denver sewage plant that will solve this problem of sewage, both raw and primary-treated sewage being discharged into the South Platte and Clear Creek and other tributaries of the South Platte River in this general area, metropolitan area of Denver. There is no doubt for the past 10 years that the air pollution problem has grown worse day by day and year by year, in spite of the control measures that are in effect. Now, that is true-as you know better than I, Senator-in all metropolitan areas that have experienced a population explosion and a proliferating growth, and it is not only true here but I would say in most cities of the Nation both industrial expansion and population growth have outstripped, for the most part, the resources and facilities to meet these problems of environmental health. So it is going to cost a considerable sum of money to take this smog out of the air over Denver and other cities that are having pollution problems. It is going to cost city government, State government, Federal Government, industries, and taxpayers in general, if we are really to solve the problem of air pollution.

Senator MUSKIE. On the matter of cost, as a matter of fact, it is more costly to live with the problem than to deal with it. I think the figure we have, in the committee hearings, is that property damage and damage to crops alone is on the order of $11 billion a year nationally, and this, of course, assigns no cost at all to the damage to health. So that I think we have here a problem that would be cheaper to deal with than to ignore.

Dr. CLEERE. I certainly agree and, from the viewpoint of industry, I think if we chart a course which is understood by industry, that they will extend full cooperation. That has been our experience in water pollution control measures and I feel confident the same procedure will be followed by industry in helping to correct this problem of air pollution and helping to solve it, if they understand what the governmental intent is and are familiar with the standards and feel that the standards are sound.

Senator MUSKIE. I am sure of that. Let me ask you this: There was some disagreement in our hearings in Washington on the legislation as to whether local government and State governments had sufficient authority to deal with this problem already whenever it becomes a health problem. The argument was made that existing law at the local level now gives local government sufficient authority to deal with air pollution when it becomes a health problem. What is your evaluation of that comment insofar as Colorado is concerned? Suppose you were suddenly to have a concentration of air pollutants which would seriously affect health and even cause death. Would the city of Denver then have authority to move immediately, to take remedial measures? Dr. CLEERE. My opinion would be yes. I doubt whether adequate plans have been made to meet any such emergencies to which you have made reference, and, of course, our objectives, as you know, are to prevent any such emergencies from occurring. I think our first intention should be devoted to reducing air pollution to where there is no health problem and no health hazard. I feel, Senator, that probably there is more authority from the viewpoint of governmental units in Colorado than possibly we wish to admit. There are certain authorities vested in city councils that are not vested in boards of county commissioners.

I think we are fortunate in Colorado, if I can say just one other thing relating to this question, inasmuch as we do have an excellent county and district health department law. Now, this law is referred to as one of the Sabin health laws of 1947 and it authorizes the establishment of city, county, and district health departments, and those local boards of health and local departments of health have authority by law to enforce the State laws relating to health and also standards and regulations of the State board of health relating to health. So there is certain authority transferred by the State to local health departments, and then there is certain authority vested in city councils that we think would make it possible to do more in the field of air pollution than has been done to date.

Now, again, all of this costs money and it has been my experience that the Federal Government, meaning in particular the Public Health Service, through congressional acts, such as this Muskie Clean Air Act, has assisted materially in expediting control services in the field of environmental health in the States and local communities. It stimulates studies, it stimulates specific control measures, if I can cite just one example. You tell me if I am taking too much time.

Senator MUSKIE. You go right on. We want this record as complete as we can get it.

Dr. CLEERE. We know we have received considerable assistance from the Public Health Service in accordance with the Water Pollution Act. We know the grant-in-aid to assist in construction of sewage plants has been a boon to Colorado since this act passed and money was made available to communities to help pay for the cost and installation of treatment plants that set off a chain reaction. We have made substantial progress in Colorado, in particular, in the last 5 to 6 years, and each year the progress is more manifest in solving the problem of water pollution, with particular reference to human sewage being discharged into our streams.