Mayor CURRIGAN. It is quite possible, Senator, that what will eventually have to come is an amendment to the State constitution, and this is not an easy or painless road, but there is a rather strong likelihood that this is the answer to the overall question. And I think most of us realize this, but we are beginning to crawl in that direction now. I think probably a constitutional amendment is what is really needed. I don't believe really what many of us are shooting for can be achieved even on a State legislative basis, let alone a local basis.

Senator MUSKIE. I am Chairman of the Inter-Governmental Relations Committee and that is a problem that concerns us increasingly. In some parts of the country the approach has been to try to work out a type of metropolitan area wide government called metro. This has been controversial in some areas; it has been developed in others. You seem to be moving toward the cooperative approach, which I think also has considerable merit.

Mayor CURRIGAN. Well, I suppose a lot depends upon the personal views of the public officials that hold forth at a particular time. At least at the moment it would appear that this approach has more practical aspects for us, and the metro government, although I certainly would be the last one in the world to rule out my leanings toward a metro government, but we may have to arrive at a midway station before we arrive at heaven, so to speak.

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you, Mayor Currigan.

Senator Moss, do you have some questions?

Senator Moss. I don't know that I have any specific question. I do have a general one. I take it, Mayor, that you feel you must get to this cooperative or model agreement before Denver should move along on further standards or further legislation on controlling of air pollution?

Mayor CURRIGAN. Well, I wouldn't say it is absolutely mandatory, but it would sure, I think to me, make much better sense if we all moved together because the problem is not just Denver's. For us to go our way and for the metropolitan area-and roughly half of the population is in Denver County itself, the city and county are synonymous, about half of the metro population is inside Denver, the other half out, and for Denver just to go on its merry way to me doesn't make very good sense; and I honestly believe when you have real strong and high hopes of a metro approach through one avenue or another on air pollution, because this is one area that there seems to be common agreement on, I wish I could say the same for other metropolitan problems, but actually I think this air pollution could be the forerunner to the solving of many of our other problems in possibly like manner.

Senator Moss. Would there be rather general acceptance of, say, a prohibition on incinerators, household incinerators, which I understand you still have?

Mayor CURRIGAN. We still have.

Senator Moss. Do you think that sort of thing there is pretty common agreement on now?

Mayor CURRIGAN. Our common agreement to eliminating the same? Senator Moss. Yes.

Mayor CURRIGAN. Len, you are probably closer than I. I would have some hesitancy. I well recall here several years ago when the

city enacted some legislation along this area and it affected the home incinerators. So to say that it was controversial is putting it mildly. Len, what is your reaction or opinion in this respect?

Mr. DOBLER. About all I can say in this respect, at least one of the communities is now studying elimination of all home burning. The other two counties, to my knowledge, have not gone quite this far. Senator Moss. Thank you very much, gentlemen. It is very interesting and helpful to have your views and experiences of Denver, which is the largest metropolitan center in the State and one, I guess, where the problem is most acute at this time.

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you very much, Mayor Currigan.

Mayor CURRIGAN. Thank you, gentlemen, very much for the privilege and the opportunity to appear before you.

Senator MUSKIE. This will conclude our list of witnesses for this morning. We will resume at 2 o'clock this afternoon. We would have liked to have advanced some of the afternoon witnesses to this morning, but this did not prove convenient for them. So we will now recess and meet again at 2. I look forward to as constructive and useful an afternoon as the morning.

(At 11:45 a.m. the meeting was recessed until 2 p.m. of the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Senator MUSKIE. The hearing will be in order. We want to establish a reputation for the Senate by starting on time. This doesn't happen very often in Washington. We are 5 minutes late, I think, in getting started.

Our first witness this afternoon is Mrs. Chester W. Rose, of the General Federation of Women's Clubs.

Mrs. Rose, you have a prepared statement?

Mrs. ROSE. Yes, I do, Senator.

Senator MUSKIE. I am going to have to leave about 2:30 but Senator Moss will continue. Why don't you proceed with your testimony?

STATEMENT OF MRS. CHESTER W. ROSE, GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS

Mrs. ROSE. Senator Muskie and Senator Moss, I wish to express on behalf of the Colorado members of the Federation of Women's Clubs and of the women of Denver our pleasure and satisfaction in your selection of Denver as a city for your hearing, and Senator Muskie, I bring you personal greetings from Mrs. Dexter Otis, of Washington, president of the General Federation of Women's Clubs. One hundred years ago the water resources of the United States were becoming so poisoned by indiscriminate pollution that action had to be taken if the country were to survive. Today one needs only turn on the water tap to obtain acceptable drinking water. But this result was obtained only by complete, constant cooperation between the various levels of government and the people who were, and are, creating this pollution. In the field of air pollution we are today at the crossroads where the problem of water pollution was 100 years ago. But the need for action in regard to air pollution is immediate. Worldwide public opinion, which reached peaks of near-hysteria after each period of atomic testing by the two great military powers,

finally forced the major powers and most of the minor powers to agree to cease aboveground and atmospheric testing. While the chemical composition of radioactive fallout produced by these atomic tests is not comparable to common air pollution, the resulting treaty indicates the extreme interest of all the people of the world in the problem of pollution of the air which belongs to all the people. Air pollution does not linger in the area in which it is produced to accuse those responsible for it. It moves, uncontrolled, disagreeably pervading the air around us and blanketing the innocent who must suffer from it.

A little less than 3 miles east of here, on the corner of 13th Avenue and St. Paul Street, is the brick bungalow, common to Denver, in which I have lived for 20 years. When I first acquired this property, it was located in a clean, pleasant residential neighborhood in which it was a delight to live. A thorough weekly cleaning kept the house respectably presentable, and curtains and drapes needed cleaning only twice a year. Several years ago all this was changed when 13th Avenue was made a one-way through street and the heavy traffic moving from east to west shifted to this throughway. Since then, although the area still remains a residential neighborhood, everything in my house is daily covered by a black, oily substance which is difficult to remove, the curtains and drapes should be cleaned at least once a week, windows absoltuely cannot be kept clean, and the accompanying odor which is usually disagreeable at times becomes almost unbearable. Besides all these offensive developments, we must battle constantly to retain any semblance of a yard. Despite frequent and costly additions to the soil, the grass on the south terrace along 13th Avenue and on the parkway is rapidly dying. As a matter of fact, from an economic standpoint, I am forced to spend more and more money just for lawn care, for cleaning and laundry bills, and for home lighting which is necessary because of reduced visibility from natural sources of light which do not always filter through the thick pollution.

In addition, both my husband and I have developed an eye allergy which the doctors inform us has been caused by air pollution, and my husband has acquired an unhealthy chest condition, also apparently attributable to air pollution. If this is progress, we don't want any.

Part of the air pollution in our neighborhood must come from industry which is located west and south of us, but the very apparent causes are the automobiles and the backyard incinerators. Something can and must be done about all these factors before we all become enervated to the point of nonproductivity.

When one approaches Denver from Jefferson County to the west or Arapahoe County to the south, he must penetrate an actual wall of contamination which stretches from the sky to the ground. How could the citizens of Denver have permitted this problem to occur and why have we not demanded that corrective measures be taken long before this?

Several partial solutions occur to me, each of which would lessen somewhat the total amount of air pollution. First of all, why did we, the residents of Denver, permit the Tramway Co. to replace their easy-riding, almost noiseless, noncontaminating electric trolley buses

with those monstrous, odorous, pollution-belching diesel buses, which everyone avoids if at all possible.

Second, let us who live in this beautiful city demand that there be an end to backyard incineration and that the city government assume complete responsibility for collecting and destroying trash. The machinery for achieving this objective is at least partly in existence. Additional equipment and manpower would certainly have to be added to the city sanitation department, but the additional minimal cost to the residents of Denver should accomplish results more than worthwhile. Also, those of us with homes in east Denver very frequently are denied the gorgeous view of our beloved Rocky Mountains because the industrial pollution occurring between east Denver and the mountains produces a solid haze over the front range.

Third, industrial offenders must be forced to speed up their programs of air pollution control which are not planned to extend over a period of years. I feel certain that my interpretation of the "reasonable time" referred to in the Federal statute and the State bill differs sharply from the industrialists' interpretations. I firmly believe that if there is a known way to achieve clean air, reasonable time should be a period not longer than the number of months required to effect the changeover, not the number of years which the industrialists feel would not interfere with their accustomed pattern of profits. Clean air must be absolutely demanded of the industrialists if they are to be permitted to continue operations. Naturally, if there is no known way to accomplish this control, reasonable time should include a period of time for intensive research. It should be noted that reference is made to public enjoyment of air resources of the State as well as to public health and welfare in the air pollution bill now being considered in the Colorado General Assembly.

Fourth, the air pollution created by motor vehicles is a special problem of which we are all aware. Those States which have enacted legislation regarding exhaust and crankcase pollutants are to be congratulated for this limited action. But even the blowby attachment to recirculate crankcase emission is being installed only in new-model motor vehicles. How many years must pass before all vehicles in use are so equipped? Cannot some requirement regarding all licensed vehicles be enforced to eliminate this approximately 25 percent of automobile pollution, according to the recent report of the Surgeon General of the United States?

In regard to the greatest offender of all, the automobile exhaust, there is an entirely different problem. Study has proven that substances present in exhaust emissions can produce tumors and cancers in laboratory animals. Under certain circumstances when these substances are inhaled, cancer is definitely produced. Therefore, immediate and concentrated effort must be expended to eliminate this dangerous offender. I disagree with the belief that an afterburner should be applied to solve this problem. An afterburner is, after all, only another accessory, of which we already have too many. The solution must be found in the design of the engine itself. Literature examined indicates that some 40 automobile and chemical companies are racing to develop effective afterburners to be used as attachments. I ask the researchers and manufacturers "Why not race to find a motive power which will have efficient combustion and thus avoid any exhaust and crankcase pollution?"

No real engineering change has been produced in automobiles in the last 60 years, and the rapidly increasing numbers of constantly operating automobiles demand without qualification that an engineering solution be effected. The manufacturers continuously claim that they cannot afford to retool their plants to produce an acceptable engine. They expend all their so-called engineering research money on changes in body designs, which are after all still only designs, not engineering. If the automobile manufacturers would expend their cost of changing body styles for only 1 year on real engineering research, they could surely produce, without exorbitant expenditure, an efficient engine which would create complete combustion of the fuel. Besides, fullcombustion engines have already been designed outside the automobile industry which could easily be incorporated in the present body styles if the public demands such improvement.

It is a well-known fact that the women of this country control the purse strings. I therefore challenge the women of America to demand publicly the production of an automotive engine which does not create lethal fumes. We women must only refuse to invest the money we control in automotive products which fail to achieve the goal of engineering perfection we have the right to demand.

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you, Mrs. Rose, for your testimony. Let me ask you this on the last point. The hearings in Los Angeles and the opportunity we had to examine or to visit the motor vehicle pollution control laboratory in Los Angeles indicate that we are much closer to producing an answer to this problem of automobile pollution emissions through either the afterburner or the catalyst approach than we are in terms of redesigning the engines themselves. Would you take the position that even though the afterburner or the catalyst accessory might solve the problem we ought not to use it until the engine design is improved?

Mrs. Rose. No, sir. According to the engineers with whom I have talked about this problem, the afterburner or catalyst, or I understand there is a new Chrysler afterburner that has also been submitted to California, would partially solve the problem. But I personally would hate to drive an automobile that had a flame in the back of the automobile. I would be afraid of it. I have heard several other people make the same statement.

Senator MUSKIE. Well, as I understand, the afterburner device isn't a flame. What would ignite the combustion of the afterburner would be the spark plugs just as you have in the engine itself and it is not a flame in the sense of an open flame at all. It is a contained combustion in the sense the combustion in the engine itself takes place. I thought you might be interested to know or at least get my impression of the progress that is being made, and that is that although the afterburner approach or the catalyst approach might not be the final answer, certainly not the complete answer, it might be an answer in the evolution to the final answer that would be very useful.

Mrs. ROSE. Yes, sir. It is my feeling it should be considered a temporary measure and not a final result. I firmly believe that the engineers can continue to work toward creating a complete combustion engine.

Senator MUSKIE. We ought to be able to find an answer to that. Mrs. Rose. Certainly if we can send missiles around the world and astronauts around the world we ought to do this.