Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

In bygone years it was the practice to bury waste on readily available land areas. This practice is fast coming to its termination, for land for refuse burial is not readily available and as time goes on will be less and less so.

I have cited the figures for the city of New York. In doing this I realize, as you do, that New York City is one of the largest cities of the world and that one might argue that this is an example of extreme size. But this problem is also true of smaller communities. At the moment, a group of citizens of Northport, L.I., are aroused because of the nuisance created by the Huntington, L.I., town dump and incinerator which is located on the dividing line separating the two towns. And the New York Times of 1 week ago (Feb. 9, 1964) tells the story of the strife which is taking place because the town of North Hempstead, L.I., desires to build an incinerator at Hempstead Harbor. The residents opposed to the construction of the incinerator say it "would saturate the area with odors, smoke, and soot, etc."

These are but two examples. But this is not the whole story. In accordance with a New York City local ordinance, certain apartment houses must be provided with incinerators for refuse destruction. And every new apartment house is so provided. There are probably no less than 15,000 such apartment house incinerators in the city at the present time. Most, if not all, of these devices are not property designed for the purpose intended, and they serve to add a tremendous burden of pollution to the city's air.

With reference to waste disposal it is clear that this is a huge and rapidly growing problem and that satisfactory means for its solution are not at hand. The importance of this warrants the expenditure of the funds needed to provide us with research and designs for devices for the nuisance-free incineration of refuse.

HEATING DEVICES Apartment house heating, boilers, and heating devices, represent another piece of equipment which requires research and study. At the present time such boilers are in most cases fired with liquid fuel, generally known as No. 5 and No. 6 oil. These boilers oftentimes release considerable amounts of unburned or partly burned gases and solids into the atmosphere. When one studies the cause one finds that many of the installations operate satisfactorily whereas others do not or are not reliable in their operation, thus releasing sig. nificant amounts of pollution to the atmosphere. Here the solution lies in adequate boiler design, especially in the design of the oil burner and its controls. Some manufacturers of equipment in this field apparently know a great deal about the design and construction of such equipment; some other manufacturers do not possess this know-how and appear not to be interested in the refinements necessary for success. As a rule, governmental agencies have not conducted investigations in this field. If we are to reduce atmospheric air pollution in our cities, the regulating authorities must be able to insist on the provision of equipment which is of such design as to eliminate the production of pollutants. This problem is particularly important in the spring and fall seasons of the year when heating equipment is used only intermittently.

The last type of equipment of which I desire to speak this morning is the diesel motor. Most trucks designed for heavy use, and most buses in our cities, are equipped with diesel motors. These motors frequently are the cause of discharge of air pollutants. Yet relatively few studies have been made on their control. It is often said that diesel motors operate satisfactorily if properly maintained. While this is true, it may well be that a study of the diesel motor from the point of view of elimination of pollutants might be productive of a more satisfactory solution.

ENFORCEMENT BY THE OFFICIAL AGENOY

The enforcement of air pollution control regulations can never be any better or stronger than the basic law on which control rests. The elective officers and councilmen in our communities must realize the health and comfort significance of pure air. They should provide the air pollution control agency, with power to compel operators of all fuel-burning equipment to utilize only approved equip ment, and to maintain it in satisfactory operating condition so as to prevent the fouling of this important natural resource.

In this brief statement I have emphasized certain aspects of our problem. It is not intended that other important parts of the problem be overlooked or neglected. The control of community air pollution involves so many factors that we must continue to engage in research, experimental, and administrative studies on a broad scale for many years to come. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MUSKIE. Doctor, I might say, on the point that you make, that the Federal funds are available only to expand and improve existing programs or initiate new programs. The funds are not available to support existing programs.

Dr. GREENBURG. I think if the intent is there, it is all right.
Senator MUSKIE. It has to be spelled out?

Dr. GREENBURG. It has to be spelled out. I think-if I don't make myself clear, I will do it again.

Senator MUSKIE. In other words, that is what the law says.

Dr. GREENBURG. Thank you. I was not familiar with the exact terms of it, but it seems to me that this is a must.

I agree with Commissioner Kandle, of New Jersey, in his belief that the regional approach is very good. It is very important; but I don't think that it can be an enforcement agency. My belief about enforcement agencies is very simple, I think.

This is a local problem. It takes place here and here and here in our city or in our State, and there is where it has to be controlled.

If you enlarge the enforcement agency by including New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, you enlarge the scope of the activity of the enforcement agency, you enlarge the amount of money that they have to get to do the job over a smaller community, and, in turn, you enlarge the difficulties of actually achieving control.

In fact, although I am a member of the State board of air pollution control, I feel that in the State of New York control ought to be done on the local level. In other words, if the city of Buffalo can develop a program of its own with the help of our board, I think the problem should be left in their hands, instead of the State agency trying to cover the whole State.

I think the problem just gets too big, and I don't think that you can do it.

Senator MUSKIE. Do you think the Interstate Sanitation Commission should not have enforcement powers with respect to water pollution?

Dr. GREENBURG. Well, I think that the record is clear, I don't know too much about it. But the record is clear. The Interstate Sanitation Commission has had enforcement powers in the field of water control, to the best of my knowledge, for 25 years now, or more.

In the field, it is really relatively simple, because you can test the effluent at any plant that you want by going there and putting a bottle under the sewer pipe and getting the effluent from that particular plant or from that particular town sewage disposal plant. Yet, in spite of that, there are many people who are not satisfied with the water pollution control program of the Interstate Sanitation Commission.

Now, compare this in your own mind with the problem of air pollution control. The problem is hundreds of times more difficult, because the sampling of the effluent from any one plant is quite a problem. If it is a big stack, like in a powerplant, it may take a week of two or three men's time to do this one sample.

Senator MUSKIE. Isn't it also more complex because it tends to be more regional than a single water pollution problem?

Dr. GREENBURG. I think it is. But, I think, nevertheless, the pollution occurs at one place, and I think, therefore, that you can control it better.

You can go to the man who has an incinerator that is putting out a lot of black smoke, or a boiler that is putting out a lot of black smoke, and say to him: “Look, our inspector found your boiler smoking, and it was smoking for a longer time than the law permits, and therefore you have to do something about it.”

Senator MUSKIE. What if you live in a different jurisdiction?

Dr. GREENBURG. Then, you cannot do anything about it. If, for example, this happens in New York, I don't see how anybody in New Jersey can do anything about it. It has to be left to the New York jurisdiction to cure this evil.

Senator MUSKIE. What if New York neglects it?

Dr. GREENBURG. Well, I think if New York neglects it, then I think the thing to do is to air this out before some kind of a committee or group meeting. I think this is perfectly all right.

This is why we set up this interstate commission, interstate committee. This was done in 1959, just before I left the department, where we organized this committee to try to get our heads together with the Jersey people to see if we could not advance on the problem.

Senator MUSKIE. So, you think that it is enough simply to meet together and talk together; that it is not necessary to have interstate enforcement ?

Dr. GREENBURG. I think it is necessary, first and primarily, to do a job in your own community, and then, if it is not being done, then I think the thing to do is to get together with the people who are blowing the stuff over your area and point it out to them objectively.

I think that your statement this morning that when you were coming down the New Jersey Turnpike and you saw burning dumps is a very effective statement, and I think that made an impression on all of us, because that is the fact; and I think everybody realizes when this happens that this is not the right thing to do.

On the other hand, I don't see how anybody, or an interstate commission, can exercise jurisdiction over this nearly as effectively as the health commissioner of the State of New Jersey and his board.

Senator MUSKIE. If they do? Dr. GREENBURG. Well, yes, if they do. And they are men of good will and they are trying. I think if they get money and get help, get governmental support or support of the officials, I think that they will do it. They are very much interested in it, just as you and I

If they don't do it, I don't think there is any pressure that an interstate group can put on them to make them do it. I really don't think that it would be successful. It is not, in my experience, anyhow.

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you, Dr. Greenburg. We appreciate your willingness to come to testify.

Dr. GREENBURG. Thank you.

Senator MUSKIE. Our next witness is Mr. Charles J. Maguire, supervising chief, Bureau of Industrial Hygiene and Air Pollution Control of Newark, N.J. Mr. Maguire is representing the mayor of Newark.

Mr. MAGUIRE. Yes, sir.
Senator MUSKIE. Mr. Maguire, it is a pleasure to welcome you

here this afternoon.

are.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES J. MAGUIRE, SUPERVISING CHIEF, BU.

REAU OF INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE AND AIR POLLUTION, NEWARK, N.J.

Mr. MAGUIRE. It is my pleasure, sir.

Mr. Chairman, members of the U.S. Senate Commission on Air Pollution Control, ladies and gentlemen, I am much pleased with the Clean Air Act. I know that a great amount of work, research and study was carried out before it was written in its final form. I commend your committee for this accomplishment. It pleases me further with the leadership, aid, grants, and research the act will make available to States and municipalities in conducting and enforcing air pollution control programs.

The city of Newark, N.J., conducts an air pollution control program through its bureau of industrial hygiene and air pollution control in the department of health and welfare. Its duties and powers are granted by an ordinance adopted in November 1958 by the municipal council, which created a bureau of industrial hygiene and air pollution control, an air pollution board, and also the air pollution control hearing and appeals board.

Prior to the 1958 ordinance there existed a bureau of industrial hygiene for 45 years and a smoke abatement bureau for 35 years, each functioning in separate departments of the municipal government. Under the 1958 ordinance the bureau of industrial hygiene absorbed or inherited the functions of the heretofore smoke abatement bureau.

The city of Newark expends annually over $70,000 for air pollution control. The bureau is staffed by eight air pollution control inspectors, five sanitarians, two public health nurses, one supervising chief, one assistant chief, one supervisor of smoke abatement and two clerkstenos.

The air pollution control program is one of "strict enforcement." Persuasion and conciliation is used when a response is indicated. However, abatement is rapid, never allowed to delay.

Inspectors are assigned to districts in the city and continuously inspect the sources of air pollution and apprehend violators and compel abatement. Two radio patrol cars, operating on police frequency, patrol the entire city daily, receive complaints and abate violations.

The program enables us to have corrected or abated anything that we can see, smell, taste, or feel. Visible smoke is no longer a problem. neither is open burning. The latter is entirely prohibited.

The invisible pollutants such as submicron dusts and particulates; the invisible exhausts from internal combuston engines; the sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and other chemicals in the outer atmosphere is what is of chief concern at the moment. Research has indic ed health hazards and preexisting physical conditions are affected by and associated with air pollutants. Add to this the damage to property, plant life, and vegetation.

Here we have been handicapped due to financial circumstances and the lack of technical personnel. I am most certain the act can aid us in functions necessary to determine the kind and amount of air contaminants. To sample and analyze the air just to see what's in it is not air pollution control. It is necessary to sample and analyze to determine the amount of pollution emitted by a given source and to move toward abatement by installation of adequate control equipment to prevent emissions.

This requires monitoring, sampling, instrumentation, chemical analysis, laboratory services, meteorological aspects and determinations, and technical personnel. We do not live alone with this handicap. I am sure there are other municipalities faced with the same situation. The act can therefore remove this handicap by grants to States and municipalities who cannot afford this costly function.

The long-range objective of an air pollution control program is to reduce air pollution to its irreducible minimum. A minimum where health is not endangered; plant life, property, and vegetation is not damaged and nuisances are not caused. This may not happen in my lifetime or yours. But our children and theirs, could and should be the beneficiaries of a concerted effort and impetus on control beginning now. It can be done. This act can be a prime mover in obtaining that objective.

Thank you.

Senator MUSKIE. Mr. Maguire, would you say that the program of the city of Newark could use these grants required by the Clean Air Act?

Mr. MAGUIRE. Yes.
Senator Muskie. Your program needs expansion?
Mr. MAGUIRE. We definitely need expansion.

Senator MUSKIE. Have you developed the details of a request for Federal funds?

Mr. MAGUIRE. Yes, we are about ready to when the time is of the utmost.

Senator Muskie. What activities would you like to expand ?

Mr. Magu IRE. We would like to expand by first putting on engineers, by getting instruments to monitor the atmosphere, meteorological determinations to tell us what concentrations or what substances come from certain directions.

We would like to be able to determine what comes into the city from beyond its borders, also.

Senator Muskie. So, what you really need is more research?
Mr. MAGUIRE. Yes, sir.
Senator MUSKIE. As to the size and details of your problem?
Mr. MAGUIRE. That is correct.

Senator MUSKIE. Thank you very much, and thank the mayor for me.

Mr. MAGUIRE. Thank you; I will, Senator.

Senator MUSKIE. Our next witnesses constitute our second panel of the day: Mr. George Minasian, assistant to the vice president, Consolidated Edison Co. of New York; Mr. William R. Chalker, from the Air Quality Committee of the Manufacturing Chemists' Association; Mr. Gwynn Thomas, of the Associated Industries of New York State; and Mr. E. I. Merrill, of the New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce.

Gentlemen, I appreciate your willingness to subject yourselves to this experience this afternoon. You all have prepared statements, I take it. You may present them as you see fit. If you can highlight them, if they are long, that would be useful; but this is not always manageable.

« ForrigeFortsett »