be about 14, 15 miles of well-treat effluent. They have proposed and reported to us and to others that they intend to put the effluent into the lower Biscayne Bay which is a virgin, beautiful body of water. have not been asked to make formal approval or disapproval on it. But I have made this statement twice. We have not been convinced that they can treat this liquid effluent to a suitable degree as it would not leave the lower Biscayne Bay which is a shallow bay; it is 10 to 14 miles long with a 6-foot depth. So whether they will have enough dilution and tidal prism to give any movement, I don't know.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, at that point; it is not exactly directed at air pollution, but Mr. Lee brings this point into focus. I am told that Broward County, even today, or at least in the near future will be pinched for water; is this true? I used the word "pinched."

Mr. LEE. That is the Fort Lauderdale area. No, we have heard nothing on pinching.

Senator RANDOLPH. I have heard that in Miami there will be a water supply problem in the next 20 years; is this true?

Mr. LEE. This has been mentioned in the press, by some prominent speakers.

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes, sir.

Mr. LEE. But those concerned with public drinking water, at this time, do not feel that the public domestic supply is endangered. We have said, Senator, that if water quality management, which your committee is interested in, is not maintained and conserved, we can face this. You see, Florida is expected to have between 15 and 20 million people by the year 2000, and this is going to take a lot of

water.

Senator RANDOLPH. Then we can't just say, "We have got plenty of water; why worry?-it is a transient State?

Mr. LEE. It is real transient. You see, Dr. Taylor and I have seen this State grow in the last 7 years, and this has been quite a struggle. But there are counties in Florida which are faced with the potential if no real conservation measures are taken.

Senator RANDOLPH. Up in the cape area?

Mr. LEE. No, sir, Brevard is the most rapidly growing county in the State, Cape Kennedy.

Senator MUSKIE. The problem now is

Mr. LEE. Sir, I have been down there with General Sands several times and they have never mentioned the future water, as far as the State government. We have a lot of mineralized water there.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MUSKIE. On the question of the refinery in Dade County again, has any attention been given to the question of accidental spills which seem to be inevitable wherever you have refineries, and which can have an impact upon the area and water?

Mr. LEE. This has been considered, and I can assure you that when the plans hit the Bureau desk that new methodologies will be put in. I have heard much about the papermills, some of the new mills that have been constructed, and one of them in South Georgia. You might ask why I am talking about South Georgia. The discharge from Georgia would come to the Suwannee River and into Florida, the operators built antispill devices. They built curbs around the kettles and the

outlets discharge into a catchall so that effluent could be reused. They provided all new equipment, that we requested in our plans for the antispill protective devices. On air, I can't answer this yet.

Senator MUSKIE. Let me ask you a very blunt question here, if I may. Now, we have been to California, we know what air pollution is in its most serious form. We have seen it from the ground, in the air by helicopter. We have been to Denver, a city you would think would be a mountain city with crystal clear, clean air; they have an air pollution problem. They are concerned with it rather early in the evolution of the problem because they are concerned with tourism. So, I am wondering what the attitude here in Florida is in official circles. Now, here you have truly marvelous weather.

Mr. LEE. Like you to come more often.

Senator MUSKIE. Do you have a feeling that it ought to be preserved as it is or do you think that you can compromise it, saying, "We still have pretty good stuff," and have your cake and eat it too? I mean is there feeling that you ought to preserve it in its present state or do you think you can compromise it and get along with something a little less good in order to get some of these other economic values? Mr. LEE. Sir, I am not a lawyer, but I think there is equity here and I believe economic development is one of the greatest needs that we have in Florida. We need some good fundamental planning and zoning and I think it is true nationwide. We used to talk about land use bank. Air resources are going to have to be zoned just like water and land, and for every purpose. I think this is vital. I do think the State government can take a deep look with industry, with agriculture and with tourism, which are our three major industries. I don't like the word "allocate," but we should define those that are compatible and come to a compromise. I have a cliche I use all the time, as long as we have people, production, you are going to have pollution. This is axiomatic, but this doesn't mean that it is so axiomatic that it is going to be limited to that point.

And I come to my same prior planning place. I think this State will plan this program, we can advocate a need to. But I don't think that smokestack industry, and I will take the extreme, can be located in Miami Beach, it is just not compatible. Now, how the doctrine of prior preparation enters into this, I don't know either. But I do think there is a reality, and a compromise must be effected, because air pollution is much more difficult to control than water pollution. We can confine water pollution to a stream or to a park, but we are nervous about it going underground.

But in air pollution I am convinced that where we have these serious problems, and we admit we have them, we think we are doing everything we can with our resources, and I doubt in my judgment that we will ever see the air pollution problem brought to that point in which everyone is satisfied. This is human nature. You can't stop it. We have too many problems, Senator, in which they will zone something for heavy industry and then Mrs. Jones builds a house in that same place and she is complaining next week.

Senator MUSKIE. Well, let me point this out, just to stimulate some of this philosophical discussion, that is what we have got to get to. Dr. Hendrickson said earlier that it is cheaper and easier to prevent the development of the problem than it is to cure it after it comes,

and this is so evident in California, and I consider some of the drastic measures they have to take in Los Angeles because they waited until the problem had reached almost insurmountable proportions.

For example, they just undertook to require on a 12-month basis that no fuel other than natural gas can be used for industrial or domestic purposes in Los Angeles County. Now, this is pretty drastic stuff. You can't use coal, you can't use fuel oil; all you can use is natural gas, and the reason, of course, is natural gas has a lower sulfur content of all the sulfur fuels. Now, that is going pretty far. They have had to do it because they have allowed the problem to go so far. You still can go up in a helicopter and see this cloud of smoke over the Los Angeles area. Now you fellows don't want that down here in Florida. You have enough problem competing with California. But you see these pictures here of Jacksonville taken in 1961 and 1962.

In California they are going to require that every used car in California by the end of 1965 have a crankcase blowby device. You are not apparently considering any such measures here in Florida. Now, here is a device that has been developed. We know it works 100 percent, controls crankcase emissions. Now, why States refuse to consider requiring its installation, I don't know, because we know that the automobile is going to become more of a problem and not less of a problem in air pollution. Here is a way of controlling 25 percent of its pollution, and California, as far as I know, is the only State that is doing anything about it. California is developing working object devices to control the exhausts of automobiles. They expect that they may have at least two devices by the end of 1966. It will be easy to require them on new cars, but then every State is going to have to act to require the use on used cars. Are these States prepared to do it? It seems to me that we have got to think about using the devices when we develop them.

I am amazed, for example, in California steel plants. They are required to control their stack emissions, and they have 99 percent effectiveness on tests, and yet you go in other parts of the country, in Chicago, for example, and other areas, you will find no such control and these stacks spewing this stuff out into the atmosphere when there is a way of controlling it. It is true it is expensive, and it is true, I think, that the Federal Government ought to be providing tax incentive to help them bear the load, but nevertheless here is a device that can control that particular problem, why do we hesitate to use it? We know that the problem is going to get worse before it gets better. So, I think that, Mr. Lightfoot, groups like yours could do a great service, and not in arbitrary approaches but simply in seeing what we already know can be done, and so I am curious as to what the attitude is here in Florida. Would you gentlemen like to comment on it?

Dr. SOWDER. Well, I think Mr. Lee spoke for the State board of health there very well. I would like to make it more positive, though, that we certainly, and I think all of Florida, and I am sure that is one thing that Mr. Lightfoot and I agree on, we don't want to proffer everything that we have and roll back the pollution we now have. We do think we have an opportunity in Florida water and air to stay ahead of nearly all the other States, particularly the larger States because we don't have as much of the heavy industry as some of the other States. We have more water to put it in and really more air,

because this is a rather good-sized State for an eastern State. And we certainly, I think-I don't speak for the legislature or the Governor-but I am quite sure that they all want to keep Florida at least as pure as it is and to improve it.

Senator MUSKIE. Well, we challenge you to do that.

Mr. LEE. May I speak of this automobile thing? Just how recent has this new development been they have

Senator MUSKIE. It has been very recent.

Mr. LEE. This is the point I want to get in the record, and I don't mind your challenge because this old business of being on the defense all the time we don't enjoy. But we have watched

Senator RANDOLPH. Especially when California is mentioned.

Mr. LEE. Of course. But we have been watching this and I can assure you that as far as any good control device, we will put it into operation, I can assure you this, because this is why we want the Federal Government and their level to give us control devices, and we will put them in if given us.

Senator MUSKIE. Do you have authority now or would you require additional legislation to use these motor vehicle control devices?

Mr. LEE. On the automobiles we'd have to have legislation. We could do it in districts, but we have methodology, just give us the devices.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, one final comment on this point. I think your challenge is constructive, and I think we have to realize, however, that as we talk today about air pollution, we know the problem of water pollution has been with us. Yet we find that Florida Director of Research for the Board of Conservation Robert Ingle says that "I know of no community on the coast, including Miami, that has an adequate treatment plant." Now, if this is true, all the more reason why what you say today is very important as we move into this area of air pollution. I don't know whether you agree with this.

Mr. LEE. I violently disagree with this. Florida in the past 17 years has grown in population, sir, and we built 1,173 sewage treatment plants. The average treatment in the State of Florida of all our sewage treatments at the plant is about 70 percent organic removal, BOD, which you have heard many times, where the average throughout the Nation is only 50 percent removal. We are shooting for 95 percent because we do not have the rapid moving streams for rapid aeration and dilution. We have bayous, ponds, and what have you. So we are shooting for 95 because with all this, sir, we have an exotic pollutant which is the nutrient of nitrogen and phosphates which enrich our bays and give us algae, and I am not sure of the red tide, mosquitoes, and any other. We solve one and create the other because we don't have the rapid stream and reoxygenation. But I think Florida is leading the Nation in building sewage programs. We have held down our industrial liquid waste, in which I put the air problem. But, Miami has put in a $27 million program. Now, they have been putting effluents out in the Gulf Stream 70 percent treated; that is pretty good.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Lee, I bring this in as part of the record, and I will close it. Colonel Kelly of the conservation department, of course, agrees with Mr. Ingle; these men say, in effect, "We have plenty of air, so why worry about it? This is not the attitude of you and your organization, is it?

Mr. LIGHTFOOT. Senator Muskie, may I make a comment? I think a great deal has been accomplished, not only in Florida but perhaps throughout the States. Florida was the ninth State to pass an air pollution law, as I understand it, and many more have since, and even 5 years ago and certainly 10 years ago you could talk to any man and he didn't know what air pollution was. Today he knows, and that is largely due to our publicity through just such meetings as this. I think we have made a great deal of headway in a fundamental sense. I think the people are behind it.

Senator MUSKIE. Mr. Lightfoot, is it true to say also that industry itself has felt its responsibility; isn't this true?

Mr. LIGHTFOOT. They get credit too. I realize the inevitability of control.

Senator MUSKIE. At least to a degree, and I think to be affirmative here to a degree, I think this is the place to make this emphatic.

Dr. HENDRICKSON. We have the same problems that you have. You question why we don't have tax benefit for air pollution control equipment; I think that the reason why we don't have that is the same reason that some of our State laws are not adequate.

Senator RANDOLPH. People really aren't too interested as yet. Senator MUSKIE. Well, I suppose one reason why you have concerned yourselves with air pollution earlier than most States is that you have so many politicians coming down here to add to your aircontrol problem.

Gentlemen, we are most grateful, we have one more witness scheduled for this morning and we are sure that we could get more if we had more time.

Mr. Doyle Conner, commissioner of the Florida State Department of Agriculture, is scheduled to testify; I understand that he could not be here but he has someone here to present his statement for him. Sir, would you give us your name.

Mr. PIERCE. Senator, my name is William C. Pierce; I am general counsel for the Florida Department of Agriculture.

Senator MUSKIE. I understand that you are going to present Mr. Conner's statement.

STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER DOYLE CONNER, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, PRESENTED BY WILLIAM C. PIERCE, GENERAL COUNSEL

Mr. PIERCE. The committee recognizes that I am not here as an expert on pollution myself. I am a lawyer, but I am here only as a representative of the commissioner.

The development of public interest in air pollution in Florida has been quite rapid and has occurred principally within the past 10 years. Control programs at all levels have not developed at the same rate as public interest, however, largely because of lack of technical knowledge of what is essential to do the job.

This is particularly true in agriculture, for we find that the effects of air pollution are fairly well known in certain localized areas and on certain crops, but present control measures are limited by lack of technical development. These facts will be discussed in some detail in this statement.