Panel C               ASPECTS OF AREA-WIDE PLANNING

151

converting waste to use, and

improving the aesthetic value of man's surroundings." 2

Having set this general goal the Task Force urges that this primary goal
be related to a policy commitment toward the elimination of environmental
contamination and that in addition program goals must be set for the reduc-
tion of specific contaminants. I b e ieve
                      1   that it is reasonable to suggest that
this same set of goals can and should be acceptable to the governments,
local, state, and Federal in the Washington metropolitan area and that there
is no valid reason why these same governments cannot make the necessary
policy commitment.

Setting Regional Goals

The kind of environmental protection system recommended by Secretary
Gardner's Task Force has as its immediate objectives the establishment of
criteria and standards for elements discharged into the air, water, and soil,
and the creation of a sui-veillance system, nationwide for all pollutants in
air. water, and soil.

The Task Force contains this admonition: "And compliance must be
based on more than abatement action. There must be an inducement so
strong for State and local governments to do comprehensive planning on an
appropriate geographic scale and to conform with national goals and ob-
jectives that it is politically and economically unpalatable for them to do
otherwise." 3

The Task Force Report goes on to say "Participation on the part of local
government in any regional environmental program should be as great as
possible, but it must be recognized that environmental protection problems
will have to be solved on the metropolitan or regional scale.

"We must engage in experimentation and research in order to increase our
capacity to make decisions at the metropolitan or regional level." *

An Interstate Compact Agency Required

For the Washington metropolitan area it seems obvious that some kind
of new institutional arrangement will have to be created to carry out an
cfrcctive emironmental protection program. It seems inevitable at this
point that to mount the kind of environmental protection system needed
to most adequately meet the problems of this area, an interstate compact
agency will have to be created. The creation of such an agency will involve
agreement on behalf of the states of Maryland and Virginia, the Congress
and should be fully supported by the Executive Branch. Also it must be


152                          M~ELDS

Proceedings

so structured so as to be genuinely responsive to the local governments in
the area. As a matter of fact, I would urge that the Compact Agency be
a component part of the Washington COG, which has already created an
intergovernmental decision-making process.

The National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences in
its report Waste Management and Control stated that "Public policies and
institutional arrangements, and the extent to which they are supported will
largely determine the effectiveness with which the challenge of pollution
is met." 5

"Law and public policy establish the environment that will determine
the response of private activities and individual public agencies to the prob-
lems of pollution. Because of the strategic role of governmental agencies
at all levels in establishing this environment, or climate, their organization,
staffing, financial support, and authority are critical to a successful attack
on the problems of pollution." 6

Neither the individual governments in the D.C. metropolitan area nor in
any other metropolitan area are adequately equipped to deal with the
problem on the scale required. The scale makes it impossible to solve on
an individual basis, and jurisdictional problems effectively preclude any
real hope for effective confederation. If the local governments in the area
are to act responsibly, they must assume the obligation of supporting the
creation of a new institutional arrangement or governmental entity which
can meet the problem on the scale required to adequately protect and
enhance the physical environment of the metropolitan area. And at the
same time they must be sure that such an arrangement is not special pur-
pose, but part of a general decision-making process for the region - one
that deals with highways, outdoor recreation, health and all the other things
that create an environment of excellence on the intergovernmental regional
scale.

   Area Wide Planning for an Environmental Protection System
The creation of a compact agency will take, however, at least from two
to four years to accomplish. Much will depend on the zeal with which the
local governments take on the job. But in any event, planning for the
creation of the compact agency itself should begin now and should be under-
taken as a specific goal of the Washington Metropolitan Council of
Governments.

The principal talk of the compact agency committee would be to secure
agreement amongst member governments as to: ( 1) the compact agency's


Panel C               ASPECTS OF AREA-WIDE PLANNING

153

specific responsibilities; (2) the kinds of powers, police, taxes, eminent
domain, etc., to be placed at its disposal; (3) how it is to be organized,
staffed and funded; (4) the kinds of standards it should impose and over
Lvhat period of time; (5) how it should enforce such standards and secure
compliance; (6) its relationships to the states and federal governments and
most importantly - its relationship to the local governments within the
metropolitan area.

But while the COG compact agency committee is pursuing its responsibilities
COG itself should be working with the governments of the region in develop
ing agreement on interim goals and an action program to meet those goals
in the most constructive and effective way until the compact agency is a
fact and is working.

This work, it would seem to me, would fall into two categories:

First, trying to meet the short term problems of eliminating the most
obnoxious hazards to the metropolitan environment:

Shooting for a target of closing down all the open burning in the metro-
politan area and particularly the. Kenilworth Dump within the next six
months.

Begin preparing for completion in 1969 a comprehensive environmental
health program plan for the metropolitan area.

Begin to develop abatement plans to reduce plant stack emissions by
90 percent by 1970. In other words implement the recommendations made
by COG in its model Air Pollution Ordinance.

Second, providing the basic information regarding the range and intensity
of esisting and potential hazards to the environment for purposes of further
refining the area's short-term goals and to be used by the compact agency
once it is created as a basis for its compliance and enforcement program.

Work undertaken in this regard would consist of the following: (1) a
metropolitan wide monitoring system for Gr and water pollution; this would
require an expansion of cot existing I I stations air pollution monitoring
network; (2) the development of a source inventory for solid, gaseous and
liquid waste for the entire metropolitan area; (3) area wide solid waste
disposal site survey; (4) analysis of the nature of the total solid waste loads
along with the development of methods of analysis for alternative mixes of
treatment. For example, how much waste should be burned, how much
should be ground up, and discharged through the sewer system, how much
should be buried, how much should be subject to salvage; (5) examination


154

MELDS             Proceedings

of existing private and public collection methods, etc. ; (6) an intense and
in depth examination of the total existing and projected impact of current
prevaient environmental hazards on the ecologue of the metropolitan area;
(7) undertaking a comprehensive analysis of the projected cost involved
in the development of an effective environmental protection system and the
examination of possible sources of revenue to support the protection program
including recommendations as to the appropriate role in terms of financing
to be played by the state and Federal governments.

Summary

The development of an effective environmental protection system will
                                         *
require a comprehensive approach involving all aspects of waste generation
and taking into account the full range of environmental hazards within
the framework of broad and responsible political decision making.

o It will have to operate on a regional scale
o It will require the full commitment and support on the part of all
the governments in the area

o The work on the creation of an appropriate compact agency should
begin now under the auspices of the Washington Metropolitan
Council of Governments

o At the same time the governments of the metropolitan area should
be working through WASH coo to develop short-term abatement goals

- and programs to achieve those goals during interim between now
and the creation of the compact agency

o Finally, every effort should be made on the part of the individual
governments within the metropolitan area acting individually and in
concert to secure and utilize all available resources and powers
through the States and the Federal government to assist them in a
truly cooperative effort to restore the Metropolitan area's physical
environment.

`The Task Force on Environmental Health and Related Problems. A rrrategy for
a livable environment; a report to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. p. 1.
' Ibid. p. xv.
a Ibid. p. xii.
`Ibid. p. xiii.
`National Academy pf Sciences - National Research Council, Committee on
Pollution. WIT Waste management and cont;oF A report :o the Federal Corrncil for
Science and Technology.   Publication No. 1400. Washington, D.C., National
Academy of Sciences - National Research Council, 1966. p. 222.
`Ibid. p. 222.


ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE UNDER THE
  SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ACT

Richard D. Vaughan *

MAN HAS BEEN POLLUTING his environment for centuries. But recently in
this country, as in other parts of the world, a rapidly growing population,
increasingly concentrated in urban areas, has made pollution a critical
problem. The metropolitan area of Washington, the point of focus for this
conference, provides a concrete example of a highly concentrated urban
area with increasingly severe pollution problems.

Until the last few years, pollution to most people meant unclean air and
water. Few were concerned about contamination from solid wastes as long
as their garbage and trash were routinely removed from their premises, and
the disposal site was beyond the senses of sight and smell. Yet, in communi-
tics throughout the country, the burning of wastes in the open or in anti-
quated equipment is a major cause of air pollution. Moreover, open dumps
often seriously pollute surface and ground waters.

Only today are we beginning to realize that our three waste repositories
contain all we shall ever have of the basic life resources of land, air, and
water and that these repositories are interconnected so that to pollute one
may be to pollute all three.

In economic terms, as a nation we are now paying about $3 billion a year
for solid waste handling systems which are less than adequate in many cases.
The expenditure of local funds for solid waste is exceeded only by expendi-
tures for schools and roads.

Although there is a great and pressing need for research and development
in the technology of solid waste management, it must be emphasized that
knowledge is now available for the development of safe and efficient solid
waste handling systems. No community need wait for research results be-

* Chief, Environmental Sanitation Program, National Center for Urban and Indus-
trial Health, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Weliare. On August 1, 1967, the National Center for Urban and Industrial
Health moved its headquarters to Cincinnati, At that time Mr. Vaughan became
Chief, Solid Wastes Program, NCUIH.

155

283-399 O-67- 11


156                         VAUGHAN

Proceedings

fore improving waste management.  Most municipalities, unfortunately,
have lacked money to spend on available sanitary collection and disposal
equipment and facilities, much less to risk on disposal methods not yet
wholly tried. Furthermore, many communities now undertaking to dispose
of solid wastes, are too small to afford to do much more than dump wastes
in the open or burn them in the open or in primitive equipment.

The Solid Waste Disposal Act

There are reasons for optimism for the long-term outlook for effective solid
waste management. One of the most important reasons is that, for the first
time, we have a Federal commitment to support and assist in a coordinated
national effort to solve solid waste problems. This commitment is embodied
in Title II of Public Law 89-272, The Solid Waste Disposal Act. On
October 20, 1965, the President signed the Act into Law.

The Act directs the Secretary of the Interior to aid in solving solid waste
problems resulting from extracting, processing or using minerals or fossil
fuels. All other responsibilities under the Act are assigned to the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare. On December 3, 1965, the Surgeon
General of the Public Health Service established an organizational entity
which is now designated as the Solid Wastes Program of the National Center
.for Urban and Industrial Health to carry out the HEW provisions of the
Act, which are : ". . . ( 1) to initiate and accelerate a national research and
development program for new and improved methods of proper and eco-
nomic solid waste disposal, including studies directed toward the conserva-
tion of natural resources by reducing the amount of waste and unsalvageable
materials and by recovery and utilization of potential resources in solid
wastes; and (2) to provide technical and financial assistance to State and
local governments and interstate agencies in the planning, development, and
conduct of solid wastes disposal programs."

The Act authorizes specific action in six areas of need: ( 1) grant support
for local and State projects to demonstrate new and improved waste disposal
technology; (2) grant support for the development of area-wide solid waste
management systems to end fragmentation of responsibilities among small
communities; (3) grant support for State surveys of solid waste handling
needs and the development of Statewide plans for meeting needs; (4) re-
search, both direct and grant-supported, to establish the basis for new ap-
proaches to solid waste handling; (5) training programs, both direct and
grant-supported, to alleviate critical shortages of trained personnel; (6)
technical assistance to local and State governments with solid waste problems.


Panel C                  ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE                   157

Clearly, the Act casts the Federal government in the role of supporting
partner with local and State agencies in solving solid waste problems. Pri-
mary responsibility for solid waste handling and for carrying out programs
for improved practices remains at the local and State levels.

Assistance Provided by the Solid Wastes Program

During the 19 months of existence of the Solid Wastes Program of the
Public Health Service, and in the context of the purposes and specific actions
authorized by the Solid Waste Disposal Act, much progress has been made,
but much more remains to be accomplished.

The Solid Wastes Program, operating with a budget of about $12 million
during F.Y. 1967, has emphasized fundamental approaches to the solution
of solid waste problems. This is exemplified by the many communities which
are attacking the basis of their disposal problems in projects, aided by
Federal grants, to replace uneconomic and insanitary small community
operations with area or regional waste management systems. Such systems
will make it possible for communities cooperatively to avail themselves of
the health-safeguarding techriology and economies inherent in large-scale
disposal operations. The projects would merge operations now being con-
ductcd individually by many - in one case, more than 50 - communities.

Demonstration Projects

Projects receiving grants to demonstrate new and improved disposal
technology also are oriented toward basic solutions of the solid waste prob-
km, such as demonstrating constructive uses for wastes. The use of wastes
in reclaiming worthless land, for example, is to be demonstrated in a number
of projects. One of these will show that wastes can be compacted to as
little as one-tenth their original volume as they are being deposited in a
sanitary landfill. Another project is to demonstrate long-distance rail trans-
portation of wastes to abandoned strip mines and other land needing recla-
mation. Economic recovery of incineration heat to desalinate or purify
water or generate power is to be established by several projects. To date
approsimately $7 million in grant funds have been or are in the process
of being awarded for the support of 50 demonstration and study and in-
\.estigation projects which are active across the nation.

In the Metropolitan Washington area a study and investigation project
has been recently completed covering special studies leading to the design
of Incinerator No. 5 for the District of Columbia. The total project cost
was $94,000 of which $62,000 in grant funds were awarded by the Solid


158

VAUGHAN             Proceedings

Wastes Program. Presently, a study and investigation project covering the
design of Incinerator No. 5 of the District of Columbia is active. This
project will have a total cost of $390,000 of which $260,000 will be provided
by a Solid Wastes Program grant.

Demonstration grants are awarded primarily to test the economic and
technical feasibility of proposed methods. Study and investigation grants
are awarded for the study of solid waste handling problems and practices.
Work under this second category of grants leads to the demonstration of
improved waste handling practices or may provide solutions for regional
solid waste management problems. Up to two-thirds of the total cost of
projects may be financed by Federal funds.

Recent administrative action resulted in the removal of a limitation on
the amount-of demonstration project funds that could be awarded to any
one State. There is now no restriction, other than the budget of course, of
funds to any one State for demonstration and study and investigation
projects.
        State Survey and Planning Projects

States across the country are surveying their solid waste needs and de-
veloping disposal programs with 50 percent of the costs provided by Solid
Wastes Program grants. In many instances, this work has never been done
before on a Statewide basis. Regional and even interstate systems are ex-
pected to be developed through this activity.

Planning grants are awarded to State and interstate agencies which have
been designated or established as the sole agencies responsible for such State
or interstate planning. The more important objectives of this type of grant
include the enactment and strengthening of legislation, a data collection
system to pinpoint solid waste problems and devise means of dealing with
them, and the setting and enforcement of standards for the design and
operation of solid waste management facilities and equipment. To date
approximately $1.5 million in grant funds have been awarded for the sup-
port of 32 State survey and planning projects. The State health agencies
in Maryland and Virginia both have active survey and planning projects.
Recent administrative action also resulted in the removal of a limitation
on the amount of survey and planning project funds that could be awarded
to any one State.

Research Projects

Research projects supported by Solid Wastes Program grants are aimed
at sdch basic solutions as the reduction of wastes at the source or their con-


panel C                  ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE                  159

\.ersion into marketable products. One project, for example, seeks knowl-
edge which would lead to the reduction of food wastes through the develop-
ment of spoilage-resistant fruits and vegetables. Another is studying the
conversion of wastes from citrus fruit processing into citrid acid. The trans-
formation of cottage cheese and tomato wastes into human and animal
foods is the objective of another project.  Several researchers seek to con-
vert wastes into marketable carbon and chemicals. A number of new routes
to incinerator heat recovery are being explored. One project is studying
gassification of wastes to produce fuel for power generation. Over $2 million
has been committed for grant-supported research in the 19 months since
the Solid Wastes Program was established. Thirty-nine research projects are
now active under grants awarded by the Program.

The Solid Wastes Program is developing a research capability of its own
in facilities at Cincinnati. Arrangements have been completed for the con-
struction in Cincinnati of the first field laboratory for general research on
solid waste pollution abatement.

Training

The Solid Wastes Program %.ponsors or conducts training for all types of
solid waste personnel. Shortages of technical personnel are being alleviated
through grants to institutions of higher education to train graduate students
in engineering and science. Operating and administrative personnel are
being trained in courses conducted by the Program,

Training grants are awarded to institutions of higher education to estab-
lish and/or expand graduate training programs in solid waste technology
and management. I might point out that very few graduate school candi-
dates in the environmental health disciplines in the past have elected to do
graduate work in the solid waste field because of the tendency of the engi-
ncering profession as well as public officials to give solid waste programs low
priorities. It is believed that, through financial help to universities for en-
larging solid waste educational programs and by assisting graduate students,
the critical need for qualified personnel will be eased.
To date nearly $0.5 million have been awarded for solid waste training to
the following institutions of higher education: Drexel Institute of Tech-
nology; University of Florida; Georgia Institute of Technology; University
of Kansas; University of Michigan; Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Uni-
versity of Texas; and the University of West Virginia.

              Technical Assistance
Engineers and scientists of the Solid Wastes Program are developing


160                         VAUGHAN

Proceedings

technical assistance capabilities as provided for by the Act for both public
and private agencies. Members of the staff work on such tasks as the develop-
ment of disposal performance criteria. These will form a basis for estab-
lishing performance standards and will be helpful to industry in designing
equipment and techniques for meeting such standards.

An example of the technical assistance available is the study of the four
District of Columbia incinerators which was made during the week of April
2, 1967, at the request of Senator Tydings of Maryland. A full report of
the study was transmitted to Senator Tydings in June.

The Future

Not only is refuse increasing in volume, its characteristics are also changing
rapidly. And the problems will unquestionably become more severe. The
165 million tons of solid waste polluting the air and discarded and spread
over the nation's landscape in 1966 will increase to 260 million tons in a
decade. Wastes which heretofore have been of a degradable organic nature
have become mainly nondegradable inorganic material.

The Task Force on Environmental Health and Related Problems in their
recently published report to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare entitled A Strategy for a Livable Environment clearly identified future
needs in waste disposal as follows:  "Basic research into the health effects of
waste and waste disposal techniques; the study of wastes as an element of
disruption in the ecology of natural systems; a stepped-up research effort to
secure breakthroughs in the reuse and disposal of solid, liquid, and gaseous
wastes; a greater public awareness of its role and responsibility in curbing
waste; a grant-in-aid program to assist State and local governments and
private industry in establishing and maintaining adequate waste disposal
systems; achievement of reduced levels of waste through improved packag-
ing methods." l

Of a more specific nature are two identical bills which were introduced
in the Senate on April 27 by Senator Muskie of Maine (s. 1646) and
in the House of Representatives on April 28 by Representative Ryan of
New York ( H.R. 9477). The proposed legislation would amend the Solid
Waste Disposal Act to provide for the construction of solid waste disposal
facilities and for other purposes. Hearings have not been scheduled for
either of the bills.

`The Task Force on Environmental Health and Related Problems. A rlruregy for
a livable environment; G report to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. p. 16.


Panel C                  ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE                  161

Comlusion

Imagination and innovation are being manifested in action to solve the
solid waste problem. It is clear, however, that the problem is of such in-
creasing magnitude as to demand long-term application of the utmost in
imaginative thinking and willingness to venture away from conventional
approaches and develop new and improved methods for solid waste hand-
ling. The problems we are facing are more than those of technology and
economics. They involve the American attitude toward wastes, which is
one that generates a vast public disinterest in the proper management of
tvastes. As Dr. Stewart mentioned earlier the citizenry appears to be inter-
ested in solving their solid waste problem but only if the disposal site is
located in someone else's backyard far, far away. This attitude is under-
standable if one correlates it with the opinion of Mr. John Q. Public of
what solid waste management is or should be. In far too many cases the
term solid waste disposal in the mind of the average citizen is associated
with burning and smelly dumps or antiquated incinerators belching forth
black and odorous smoke in gigantic quantities. Both images are not only
insults to man's environment but are unnecessary. Solid waste disposal
should be associated in the public's mind with immaculate operation, with
the reclamation of land and other resources, with the development of parks
and recreational areas, and with the beautification and improvement of
the community. People must realize that proper solid waste management
can result in an asset for their municipality not a liability. The complex
technology of today's complex world has created solid waste problems which
must be met straightforwardly and effectively by the professionals in this
held with the full support of an enlightened and positive thinking citizenry.
On the other hand to be content with the status quo - or to put it another
way to be satisfied with yesterday's solution to today's and tomorrow's prob-
lems will most certainly lead to disaster for the community and the nation.

Much unfavorable publicity during recent months has resulted from
the operation of the disposal site in the Washington metropolitan area
known as the Kenilworth Dump. Such notoriety has certainly not been
of value in associating in the minds of the populace what proper solid waste
management should be. The Solid Wastes Program would welcome a pro-
posal in the form of a demonstration grant application which would result
in the replacement of the present Kenilworth Dump with a model sanitary
landfill operation and land reclamation project resulting in the development
of an architecturally pleasing recreation site as well as the immediate cessa-
tion of burning. This, I believe, would `demonstrate to a large segment of


162                         VAUGHAN

Proceedings

the population, the transformation of a civic shame into something of which
the entire metropolitan area can be proud.

If any area-wide approach to solid waste management and utilization of
these wastes is to be successful, public attitudes must be improved. This
conference is one large step in that direction. I hope that this conference
will focus regional attention on solid waste management and the Metro-
politan Washington area and tools available for solving the problems.

The Solid Wastes Program would welcome a proposal for the design and
demonstration of a modern, efficient and safe solid waste management
system for the Metropolitan Washington area. A proposal could be sub-
mitted by a body representative of the area, such as the Metropolitan Wash-
ington Council of Governments. Such a project would be eligible for up
to two-thirds grant support as authorized by the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

The Public Health Service believes that through the Federal government's
partnership with industry, State and local agencies, the challenge of solving
one of the nation's more vexing environmental health problems - pollution-
free disposal and utilization of solid wastes - will be achieved.


OPEN DISCUSSION: PANEL C

Walter A. Scheiber,", Panel Chairman

MR. J. H. MCCALL?:  Mr. Reid, please define the data.developed by your
consulting engineers for the financing of your regional plan in the Detroit

area.

MR. REID:  The firm we employed was Consoer, Townsend and As-
sociates. Let me just read from my report. I brought this along to fortify
myself since I'm not an engineer. I have instructions to say this is out of
llrint. It was put out in 1964 and we've had almost as big a demand for
it from outside the Detroit region as we've had in the region. If you're
I'rorn around this area, I know there are three or four copies in various
counties, regional and city offices around here, that you might refer to. In
this report, we have tables of various types of financial data gathered. In
order to arrive at costs, it was necessary to set up schedules of collection
truck arrivals, number and size of unloading hoppers needed, size of trans-
fer buildings, size of scale house, amount of railroad siding, number of load-
ing ramps, amount of paved areas, number of lights in area, acreage required
for loading stations and so forth. In the several tables we made for our two
alternative plans, we cover such finance costs as transfer buildings, scale
house and scales, railroad loading, vehicle storage, maintenance garage,
paving, truck fueling items, exterior lighting, land acquisition, compactor
trailers, fodder trailers, road tractors, service trucks, and so on. These
specifications were also developed for the major sites recommended as re-
gional disposal sites, and for the trucks and equipment needed to carry on
those operations.

MR. MCCALL :  Mr. Reid, that is not the answer we were looking for.
We're interested in the financing of the two alternative plans. Not in the
l&c cost saving and development thereof, but we're interested in how your
engineers were recommending that these plans be financed.

MR. REID:  Since we do not have an operating agency in the region
Aat can implement this plan, it goes back to the counties through our
suljervisors intercounty committee for their first consideration. We just
don't have any basis for saying any more than we ought to have a metro-
Plitan service agency to carry on this operation and develop the cost. In

* Executive Director, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Wash-
ington, D.C.
t lames H. McCall, Goodbody and Company, Chicago, Illinois.

163


164                          PANEL C

Proceedings

general the operating cost would be paid by the cost per ton of refuse
delivered at the various points or at the disposal sites by the companies
involved. The initial cost I presume would have to be raised either by a
bonding or by a capital financing program. That's the best answer I can
give to it. We are pushing for the creation of an agency capable of doing
this.

MR. S. PROFILET*:  Do you anticipate that the Program of Solid Wastes
will generate any public information material aimed at increasing public
acceptance of solid waste disposal practices as the practices ideally should
be pursued?

MR. VAUGHAN:  Yes. This will be accomplished through several mechan-
isms, - through publicity connected with the demonstration grants and
through straight public information which is aimed toward the house-
wife or the fellow next door. Wide distribution will be made of this material,
through the Center office of public information, National Center of Urban
and Industrial Health.

MR. W. SULLIVAN+:  Are there any direct aids to industry under the
Solid Waste Disposal Act to perform research and development on solid
waste treatment?

MR. VAUGHAN :  There are no direct aids as far as the grants are con-
cerned. However, we do work a great deal with industry through the
contract mechanism.

MR. SULLIVAN :  How about money being used as state government aid
then given to industry for work for the state government as a grant?

MR. VAUGHAN :  The money that is given to the state government for
state planning grants, the state could in turn use a portion of (these funds)
for consultant purposes.
MR. HENRY EPPES~:  Does the Metropolitan Toronto area include any
unincorporated area?

MR. Ross L. CLARK: The answer is no. Metropolitan Toronto as we
said comprises six municipalities, one core city and five boroughs. It also
has surrounding it, and included in the Metropolitan Planning area, five
townships. Each of these townships is quite extensive in size, but under the
provincial statutes each is incorporated.

* Stephen B. Profilet, Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, Hyattsville,
Maryland.
t William E. Sullivan, Electronic Associates, Inc., Rockville, Maryland.
$ M. Henry Eppes, Maryland Technical Advisory Service, University of Maryland.


Second Session               OPEN DISCUSSION

165

Going back to the question of Mr. Reid. We finance operation of our
refuse disposal system now, simply by presenting a budget for the year at
the Metro-Council level. This year, it will be $4 million. Capital cost
payments are also added to the metro-levy. This total levy is then prorated
against each member municipality in relation to its assessment over the
c
whole assessment of the metro area.

&'f~. E. F. MENKE":  The question is `In the greater Metropolitan Area,
\vould it require a new agency for solid waste disposal or would the existing
structure of the Metropolitan Washington government suffice?'

MR. SCHEIBER:  The Council of Governments is a voluntary association
assisting major local governments in the Metropolitan Area including the
District and 14 suburban governments. It does not have the kind of legal
standing in our opinion which would suffice to make it adequate for the
kind of solid waste disposal programs which we've discussed during this
t\vo-day conference. Mr. Mields suggested this morning that in all likelihood
it would be necessary to negotiate and enact an interstate compact. This
would create an organization with legal power, such as the power to con-
demn land, the power to borrow money by bond issue and other similar
powers which are generally thought to be necessary in order to develop a
viable solid waste disposal program. COG at the present time does not
have such powers and we do not envisage that we will receive them in a
general way in the foreseeable future. Therefore, I think those of us on the
coo staff generally would subscribe to the suggestions made by Mr. Mields
during the previous statement.

MR. 0. SUTERMEISTER~:  I have two short questions. The first is about
-Mr. Clark's comment on the new section of the Public Health Act governing
landfill site use.

MR. CLARK:  Perhaps, when I was quoting the Public Health Act in
talking about the finished site, I didn't finish my statement. There shall be
no utilization of a finished landfill site for a period of 25 years unless a
specific proposal is put forward and is accepted by the Provincial Depart-
ment of Health. For instance, we don't like to see any buildings or struc-
tures put on top of a finished landfill site. But a new approach to develop-
ment is to put buildings on piles to keep two or three floors clear and open
for parking with no basement boiler rooms. Boiler rooms, of course, are

* Eric F. Menke, Washington Citizens for Clear Air, Washington, D.C.
t Oscar Sutermeister, U.S. Public Health Service, Washington, D.C.


166                         PANEL C

ProceedingJ

starting to appear on the top part of some of our buildings rather than the
basement.

MR. SUTERMEISTER:  Where does the authority to approve the future
use lie?

MR. CLARK:  With the province of Ontario under the new Public
Health Act.

MR. SUTERMEISTER :  Not with the metro area?

MR: CLARK:  We must conform with provincial requirements.

COMMENT:  This is not a direct question, but I'm afraid that some of
those who are here might be under the impression that there are no properly
operated sanitary landfill? in the Metropolitan Washington area. There is
one old sanitary landfill in Fairfax County, in the Bailey's Crossroads area,
which is now the center of a very concentrated commercial area. We did
have some probIems with construction here (methane). We had to do some
mucking out, which was not the most pleasant thing in the world. It was
concentrated under one large high-rise type building. We have another
sanitary landfill, which was closed down about three years ago. It's in the
grand process of being converted into a recreational area. We have a police
rifle range and training center there. We have a currently operated sanitary
landfill. It is not without problems and we do have the usual citizen opposi-
tion that everyone has mentioned in the location of landfills.

MR. SUTERMEISTER:  Mr. Clark showed slides of a watercourse in a
completed landfill. The watercourse seemed to me as a mere channel of
concrete. A landscape architect in designing the plan for recreational usage
might have some objections to this type of structure. Is there any alternative
to such structures?

MR. CLARK:  Actually, if you noticed on the left side of that slide there
was rubble stonework laid in concrete. That was all done in ground aesthetic
color to blend in with the park approach of using natural wood and things
like this. In the other part it was like concrete and eventually it will be lined
on top in brown stone to blend in much more naturally. There are twenty-
two feet of refuse underneath that area. We did have to carry the water-
course through in concrete because this is part of our water pollution control
program. We don't want the old watercourse seeping down through the
refuse and then leaching through underneath into the adjacent river.


LUNCHEON ADDRESS

William B. Spong, Jr.*

I AM VERY PLEASED to be here with you. I assure you that as slowly as I
speak, I won't speak very long; I will speak rather informally to you. I will
talk a little about air pollution, which of course is related to solid wastes
disposal.

I commend this subject as a dinner conversation piece for you. When I
was first married, my wife used to take me off to dinner parties and I would
find myself seated with nice ladies with whom I couldn't possibly find any-
thing to talk about. When I returned home, I would say, "Well, Virginia,
1 did the best I could; I just couldn't seem to strike up any conversation
that we had a mutual interest in." She said, "Well, I'll tell you; I learned
a long time ago that the one thing you can talk about is termites - every-
body has had some experience with termites; it's amazing - you can just
sit there and the evening will be cool and you just say something about
termites and you will just be amazed - everybody knows something about
termites." And so I tried this for 15 or 16 years. Since I have been in the
Senate of the United States, which is now just under seven months, I have
found that air pollution works almost as well as termites - everyone has
some opinion about it, the cause of it, the cure of it; everyone has had
some experience with it, and therefore I commend to you on any evening
when the conversation is pretty dull as far as you are concerned, just (you
don't have to talk about the Kenilworth Dump) - just talk about air
pollution, and you will be amazed to see what opinions and reactions that
it brings forth.

The day before yesterday, the Senate, by a vote of 88 to 0, passed the
Air Quality Act of 1967. The bill as passed was far different from the bill
initially introduced and recommended by the Administration. I think that
Senator Muskie, who was the chief patron of the bill, and the chairman of
the subcommittee, should be commended for getting the bill through the
Senate in the manner that he did. What the House will do with the bill
remains to be seen.

I thought that for 10 or 12 minutes, I would review informally the prin-
ciple thrust of the Bill in its present form. This will allow you to become

* United States Senator from Virginia.

167


168

SPONG             Proceedings

acquainted with what the Congress - or at least the Senate - is trying
to do insofar as Federal participation in attacking the problem of air pllu-
tion is concerned. I think one of the foremost provisions is money for re-
search. We know, of course, that the burning of low-grade fuel is one of
the chief causes of the pollutants in the air that have been adjudged most
harmful to individuals. And we know that a great deal of meaningful re-
search is already being done. We visited Riverside at the University of
California, and saw what they are doing in terms of the effects of air
pollution on plant life and the effects on animal life. We know that a great
deal can be done insofar as low-grade fuel burning is, concerned. Much is
being done in many other parts of the world that should be helpful to us
in attacking this cause of air pollution. I will talk now about what the
Bill provides insofar as motor vehicles are concerned. Many States do not
have mandatory inspection of automobiles; they have spot checks in Cali-
fornia to determine if the anti-pollution equipment, which must be installed
in every automobile beginning next year, is continuing to function properly;
they can spot check it. They can stop the car and check to see if the equip-
ment is in the car, and if it is connected. They cannot determine (unless
they test the vehicle) whether the equipment actually is functioning properly
and whether that equipment and the other equipment in the automobile is
being properly maintained. I would hope that the research funds will pro-
duce not only economic hardware which can be installed in every auto-
mobile, but also testing equipment which will make it easier and cheaper
to follow up a spot check or used as part of a mandatory inspection.

The greatest problem in our deliberations on the Air Quality Act of 1967
was determining how standards would be determined. We in the United
States are free and independent and we don't want somebody from Wash-
ington, regardless of how attractive and personable he may be, sniffing at
every smokestack in the United States to find out what's going on. It was
decided that the best thing to do was to allow the states to determine the
minimum standards that they wanted enacted in this field.

The principle thing that this bill provides insofar as the role of the Federal
government is concerned is the research that HEW can do to inform people
throughout the United States about the problems, dangers and types of air
pollution, and about the regions in the United States where the greatest
problems exist. Then, within a period of a year to fifteen months, the indi-
vidual States can enact minimum standards of their own.

.The only field that the Federal government has pre-empted for the setting
of emission standards is the area of motor vehicle pollution. The one excep-


Poe1 C                   LUNCHEON ADDRESS                   169

tion to this is the State of California, which has had its own standards for

two years. But each State will have a reasonable period of time in which
to enact minimum standards. I am hopeful that each and every one - the
States of Maryland and Virginia have both moved forward in this direction
already - will adopt their own standards and come in under this Act.

Insofar as automobiles are concerned, it's impractical not to have national

standards. If we allowed each individual State to set its own emission
standards for motor vehicles, then the manufacturers of motor vehicles would
have to manufacture different hardware for the different localities in which
their automobiles are operated. The cost of this would certainly be passed
on to the automobile purchaser, and I think it is completely unrealistic not
to approach the problem of motor vehicle air pollution from the basis of
national standards.

In this particular area, regardless of the Kenilworth Dump, the motor
vehicle remains the greatest, problem. Here in Washington we have the
heaviest concentration of automobiles I believe of any metropolitan area in
the United States. In Los Angeles, where they pride themselves about the
number of automobiles they have, they were very surprised when we advised
them that there are more automobiles per capita here in the Washington
Metropolitan area than in Los Angeles County or in the immediate Los
Angeles area.

NOW, the Secretary of HEW will. set forth regional airsheds. He will
designate the regions where air pollution is a problem, and certainly Metro-
politan Washington is a region that will be designated. There will be hear-
ings on Senator Tydings' bill this afternoon. It seeks to set up a control
board for the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. All three of
these political subdivisions will be in a position to work together within a
designated region to attack this problem.

The first stage, an inventory of the potential causes of air pollution, has
already been underway in the District of Columbia for some time. In Los
Angeles County they say that the only problem that they have in air pollu-
tion is the result of the motor vehicle. They say they have inventoried,
identified, cataloged and done everything necessary to control 90 to 95
percent of the air pollution from stationary sources in the Los Angeles area.
They have secured convictions in 90 percent of the cases initiated and they
say that stationary sources of air pollution, unlike most metropolitan areas,
are the least of their worries and problems. The four main things that the
Air Quailty Act of 1967 seeks to do is: ( 1) to provide research immediately


170

SPONG             Proceedings

in this area; (2) to encourage the States and the localities within the States
to adopt standards that will enable that particular region or that State to
combat air pollution in its own way, but which will meet minimum require-
ments; (3) to encourage States, through grants, to provide for inspection
of automobiles to determine that the equipment installed in the automobile
and required under previous legislation is operating to combat air pollution;
and (4) to set up regional air-sheds. If there is an emergency, such as
happened at Donora, Pennsylvania, or last Thanksgiving in New York City,
and a locality and a State have not set up sufficient legislation and admin-
istration to meet that problem, then the Federal government can move in
immediately.

I think there should be some exploration in the field of tax incentives
to encourage industries to install equipment to combat the problem, and I
think that Congress will be considering this in the near future.

The thing that has impressed me about the Bill the Senate passed unani-
mously day before yesterday is that it follows in many respects the pattern
set in the Clean Water Act. It enables the States and the localities to take
the initiative without pre-empting very much from them. It provides scien-
tific and technical data to the localities and to the States.

Now, we have, both in the House and in the Senate, a Solid Wastes
Disposal Bill which I predict ultimately will follow this same pattern. The
pattern recognizes the necessity for local and State initiative, for local, State
and Federal cooperation, and for regional planning.

We are mindful that America is becoming rapidly urbanized. I live in
the southernmost part of one great urban complex, which extends from
north of Boston down into Virginia. I live in Hampton Roads, the southem-
most portion of that complex. And whether we are talking about solid wastes
disposal, mass transit, air pollution, or planning or zoning or noise abatement,
we are coming to realize that an entire new concept of the environment Of
the individual of tomorrow is going to take place. It will require the utmost
cooperation between the various experts in these fields, because they all
relate to each other whether they be engineers or architects or planners, or
health officers. They must see a total concept in which we begin to under-
stand and deal with all of these things at one time. We have also come to
realize that man is not on an island. The District of Columbia can't proceed
with solid wastes disposal plans or with air pollution plans unless those in the
neighboring communities in Maryland and in Virginia are planning and
working with them on this problem.


Panel C                   LUNCHEON ADDRESS                   171

I think the most meaningful thmg about the legislation I have discussed
is that it sets a pattern which is consistent with the American concept and
yet recognizes the role that the Federal government must play. It demands
initiative by the States if the problems are to be met, and it encourages
regional planning and regional cooperation. As a Virginia Senator I have
had a great deal of fun in the last four or five months advising my con-
stituents in Richmond that whether they know it or not they are polluting
the District of Columbia; they don't always take that too kindly, but it's
true - depending on the prevailing winds, we are either doing damage to
Baltimore or Richmond or they are doing damage to us here in the District
of Columbia.

1 commend you upon this conference ; I believe Senator Tydings' legis-
lation for the District in this area will pass. I know that the Solid Wastes
Disposal Bills are going to have full hearings. But the success of any of these
undertakings in the world in which we live today demands the cooperation
and the planning of many people in many different walks of life and of
many, many political subdivisions.

283-399 O-67-12


  SUMMARY OF PANEL A
PRESENT PRACTICES AND NEEDS
IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA

Achilles M. Tuchtan, Panel Chairman

k1.i~. SV.ORE, LADIES, AND GENTLEMEN:  Yesterday afternoon in the Panel
on Present Practices and Needs in the Metropolitan Area we had the op-
portunity to hear six well-qualified speakers, who have had broad experience
\vith the problem, discuss individual aspects of the solid waste problem in
the metropolitan area.

I\fr. Bremser, whose firm has studied the problem for the Northern
Virginia Regional Planning Commission, the Maryland National Capital
Park and Planning Commission, and the Metropolitan Washington Council
of Governments, told us of the quantities of waste now being produced in
the area, and of the means used to dispose of that waste. He estimated the
quantities of waste that will be produced in the future, and told us some-
thing of what will be required to dispose of that waste.
Dr. Middleton discussed the present relationship between solid waste dis-
posal and air pollution.  Mr. Binnewies and Mr. Eastman told US of the
prohlcms and accomplishments of the Federal Government in disposing of
the solid wastes that arise as the result of Federal government activities in
the metropolitan area.

Mr. William Vogely analyzed for us some of the asthetic aspects of the
problem of removing junk automobiles from the streets and vacant lots of
the region and returning them to the channel of available natural resources.

Mr. Bosley, recognizing the fact that many persons have realized that solid
wastes disposal is now becoming a regional problem, discussed some of the
legislative measures that will be necessary to bring about a regional solution
to the problem,

Mr. Vogely's remarks on the magnitude of the junk automobile problem
were truly enlightening. It appears that the rate of recycling of scrap metal
from junked automobiles just about equals the rate at which cars are being
abandoned, so that a large backlog of abandoned vehicles continues to re-
main almost untouched. If the entire supply of junk automobiles is to be
removed from our communities, Mr. Vogely recommended that automotive
scrap be given competitive advantage over other types of scrap. I might
add here that the Council of Governments has begun to seek a solution to

173


174

SUMMARY OF PANEL A          Proceedings

the problem in the metropolitan area, and has requested assistance from the
Bureau of Mines in obtaining some of the specific information it must
have if a sound policy is to be developed.

There is no question, however, that the major solid wastes disposal
problem in the metropolitan area at present is the disposal of ordinary
residential and commercial refuse. Refuse production for the entire region
in 1965 was estimated at 1.3 million tons of incinerable refuse and 0.5
million tons of nonincinerable refuse. Mr. Bremser estimated that by the
year 2000 the region would be producing 4.5 million tons of incinerable
refuse and 1.6 million tons of nonincinerable refuse.
                                            <

Nearly one half of that waste arises in the District of Columbia and much
of that half comes from Federal installations. Mr. Eastman of the General
Services Administration told us of the extensive problems, and of the monu-
mental accomplishments, of his agency in dealing with the wastes collected
from 55 million square feet of office space in 1,300 separate buildings. Wastes
are segregated, and sold wherever possible. Ingenious solutions have been
provided for the specialized problems presented by classified documents,
flourescent light tubes, and medical supplies, but much of the Federal solid
wastes still find their way into the normal municipal solid waste disposal
channels. These wastes include the nonsaleable wastes from the General
Services Administration, Blong with the over 300,000 cans of trash which
Mr. Binnewies reported were collected in the National Parks of the region
last year.

Mr. Bremser described the present manner of the disposing of solid wastes
within the region. Three methods are used for waste disposal: incineration,
sanitary landfilling, and open burning.

Because of the lack of landfill space, Arlington County, Montgomery
County, the City of Alexandria, and the District of Columbia use incinera-
tion to reduce the volume of solid waste prior to final disposal. Alexandria
and the District of Columbia are also required to use open dumps to dispose
of wastes which cannot be processed in their existing incinerators. Sanitary
landfilling is employed in Prince Georges, Charles, Fairfax, and Prince
William counties.

Because it has been necessary to rely on open burning to dispose of those
wastes which exceed incineration and landfill capacity, the solid waste dis-
posal problem has also become an air pollution problem.

Dr: Middleton noted that almost 900,000 tons of refuse are burned
annually in municipal and private incinerators and that approximately


Third Session    PRESENT PRACTICES AND NEEDS IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA

175

160,000 tons of refuse are burned in open dumps, mostly at the Kenilworth
Dump. He declared that efforts to reduce air pollution from refuse disposal
can at present most profitably be concentrated in the District of Columbia.
He stated that closing of the archaic Kenilworth Dump is an essential
first step. In order to close down the Kenilworth Dump as well as other
open burning in the region, it is necessary that alternate facilities be provided.

Mr. Bremser stated unequivocably that land for landfills and incinerator
plants is the greatest present and future refuse disposal need of the Wash-
ington metropolitan region. He noted that the region does not have the
natural conditions which make sanitary landfilling the ideal refuse disposal
method that it is for some other large urban areas. Geological and hydro-
logical conditions in the northern half of the region are generally unfavorable
for sanitary landfill; conditions are more favorable in the costal plains region
of the southern half of the area but that transportation costs to the region
would be high.

Mr. Bremser concluded that more incinerator plants will be needed in
the future.

Dr. Middleton, on the contrary, expressed the belief that the best solution
to the problem is to stop all burning of refuse. However, he recognized that
the Washington area must eventually run out of suitable space for land-
filling. In view of this, he suggested that incinerators in each building be
dispensed with. He suggested that if wastes must be burned they should be
burned in modem, well-operated municipal incinerators equipped with the
best available air pollution control devices. Both Mr. Bremser and Dr.
Middleton agreed that effective solution of the solid waste problem, ac-
companied by the elimination of air pollution, will require extensive cooper-
ation among the individual jurisdictions concerned.

Mr. Bosley described some of the mechanisms by which such cooperation
could be established. He noted that the District of Columbia had already
requested the Council of Governments to investigate a means of establishing
a regional solid waste disposal program. As a result he had determined that,
as an interim mechanism, it would be possible to create a nonprofit corpora-
tion to undertake the disposal of solid wastes. However, such a corporation
would have neither the power of eminent domain nor the ability to obtain
kg-range financing. As a result, it could not engage in long-term landfill
or incinerator operations.

An alternative to the nonprofit corporation would be the establishment
of a metropolitan authority under interstate compact. Mr. Bosley expressed