Exhibit 2
Calendar No. 1214

91ST CONGRESS I { REPORT

2d Session f SENATE 1 1196

NATIONAL AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

ACT OF 1970

REPORT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS

UNITED STATES SENATE

5-311 0

TOGETHER WITH

INDIVIDUAL VIEWS

TO ACCOMPANY

S. 4358

SEPTEMBER 17, 1970.-Ordered to be printed

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1970
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS

JENNINGS RANDOLPH, West Virginia, Chairman

STEPHEN M. YOUNG, Ohio JOHN SHERMAN COOPER, Kentucky

EDMUND S. MUSKIE, Maine J. CALEB BOGOS, Dlware

B. EVERETT JORDAN, North Carolina HOWARD H. BAKER, JR., Tennessee

BIRCH BAYH, Indiana ROBERT J. DOLE, Kansas

JOSEPH M. MONTOYA, New Menico EDWARD J. GURNEY, Florida

WILLIAM B. SPONG, JR., Virginia ROBERT W. PACKWOOD, Oregon

THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Missouri

MIKE GRAVEL, Alaska

RICHARD B. ROYcE, Chief Clerk and Stag Diiedor

J. B. Huye, Jr., Aeistat Chief Clerk and Assistant Staf Dieor

BARRY MEYER, Counsel

BAILEy GUAR, Aeeitaln Chief Clerk (Minority)

TOM C. JoRLrNo, Minority Contel

Professional Stag Members: JOSEPH F. VAN VLDRicKEN, LEON 0. BILLINGS, RICHARD D. GROUND,

STEWART E. MCCLURE, ADeIEN WALLER, HAROLD H. BRAYMAN, RICHARD W. WILSON, JOHN YAO,

and PHILIP T. CummnmoS

(I)
CONTENTS

Fag. G general statem ent ------------------------------------------------ I H ea rin g s -------------------. -. -----------------------------. . . . . . 4 D iscussion of in tent ----------------------------------------------- 4 Research relating to fuels and vehicles -------------------------- 4 Grants for support of air pollution programs ------------ 5 Interstate air quality agencies ---------------------------------- 6 Research relating to air pollution effects -------------------------- 7 Air quality control regions -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - 8 Air quality criteria and control techniques.------------ 9 National air quality standards and goals -------------- 9 Im plem entation plans ------------------------------------------ 11 State standards and plans to achieve greater air quality control ------ 15 New source standards of performance.-------------- 15 National emission standards-selected air pollution agents ---------- 18

National emission standards-hazardous air pollution agents -------- 20 Federal enforcem ent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 21 Control of pollution from Federal facilities ------------- 23

Establishment of standards - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - - 23

Prohibited acts-Injunction proceedings-Penalties ------------ 28

Certification and production model testing ------------- 28

Motor vehicle and motor vehicle engine compliance testing --------- 29

S ta te g ra n ts ------- ------ ------ ---- -- -- ---- ------ ----- - 3 1

R ecords and reports ---------- --- .---- .--------- .........- 3 1

State standards - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 32

U sed v ehi cles ------ ---- - ----- ---- - ----- ----- ----- ----- 32

Registration and regulation of fuels and fuel additives ............... 33

Development of low-emission vehicles_--------------- 35

D efi n itio n s -- --- -- --- -- - -- ----- ---- -- --- ---- --- --- --- --- 3 5

A p p lica b ility ------- ------ ------ ------ --- --- ------ ----- - 35

E m ergency pow ers -------------------------------------------- 35

C itizen su its ---------------- ---- ----------- --------------- 36

A p p ea ra n ce --- ---- -- ---- ----- - --- --- - -- ---- ---- -- -- -- -- 3 9

Federal procurem ent -------------- ------------- ------------- 39

E m ployee protection -------------- ------------- ------------- 40

Ju dicial review --------- --------- -------- ----- ---- -------- 40

M andatory licensing ------ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 42

P olicy review --------- --------- --------- --------- -------- 4 3

A u th orization s --------------- --------------------------------- 44

N oise p ollu tion ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 4 5

Individual views: H on. R obert J. D ole ----- ---- ----- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- 47

H on. Edward J. G urney ------------------- ------------------- 50

Section-by-section analysis ------------------------------------- 52

C hanges in existing law --------------------------------------- 68

(IM)

Calendar No. 1214

91ST CONGRESS )SENATE REPORT

2d Session I No. 91-1196

NATIONAL AIR QUALITY STANDARDS ACT OF 1970

SEPTEMBER 17, 1970.-Ordered to be printed

Mr. BYRD of West Virginia (for Mr. MUsKIE, from the Committee

on Public Works, submitted the following

REPORT

together with

INDIVIDUAL VIEWS

[To accompany S. 4358]

The Committee on Public Works, to which the bill (S. 4358),

to amend the Clean Air Act as amended, was referred having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment.

An original bill (S. 4358) is reported in lieu of S. 3229, S. 3466, and

S. 3546 which were considered by the Committee.

GENERAL STATEMENT

The committee bill would restructure the methods available to

attack a critical and growing national problem of air pollution.

The legislation reported by the committee is the result of deep

concern for protection of the health of the American people. Air pollution is not only an aesthetic nuisance. The Committee's concern

with direct adverse effects upon public health has increased since the

publication of air quality criteria documents for five major pollutants

(oxides of sulfur, particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and

oxidants). These documents indicate that the air pollution problem is

more severe, more pervasive, and growing at a more rapid rate than

was generally believed.

The new information that carbon monoxide concentrations at levels

damaging to public health occur in Chicago more than 22 percent of

the time, and that other cities have similar problems with carbon

monoxide and other pollutants, intensified the committee's concern to

authorize a massive attack on air pollution. This bill is designed to

provide the basis for such an attack.
Although the nature of the attack will differ from region to region,

one objective will be the same: Air quality standards protective of the

health of persons must be achieved within the 3-year period of the

approval of plans to implement ambient air quality standards. The

right of States to set more stringent standards of air quality has been

preserved. Maintenance of existing high quality air is assured through

provision for maximum control of new major pollution sources.

The protection of public health-as required by the national

ambient air quality standards and as mandated by provision for

elimination of emissions of extremely hazardous pollution agentswill require major action throughout the Nation. Many facilities will

require major investments in new technology and new processes. Some

facilities will need altered operating procedures or a change of fuels.

Some facilities may be closed.

The requirements for State action will be broadened. And the obligation on polluters will be greatly increased. What has been a program

focused on uniquely critical areas, underfunded and inadequately

manned, will become truly national in scope and will require an immediate increase in personnel and funding.

Implementation of standards will require other changes in public

policy:

Land use policies must be developed to prevent location of

facilities which are not compatible with implementation of

national standards.

Transportation policies must be developed or improved to assure that the impact of pollution from existing moving sources

is reduced to the minimum compatible with the needs of each

region. Construction of urban highways and freeways may be

required to take second place to rapid and mass transit and other

public transportation systems. Central city use of motor vehicles

may have to be restricted.

Fuel policies must be developed to provide for use of clean

fuels in urban areas. Development of control technology for

fuel combustion byproducts must be accelerated. Greater use of natural gas for electric power generation may be required.

And, to the extent that low sulfur coal and oil are available,

they may be required for generating stations and home heating

units in critical areas. Fuel import policies may need to be

reevaluated.

If the Nation is to continue to depend on individual use motor vehicles, such vehicles must meet high standards. The bill recognizes

that a generation-or ten years' production-of motor vehicles will be

required to meet the proposed standards. During that time, as much as seventy-five percent of the traffic may have to be restricted in

certain large metropolitan areas if health standards are to be achieved

within the time required by this bill.

In the Committee discussions, considerable concern was expressed

regarding the use of the concept of technical feasibility as the basis of

ambient air standards. The Committee determined that 1) the health

of people is more important than the question of whether the early

achievement of ambient air quality standards protective of health is

technically feasible; and, 2) the growth of pollution load in many areas, even with application of available technology, would still be

deleterious to public health.
Therefore, the Committee determined that existing sources of pollutants either should meet the standard of the law or be closed down,

and in addition that new sources should be controlled to the maximum

extent possible to prevent atmospheric emissions.

The committee also was concerned that public participation, a unique feature of the Air Quality Act of 1967, should be preserved.

The national air quality standards concept should not restrict effective

citizen action. Not only does the bill assure an opportunity for a region to adopt standards more restrictive than the national standard,

but public hearings on implementation plans also must be held. More

importantly, the committee believes that public participation should

not be limited to the development of standards and plans. The proposed legislation emphasizes the need to accelerate enforcement action. To assure that Federal and State agencies aggressively

pursue their responsibilities and to supplement their capacities, the

bill provides a right of citizen action to seek enforcement of the

provisions of the act. Actions to abate violations of timetables, of

implementation schedules, of emission requirements, of performance

and emission standards and of prohibitions can be initiated by the

public.

The bill would provide other important tools to protect public health and to assure effective implementation of the purposes of the

Act. By providing authority to prohibit the emission of pollutants

which present a clear hazard to health, the bill shifts the burden of

proof to the polluter to identify safe emission levels.

Extensive research must be carried out to accelerate knowledge of

pollution effects and control methods. New motor vehicle engines

must represent substantial improvements over existing systems. The

sale of fuels which would hinder effective, economic emission control

systems can be prohibited. Under the provision which would require mandatory licensing of

pollution control techniques, technology (not otherwise available) that

is developed to control emissions from either moving sources on new or hazardous sources would be available to any polluter.

The extent of Federal involvement in the development and maintenance of air pollution control programs would be broadened. The

pace and degree of enforcement will be quickened.

The bill, for the first time, would establish a Federal capability to

evaluate the problems of environmental noise and requires legislative

recommendations to the Congress. While noise is not an "air pollutant" in the classic sense, it is a growing environmental problem which

is national in scope and requires intensified evaluation and greater

understanding. By authorizing the establishment of an Office of Noise

Abatement Control, the bill would provide the proposed Environmental Protection Agency with a capacity to deal with this growing

problem.

The committee emphasizes that the act, the deadlines proposed,

and the new programs authorized will be without meaning unless supplemental manpower (doubling present staffing of National Air Pollution Control Administration) and supplemental funding (an increase

of at least $44 million over the present budget request) are provided

in this fiscal year. Failure by the Executive Branch to request and Congress to approve

these needed increases will substantially impair implementation of this
legislation and make both the executive and legislative branches subject to charges of lack of commitment.

Within a short period, the pressures for additional staff and funds

will also be felt by the States. Should the States fail to respond to that

pressure, the deadlines established by the Act would require broader

Federal involvement in regional and State programs. In sum, this bill would extend the Clean Air Act of 1963 as amended

in 1965, 1966, and 1967 to provide a much more intensive and com- prehensive attack on air pollution. It would establish that the air is a public resource, and that those who would use that resource must

protect it from abuse, to assure the protection of the health of every American. HEARINGS

Following enactment of the Air Quality Act of 1967, the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution held 13 days of oversight hearings in 1968 and 1969 on the progress and problems associated with the

control of air pollution. The subjects covered included interstate air

pollution com pacts, air quality criteria, and a field hearing on air

pollution problems in St. Louis, Missouri. In addition, 2 days of joint hearings were held with the Senate Commerce Committee on alternatives to the internal combustion engine. On December 10, 1969, Senator Muskie introduced S. 3229, the Air

Quality Improvement Act and Senator Montoya introduced Amendment No. 501 on fuels regulation on February 18, 1970. The Administration bill, S. 3466, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970, was introduced by Senator Scott on February 18, 1970. Senator Muskie

introduced S. 3546, the National Air Quality Standards Act on March

4, 1970. Subsequently, 11 days of hearings were held in Washington, D.C. Three additional days of hearings were held in joint session with

the Commerce Committee on legislation related to low-emission

alternatives to the internal combustion engine (S. 3072). In total, the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution held 15

days of oversight hearings in 1968 and 1969, and 15 days of legislative hearings in 1970. DISCUSSION OF INTENT

SECTION 104. RESEARCH RELATING TO FUELS AND VEHICLES

The Air Quality Act of 1967 provided increased emphasis on re- search relating to fuels and vehicles. This provision included two

special features not contained in the general research authority of

section 103 of that act. First, appropriated funds were to remain available until expended, providing needed flexibility in the planning and

scheduling of research and development and demonstration projects. Second, a legal basis was established for supporting demonstration

projects involving the construction and installation of pollution con- trol equipment in profit making facilities in order to gain maximum

benefit from expertise in the practical application of technology. The amendments to section 104 contained in the bill, as reported, would provide increased emphasis on (1) fuel cleaning prior to com- bustion; (2) new and improved methods for combusting fuels which

result in decreased atmospheric emissions; (3) methods for producing synthetic or new fuels which have a lower combustion potential for
creating air pollution; and (4) increased efforts to develop and demonstrate alternatives to the internal combustion engine.

The legislation also would provide authority to make fleet purchases

of low emission vehicles for research, development, and testing purposes

which would involve purchase of 300 or more cars of a particular

design, subject to actual operation and testing. The National Air

Pollution Control Administration has developed a 6-year plan (fiscal

1970 to 1975) which contemplates expenditures of $89.1 million for

the development of low-emission alternatives to the internal combustion engine. This plan includes both the control of emissions from

conventional motor vehicles, and the development of unconventional

low pollution motor vehicles. New authority for purchase of cars for

research, development, and testing is intended primarily to facilitate

this program.

The current research and development effort for controlling emissions from stationary sources has emphasized flue gas treatment and

fuel cleaning (removal of contaminants from fuels before use). Increased emphasis should be placed on fuel cleaning as a method for

reducing atmospheric emissions.

The Committee also intends that increased emphasis be placed on

improving fuel combustion efficiencies. Although flue gas control

technology offers a potential for improvement, the long-term answers

may lie in magnetohydrodynamics, fuel cells and other energy con- version processes which emit less pollution per unit of fuel or per unit

of energy.

The Committee recognizes that variations in the choice of fuels

among different regions may offer a potential for reducing air pollution levels. However, fuels with a minimal adverse impact on the

environment-such as natural gas and low sulfur fuels-may only be

available in limited quantities. The bill therefore would authorize

the development and demonstration of methods to produce synthetic

or new fuels for both stationary and moving sources which will result

in decreased atmospheric emissions.

The bill would authorize $450 million to carry out the provisions

of this section: $125 million for fiscal year 1971; $150 million for fiscal

year 1972; and $175 million for fiscal year 1973. Appropriations at

that level could substantially accelerate the nation's capacity to

reduce air pollution and to achieve and maintain high ambient air

quality.

SECTION 105. GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF AIR POLLUTION PLANNING AND

CONTROL PROGRAMS

The Committee expects that the grantmaking authority in section

105 will be used to make three-to-one support (three-to-two in the

case of maintenance support) grants available to States where the

States are initiating or operating regional air pollution control programs. The intent is to enable States to qualify for the same degree

of Federal support now available to intermunicipal and interstate

agencies engaged in regional air pollution control activities. Stateoperated regional programs should supplant municipal or intermunicipal programs only in those cases where it is clearly advantageous, from the standpoint of effective air pollution control and

efficient utilization of resources.
There are a number of ways a State agency could establish such

regional programs, and States should use their own administrative

and organizational structure to achieve this purpose in a manner most

suitable to their respeQ tive needs. In at least one State, Massachusetts,

State supported regional programs are operating for the Boston and

Springfield metropolitan areas. The Federal grant support to these

programs would, however, be made to the State agency which in turn

would fund the regional program; the employees of such regional

programs are to be considered State employees.

Acting under section 301 (a) of the Clean Air Act, the administration

has formulated a plan for assigning Federally-employed personnel to

State air pollution control agencies for periods of up to two years. The purpose of the plan is to help States build up their manpower resources. After a two-year assignment, each Federal employee in this

program would be available for State employment, presumably in the same agency to which he had been detailed. The authority for the

Department to make such personnel assignments would be retained;

the additional provision in section 105 would authorize the Department

to make such assignments in lieu of cash awards under a grant. It is the intent of the Committee, that as a condition for Federal

grant support, air pollution control agencies either applying for, or receiving such support shall vigorously attack air pollution problems within their area of jurisdiction and effectively coordinate their efforts

with those of the Federal air pollution control program. In order to

achieve such performance inprograms receiving Federal support, the

Secretary would be authorize to suspend or deny such assistance until

the performance of such program is adequate.

SECTION 106. INTERSTATE AIR QUALITY AGENCIES

Section 106 of the 1967 act authorized Federal support of up to

100 percent of the costs of interstate air quality planning programs for 2 years in order to expedite the development of regional control

programs in interstate areas. The purpose of this provision was to

provide a mechanism for planning in a coordinated fashion throughout regions where, except for State boundaries, the problems of air

quality control are common. It was hoped that planning agencies such as Councils of Government

and regional planning commissions would be used. These agencies now function in some areas to provide consistency of approach between States and among local jurisdictions on a number of common problems, and were expected to perform . similar function for air quality planning.

The Uommittee is disappointed that the provisions of Section 106

have never been implemented, and that no interstate planning agency has been activated. The success of future regional efforts in air quality

control requires sound planning and coordination of planning efforts on a comprehensive, regional basis. The bill, therefore, would retain

the planning provision, but would delete the authority for the Secretary to establish Federal regional commissions to plan for imple- mentation of air quality standards. The rigid timetables proposed by this legislation would obviate the value of this authority.
SECTION 107. RESEARCH RELATING TO AIR POLLUTION EFFECTS

The Committee believes increased research is needed on the public

health and welfare effects of air pollution agents-particularly longterm effects. This effort should be directed toward the accelerated

development of more comprehensive air quality criteria.

The protection of the public health and welfare requires definitive

knowledge of the causal relationships between exposure to air pollution

agents-singly or in combinations-and health or welfare under varying environmental conditions. Knowledge of the relationship between

the exposure to many air pollution agents and acute and chronic health

effects is sufficient to develop air quality criteria related to such effects.

Our knowledge of some of the chronic effects involving extended exposure over a period of years is limited. Increased research activities

should concentrate in this area.

Concern for health effects must extend beyond "normal" segments

of the population to effects on the very young, the aged, the infirm,

and other susceptible individuals. Research efforts also must be

directed toward improving knowledge of the causal relationships involving impacts on socio-econoic conditions, vegetation, and

materials.

The legislation would provide for an accelerated research program to

improve knowledge of the contribution of air pollution agents to the

occurrence of adverse effects on health.

The Committee anticipates that attention will be given to the

following areas:

(1) The contribution of air pollution agents to the etiology of

disease, including the health significance of physiological, toxicological, and biochemical effects;

(2) The additive and synergistic effects of exposure to air

pollution agents;

(3) The health and welfare significance of the storage and

accumulation of air pollution agents and their metabolites in

human organs and tissues;

(4) The influence of air pollution agents on the impairment of

human functions, increased accidents or absenteeism;

(5) The contribution of age, ethnic, social, occupational,

smoking and other factors to susceptibility to air pollution

agents; and

(6) The development of models to predict the public health

and welfare effects of exposure to air pollution agents, singly

or in combination.

The bill also would provide for the furtherance of knowledge on welfare effects, including effects on vegetation, animals, wildlife, buildings,

structures, and materials. This research effort should extend into

welfare effects and aesthetics in their broadest definition, including

the economy, visibility, weather, and climate.

Because prospective studies on the long-term effects of air pollution

often extend beyond normal contract periods, and in order to maintain

a continuity with respect to such epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory studies, the bill would provide contract authority for periods up

to 10 years. For the purpose of carrying out this specific contract

research, the bill provides an authorization of $15,000,000.

The ongoing research on health and welfare effects carried out under

section 103 should not be replaced, but should be supplemented by this
authority. It is important that health research activities authorized

by this Act supplement research in other agencies. Careful evaluation

of proposed research projects should precede funding to avoid duplication. SECTION 108. AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGIONS

The Committee intends that the proposed revision of the procedure

for the designation of air quality control regions will provide for early

completion of this process. The new provisions would not eliminate

the requirements for delineation of regional boundaries on the basis

of factors that have a significant bearing on the implementation of air

quality standards, such as meteorological, topographical, and urbanindustrial factors which influence the distribution and concentration

of pollution agents. Ambient air standards designed to protect the health of persons

must be implemented throughout the entire territory of every State.

However, to attempt to do so through application of a single imple- mentation plan for an entire State would overlook the fact that various

sections of a State often may require substantially different emission

control strategies. Each strategy must insure attainment of a quality of ambient air designed to protect the health of persons in all parts

of the area to which the strategy is applied. Accordingly, the bill would provide 90 days for the Secretary to

complete designation of air quality control regions in interstate and

major intrastate air pollution problem areas. This period is considered

to be a sufficient time for completing the designation of air quality con- trol regions for the 91 areas already proposed for such designation. It is

also considered to be sufficient time for the Secretary to designate additional air quality control regions covering interstate areas or any intrastate areas where there are major air pollution problems associated

with particular concentrations of population and industry. It should be noted that this 90-day period would produce no delay in

the establishment and implementation of ambient air quality standards, since it would coincide with the period for the promulgation of

national ambient air quality standards for pollution agents for which

criteria have been issued. Moreover, any area of a State not included

in an air quality control region designated by the Secretary during this

period would automatically be considered an air quality control region for the purposes of the Act. In each State, the area not included in air

quality control regions designated by the Secretary could be subdivided

by the State into two or more air quality control regions. This step, which would take no additional time, would be accomplished as part of the State's plan for implementation of the national air quality standards and would be subject to review by the Secretary at the time

that implementation plans are submitted for approval.

It should be emphasized that the provision for subdivision of

States into regions is included in the bill to insure that factors bearing on effective implementation of air quality standards such as meteotology, topography, and urban-industrial concentrations will take

precedence over mere administrative convenience. In other words, while it is considered necessary that areas not covered by the Federal

designation process shall be designated as air quality control regions without further delay, it is also considered essential that States, in

cooperation with the Secretary, make a determination as to whether
such areas ought to be subdivided to effectively implement air quality standards.

SECTION 109. AIR QUALITY CRITERIA AND CONTROL TECHNIQUES

This proposed legislation would require acceleration of the issuance

of air quality criteria and information on control techniques as an integral part of the system for adoption of ambient air quality standards and implementation plans.

Pollution agents which would be subject to the provisions of this

section would be those which are emitted from widely distributed

air pollution sources and generally present in the ambient air in all areas of the Nation.

Air quality criteria for five pollution agents have already been issued

(sulfur oxides, particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and

photochemical oxidants). Other contaminants of broad national impact include fluorides, nitrogen oxides, polynuclear organic matter,

lead, and odors. Others may be added to this group as knowledge in- creases. The bill would require that air quality criteria for these and

other pollutants be issued within 13 months from enactment. If the

Secretary subsequently should find that there are other pollution

agents for which the ambient air quality standards procedure is appropriate, he could list those agents in the Federal Register, and repeat

the criteria process. Reports on control techniques, as under existing law, would be issued simultaneously with the publication of criteria. The Committee

recognizes that the States will continue to need this information

to develop meaningful programs for implementation of ambient air

quality standards on a regional basis.

The Committee believes that criteria and control technology documents should be periodically reviewed and re-issued to ensure currency.

In addition, control techniques information should be periodically

modified to reflect information developed under sections 104 and 113.

The Secretary would also be required to issue information on control

techniques for air pollution agents for which emission standards are to be established under Section 114 and Section 115 and for which new source standards of performance are to be established under Section 113. It is expected that the Secretary would provide documentation, as appropriate, on the control techniques, methods, processes, or systems available for the purpose of complying with such emission

standards or standards of performance.

The Committee does not intend that the recommended control

techniques documents should lock in existing technology. As was pointed out by Dr. Aaron Teller, "the inhibition of innovation is the

most dangerous consequence of this language. Air pollution control

requires a new and unique technology."

The Committee intends that the information provided pursuant to

this section should serve as guidance to States, not as limitations on control technology innovation.

SECTION 110. NATIONAL AIR QUALITY STANDARDS AND GOALS

This section would provide for publication and promulgation of na- tional ambient air quality standards at a level which will protect the

health of persons. In setting such air quality standards the Secretary
should consider and incorporate not only the results of research sum- marized in air quality criteria documents, but also the need for margins

of safety. Margins of safety are essential to any health-related en- vironmental standards if a reasonable degree of protection is to be provided against hazards which research has not yet identified.

Following the publication of any proposed national ambient air

quality standard, the Secretary would provide up to 90 days for the

receipt and evaluation of comments. Since the issuance of air quality

criteria would precede the promulgation of such national standards,

and since expert advisory committees would continue to be consulted

in the preparation of air quality criteria, 90 days is considered sufficient time for the presentation and evaluation of additional information and opinions that may have a bearing on the national ambient

air quality standards.

Although the option of adopting ambient air quality standards more stringent than the national health minimum for any air quality control region is preserved for the States, the Secretary would be

required to set a national minimum standard of air quality which will

protect the health of persons regardless of where such persons reside.

This mechanism is recommended by the committee to expedite the

establishment and implementation of ambient air quality standards.

In requiring that national ambient air quality standards be es- tablished at a level necessary to protect the health of persons, the

Committee recognizes that such standards will not necessarily provide for the quality of air required to protect those individuals who are otherwise dependent on a controled internal environment such as patients in intensive care units or newborn infants in nurseries. However, the Committee emphasizes that included among those persons whose health should be protected by the ambient standard are par- ticularly sensitive citizens such as bronchial asthmatics and emphyse- matics who in the normal course of daily activity are exposed to the

ambient environment. In establishing an ambient standard necessary to protect the health of these persons, reference should be made to a representative sample of persons comprising the sensitive group rather

than to a single person in such a group. Ambient air quality is sufficient to protect the health of such persons

whenever there is an absence of adverse effect on the health of a statistically related sample of persons in sensitive groups from ex- posur3 to the ambient air. An ambient air quality standard, therefore, should be the maximum permissible ambient air level of an air pollu- tion agent or class of such agents (related to a period of time) which

will protect the health of any group of the population. For purposes of this description, a statistically related sample is the

number of persons necessary to test in order to detect a deviation in

the health of any person within such sensitive group which is attributable to the condition of the ambient air.

Within 30 days after enactment the Secretary would be required to

publish proposed national air quality standards for those pollutants

covered by existing air quality criteria (sulfur oxides, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and photochemical oxidants).

Since these criteria have been available for some time, it is realistic to

expect that proposed national standards for these five pollution

agents would be published within the 30-day period. Proposed national

air quality standards for pollutants for which criteria would be issued
subsequent to enactment would be published simultaneously with the

issuance of such criteria. These pollutants would include nitrogen

oxides, lead, polynuclear organics, odors, and fluorides.

National air quality standards are authorized because the Committee has recognized that protection of health is a national priority, but

the Committee also recognizes that man's natural and man-made environment must be preserved and protected. Therefore, the bill provides for the setting of national ambient air quality goals at levels

necessary to protect public health and welfare from any known or

anticipated adverse effects of air pollution-includ'ng effects on soils,

water, vegetation, man-made materials, animals, wildlife, visibility

climate, and economic values. To implement this provision the sections of existing law relating to the issuance of air quality criteria have

been modified to require that air quality criteria documents include,

to the extent practicable, information on any known or anticipated

adverse effects of air pollution, including such effects on all the environmental and economic values listed above. Those criteria which have

been issued as well as those planned for January of 1971 must be

revised to include this information. Until such revisions are made, the

Secretary should publish interim guidelines to assist the States in

developing plans for the implementation of goals.

The Committee is aware that there are many gaps in the available

scientific knowledge of the welfare and other environmental effects of

air pollution agents. As indicated in the discussion of section 107, the

Committee expects that the Department will intensify research on

environmental and other economic effects of air pollution. A great

deal of basic research will be needed to determine the long-term air

quality goals which are required to protect the public health and

welfare from any potential effects of air pollution. In the meantime,

the Secretary will be expected to establish such national goals on the

basis of the best information available to him.

The bill would not require the attainment of the air quality goals

within a specified time period. Nevertheless, it is the Committee's

view that progress in this direction should be made as rapidly as

possible. In areas where air pollution levels are already relatively

low, the attainment and maintenance of these goals should not require

an extended time period. In areas where current air pollution levels

are already equal to, or better than, the air quality goals, the Secretary should not approve any implementation plan which does not

provide, to the maximum extent practicable, for the continued maintenance of such ambient air quality. Once such national goals are

established, deterioration of air quality should not be permitted

except under circumstances where there is no available alternative.

Given the various alternative means of preventing and controlling

air pollution-including the use of the best available control technology, industrial processes, and operating practices--and care in the

selection of sites for new sources, land use planning and traffic controls-deterioration need not occur.

SECTION l. IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

The establishment alone of ambient air quality standards has little

effect on air quality. Standards are only the reference point for the

analysis of the factors contributing to air pollution and the imposition
of control strategy and tactics. This program is an implementation

plan.

The Committee recognizes that the implementation plan is the

principal component of control efforts for pollution agents for which

national standards are established. It is this program which must be

effective if the Nation is to achieve the quality of air which the bill

would mandate in a relatively short period of time.

The implementation plan provision in the bill has its origin in

existing law. The Committee recognized that because thelroposed

bill would require a great deal in a short period of time anubecause

the brevity of the provision in existing law has led to uneven and

inadequate interpretation, the character of an implementation plan

must be specified and the alternative methods of achievement listed.

The Committee bill would require that a rigorous time sequence be

met in the development of the implementation plan and would

provide for the substitution of Secretarial authority if the State plan,

or a portion thereof, is inadequate to attain the quality of ambient air

established by the nationally promulgated ambient air quality

standard.

The bill would provide that within nine months after the date of

romulgation of any national ambient air quality standard, each

State would have to adopt and submit to the Secretary for each air

quality control region or portion thereof in such State a plan which

would provide for the attainment of the national ambient air quality

standard within three years after the date of approval of such plan,

or after the date of promulgation if the Secretary established such plan

or any portion thereof.

The Committee bill, based upon experience gained under existing

law, would require that each State, after reasonable notice and a

public hearing, adopt a plan for the implementation of standards at

least as stringent as the national ambient air quality standards. Any

implementation plan could be developed for a region only after participation by the public. Public participation can only be meaningful

if there is reasonable notice and full disclosure of information prior to

public hearings. The Committee expects that appropriate Federal,

tate, and local officials, citizens and affected industry groups will consider the development of the implementation plan the central element

of this aspect of the legislation.

The Committee bill would establish certain tools as potential parts

of an implementation plan and would require that emission requirements be established by each State for sources of air pollution agents

or combinations of such agents in such region and that these emission

requirements be monitored and enforceable.

In addition to direct emission controls, other potential parts of an

implementation plan include land use and air and surface transportation controls. These should insure that any existing or future stationary

source of air pollution will be located, designed, constructed, equipped,

and operated, and that moving sources will be located and operated

so as not to interfere with the implementation, maintenance, and

enforcement of any applicable air quality standard or goal.

The Committee acknowledges that this would require each region to

make difficult judgments about the siting of facilities which may emit

pollution agents, including decisions to prohibit the location of new

sources which, although in compliance with Section 113, would con-
tribute to a violation of a regional air quality standard. These factors

would necessitate long-term decisions about the character of the

growth and development of such region. In air quality control regions where present air quality is below the

standard, rigorous restrictions must be placed on existing sources to provide a margin for future growth, or only pollution-free growth, development and expansion will be possible.

This section would also provide for intergovernmental cooperation in the development of air quality programs which at the minimum

must prevent facilities in one State from contributing to the violation

of ambient air quality standards in an adjacent State, whether or not

the adjacent State is part of the same air quality control region. The Committee has added provisions that would require the States

to develop enforceable information, recordkeeping, and monitoring requirements similar to those which the Secretary would be authorized

to establish in the bill.

The Committee recognizes that during the next several years, the

attainment of required ambient air quality in many of the metropolitan regions of this country will be impossible if the control of

pollution from moving sources depends solely on emission controls.

he Committee does not intend that these areas be exempt from

meeting the standards. Some regions may have to establish new transportation programs and systems combined with traffic control

regulations and restrictions in order to achieve ambient air quality standards for pollution agents associated with moving sources. The Committee realizes that changes or restrictions in transportation systems may impose severe hardship on municipalities and States,

and it urges that agencies of the Federal Government make available

any relevant program assistance to the States and regions to meet

these obligations. The highway program, various housing and urban

development programs and other sources of assistance should be

examined in this connection.

The implementation plan section of the proposed bill would specifi- cally provide that, to the extent necessary, each region develop motor vehicle inspection and testing programs for which it is eligible to

receive assistance under section 208 of the proposed bill. The Committee believes that this is an extremely important provision, because

used vehicles, particularly those manufactured before 1970 are among

the most significant sources of air pollution. It is also a class of air

pollution sources for which the regions and States have better opportunities to control.

In considering alternative means of controlling emissions of air

pollution agents from used vehicles, the Committee was unable to

develop a feasible national system. The Committee rejected ideas

ranging from the imposition of a retroactive installation obligation on automobile manufacturers to a Federal subsidy program.

Section 211 of the Act provides for Secretarial certification of used car emission control devices and systems in order to protect the public from sham or inadequate devices and systems. Following the certification of such devices, the regions and States would be encouraged in the

development of implementation plans to adopt requirements for the

installation of such devices. The Committee believes at this time that

regulations relative to the retroactive application of emission control

devices and methods is manageable on y at the State and regional

50-311 0-70---2
level and expects and hopes that the regions and States will be innovative in this area.

As pointed out in the discussion of section 211, used vehicles contribute substantially to air quality deterioration. The States would be

expected to act to improve used vehicle performance and should

consider requiring the installation of certified control devices or systems or, at least, the tuning of used vehicles before resale.

Under this Section the Secretary would be required to approve the

implementation plan only if it specified the boundaries of the region to

which such plan applies. This requirement is necessary to provide

review of the adequacy of implementation plans for regions which the

Governor may have sub-divided pursuant to the air control region

designation provisions of section 108.

In order to insure achievement of air quality necessary to protect

the health of persons within the period specified in the bill, time constraints would be placed on the Secretary's review and approval

authority. The bill recognizes that the Secretary must have the

authority to replace all or any portion of any implementation plan

submitted by a State where attainment of the nationally ambient air

quality standard within the time required is not provided. The bill

would provide that the Secretary must approve or reject any implementation plan submitted by a State within four months of the date

required for its submission. If he rejected the plan or any portion of it

he would have to promulgate an alternative plan or portion thereof

within an additional two months.

The Committee recognizes that pursuant to provisions of the 1967

Act many States are developing or have developed implementation

plans for designated air quality control regions. To the extent possible

these plans should not be disrupted. Therefore, the bill would specifically provide that implementation plans and ambient standards developed under existing law shall remain in effect until such time as the Secretary determines that all or any portion of such standards or plans are inadequate to meet the new obligations placed upon these

regions. If the Secretary made such a determination, he would be

required to make recommendations to the appropriate State or States

of changes needed to meet the additional requirements of the Act. If

such State or States failed to make the proposed revisions in existing

implementation plans, the Secretary would be required to promulgate

the necessary changes.

The Committee also recognizes that it is possible that an implementation plan approved or promulgated by the Secretary may later

be found inadequate to attain the national ambient air quality

standard(s). Whenever information reveals that an approved or promulgated implementation plan is inadequate, the Secretary would be

required to act to revise such plan. Because such revision may delay

implementation beyond the three year deadline the Committee bill

would provide that the Secretary may extend the period of time re- quired for attainment of the national ambient air quality standard for

one year.

Finally, the Committee would recognize that compliance with the

national ambient air quality standards deadline may not be possible.

If a Governor judges that any region or regions or portions thereof

within his State will not meet the national ambient air quality standard

within the time provided, the bill would authorize him-one year
before the deadline-to file a petition against the United States in the

District Court of the United States for the district where such region

or portion thereof is located for relief from the effect of such expiration.

The Committee proposes to have such actions brought before the

District Court constituted as a three-judge court with such actions

taking precedence on the docket over all other causes and directing

that they be expedited in every way.

The Committee expects that an extension of time would be granted

only as a last alternative. Therefore, the bill would provide that the

court could grant relief in the paramount interest of the United States

and in the public interest and general welfare of the persons in such region only after finding that substantial efforts had been made to protect the health of persons in such regions, and that means to control

emissions causing or contributing to the failure had not been available

for sufficient time or that the failure was a result of a Federal facility

operating Under an exemption granted by the President. The bill

would restrict relief to one-year extensions of the deadline. Nothing

in this subsection should affect any provision or obligation pursuant

to any implementation plan which is not the subject of the request

for extension. The Secretary would be required to make changes in

the implementation plan to bring the region into compliance with the

applicable standard or standards within the year extension granted

by the court.

The severe time limitations in the bill for filing an implementation

plan for ambient air quality standards may limit the capacity of

States to act simultaneously on plans for national ambient air quality

goals. The bill would provide that the Secretary may extend for 18

months the period for submission of any portion of any iml)lementation

plan. The development of the portion of the implementation plan for

the achievement of air quality goal requires different and more extensive analysis than that required to establish an implementation

plan to achieve national ambient air quality standards. Therefore, the

Committee bill would provide an additional period for such development for those regions where it is needed.

SECTION 112. STATE STANDARDS AND PLANS TO ACHIEVE GREATER AIR

QUALITY CONTROL

Section 112 would restate the intent of Section 109 of the Air Quality

Act of 1967 which provided assurance that States, localities, intermunicipal and interstate agencies may adopt standards and plans to

achieve a higher level of ambient air qualty than approved by the

Secretary. The section would be revised to provide that such States,

localities, intermunicipal and interstate agencies may adopt such more

restrictive standards and plans and may establish timetables which

achieve standards in a shorter period of time than required by Section

111 of this Act. The authority preserved by this section would apply

to all aspects of the legislation except where the Congress has specifically pre-empted authority to act.

SECTION 113. NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

rrhe provisions for new source )erformance standards are designed

to insure that new stationary sources are designed, built, equipped,

operated, and maintained so as to reduce emissions to a minimum.
Pages omitted due to document size. 

Available upon request.