Since the first hint of ABS problems we have been pushing suppliers to develop more rapidly degradable raw materials. To date we have tested more than 750 samples as possible replacements. Now, the materials with which we are working look excellent from the standpoints of degradability, washing effectiveness, and cost. In our opinion there is no reason not to use them as soon as design and construction of manufacturing facilities can be completed by our suppliers. In anticipation of the new materials, Lever Brothers Co. has made purchase commitments for deliveries coincidental with suppliers' plant startups. In the meantime, we shall continue to pursue the necessary formulation, pilot plant and scale-up work that normally precedes a changeover in raw materials. (This information is for the use of HEW; it has not publicized yet.) Assuming good success in completion of basic ABS facilities and no unforeseen problems in our plants, we shall be shipping products containing "soft" ABS inside the period ending December 31, 1965. We are pleased that our industry has been able to push forward the development of "soft" detergents to the present advanced stage. ABS has not been a major or toxic contributor to the Nation's pollution problem; nevertheless we shall be happy when we can eliminate even this small factor from water supplies. Cordially yours, JOHN P. MOSER, Vice President. Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, MONSANTO CHEMICAL CO., St. Louis, Mo., June 18, 1963. Chairman, Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Senate Public Works Committee, New Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: We understand that your committee will hold hearings during the week of June 17 and on June 25 on Senate bills S. 1118 and S. 1183 relating to proposed legislation that would require that after June 30, 1965, synthetic detergents produced in or imported into the United States comply with certain standards of decomposability. It is assumed that the "standards of decomposability," which are still to be defined, would be designed to exclude certain varieties of detergents presently being manufactured and specifically to exclude those detergents containing existing varieties of alkylbenzene sulfonate (ABS) made from tetrapropylene as the essential detergent base material. As one of the principal producers of alkylbenzene, which is the base detergent raw material employed by manufacturers of detergents, Monsanto Chemical Co. has a vital interest in any legislation associated with detergents. We respectfully submit that the legislation as proposed in S. 118 (Mr. Metcalf) and S. 1183 (Mrs. Neuberger, et al.) in unnecessary and would serve no useful purpose. We base this opinion on the fact that Monstanto Chemical Co. has announced to the press and disclosed at the hearings in Washington on June 10, 1963, before the Jones Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power of the House Government Operations Committee, that Monsanto plans to produce more biodegradable detergent raw material in commercial quanities in 1964 and to effect complete conversion to the new product in 1965. These plans have been preceded by 7 years of aggressive research on the problem by Monsanto. Our technology in all areas of the problem has advanced to a point where a specific route has been chosen and engineering know-how for construction of new manufacturing facilities involving substantial capital expenditures is well along. At this time, we have produced tank car quantities of a new variety of biodegradable detergent raw material which is presently under further test by manufacturers of finished detergents to confirm and expand on earlier favorable findings. Research investigations within Monsanto on this problem are continuing at an accelerated pace and represent the most extensive single research project presently active in the corporation. From information in the press it is evident that other important organizations are also directing major efforts toward making available new kinds of detergent raw materials to take the place of existing kinds of alkylbenzene sulfonate (ABS). It is thus indicated that a change to more biodegradable detergents will be effected voluntarily by industry and that conversion to the new materials can be foreseen by the end of 1965. It is apparent from the foregoing that legislation is unnecessary. Indeed, passage of a bill in the immediate future that would prohibit manufacture and sale several months hence of still undefined varieties of detergents could well delay investigations that are still proceeding and force industry to freeze on a course which in the end could prove to be wrong. We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the record of the hearings before your committee on June 25, 1963. Yours sincerely, Mr. JAMES M. QUIGLEY, EDWARD J. BосK, Vice President. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO., New York, N.Y., June 21, 1963. DEAR MR. QUIGLEY: Our company has made arrangements to obtain an adequate supply of the new type straight chain detergent alkylate to replace all the present type alkylate in the manufacture of our detergent products. Sufficient quantities should be ready for delivery to our plants late in the year 1964 In order to be in a position to use this material when it becomes available, equipment modifications are being engineered for our plant facilities. Pilot scale quantities are currently being used in trial manufacturing operations, and products thus made are being utilized in consumer tests and in confirmatory tests for biodegradability in a community sewage disposal plant. We are confident that our program will be completed successfully and on schedule. In the event that no delays are incurred, this should put us in a position to complete the changeover in all manufacturing operations by midyear of 1965. Sincerely, JOHN M. HALSTED, Vice President. CALIFORNIA CHEMICAL Co., ORONITE DIVISION, San Francisco, Calif., June 20, 1963. Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: Your Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Senate Public Works Committee is currently examining proposed legislation in the general field of water pollution, including that concerned with the use of synthetic detergents. I would like to present for your consideration a detergent alkylate manufac turer's views regarding the detergent industry's problem of developing and supplying softer detergents to mitigate the foaming sometimes caused by present-day detergent residues in water supplies in certain areas in the United States. First let me identify the Oronite Division of California Chemical Co. We are the chemical subsidiary of Standard Oil Co. of California responsible for the development, manufacture, and marketing of industrial chemicals-including detergent alkylate, the raw material for the washing ingredient of most modern liquid and powdered detergents. We are major producers of detergent alkylate. I would like to comment on the Soap & Detergent Association's prediction that softer detergents will be available nationally by the end of 1965, and the program this company embarked on many years ago to make this possible. Detergent alkylate for the manufacture of more readily degradable detergents will be available in substantial volume by the end of 1965. A no-approach-barred effort is being made by the established suppliers of alkylate, and others who are interested in breaking into this market, to earn a place in the supply of new soft materials to the soap industry. The result is an intensely competitive situation which of itself has established a pace of development which is the fastest possible in the light of the technical and economic demands. We must produce intermediates which can be processed into softer detergents having the same excellent detergency and other properties as the present polypropylene benzene product performance the housewife demands. We must produce these new intermediates at a reasonable cost. This will require new processes, new plants and some time. The association's prediction appears to us to be reasonable and realistic. What is Oronite doing? Our efforts to improve biodegradability have intensified in recent years. We have developed and defined a series of new softer intermediates which we feel will meet any reasonable standard of biodegradability and at the same time will not sacrifice performance. We have delivered developmental quantities of these new intermediates to the industry, thus facilitating limited detergent product development and consumer testing. We expect to deliver larger quantities of these prototype materials for more extensive area testing during this year. These products will be the basis for our vigorous efforts to retain our leadership in the detergent alkylate market. Our research program has yielded some peripheral developments in the field of water-pollution control: (1) We have developed a standardized procedure to measure biodegradability in commercial activated sludge sewage treating plants. (2) We have developed a promising and inexpensive process for removing detergents and other pollutants from waste water, "foam recycle." This process is applicable to activated sludge sewage treating plants. We are deeply concerned about the Nation's problems of water-pollution control. We offer our fullest cooperation to this committee to do everything we can to help solve this highly complex problem We, as an industry, do have the answer to the present problem of the biodegradation of detergents. We have the capability and intention. We feel that the Soap & Detergent Association's prediction that a nationwide conversion will be achieved during 1965 is reasonable and conservative. May I thank you again for this opportunity to comment to you and the Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Senate Public Works Committee on this vital subject. Very truly yours, T. M. WELTON, President. STATEMENT OF JOSEPH W. PENFOLD, CHAIRMAN, CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR THE OUTDOOR RECREATION RESOURCES REVIEW COMMISSION REPORT The Chairman, in 1958 the Congress, concerned about increasing pressures on the Nation's outdoor recreation resources, established the Outoor Recreation Resources Review Commission (ORRRC). The authorizing act, Public Law 85470, set forth ORRRC's mission. It was to survey the outdoor recreation wants and needs of the American people now and in the years 1976 and 2000, to take inventory of the resources available to satisfy these needs, and to recommend policies and programs to insure that the needs are adequately and efficiently met. The Commission consisted of eight Members of Congress-four members of each party from both the House of Representatives and the Senate and seven private citizens appointed by former President Eisenhower. The Commission's report, "Outdoor Recreation for America,”-known as the ORRRC Report-was submitted to the Congress and President Kennedy in January 1962. One year later, in January of this year, the Citizens Committee for the ORRRC report was organized by a group of leaders in conservation, outdoor recreation, industry, and labor, including the Presidential appointees to the Commission. The Committee's purpose is to further the aims and objectives of the ORRRC report by seeking the widest possible understanding and practices of the policies and programs recommended in the report. The ORRRC report did not make formal recommendations on most of the specifics of S. 649 and the other bills before you. Therefore, we are not in a position to be able to comment on most of these matters. 1 "Increased Alkylbenzene Sulfonate Removal From Sewage by Foam Recycle," by S. H. Sharman, D. Kyriacow, D. F. Searle, presented to 36th Annual convention, the Soap & Detergent Association, on Jan. 24, 1963, in New York. However, one of the main thrusts of the Commission's findings and recommendations is that more effective and more widespread water pollution control and abatement are essential if the rapidly growing outdoor recreation needs of the American people are going to be met. Therefore, we can testify to our strong support of the principle stated in section 1 of S. 649-that the national water pollution policy should be to keep our waters "as clean as possible" as opposed to a negative policy that our waters should be used for waste assimilation to their capacity for that purpose. The ORRRC Report, together with several of the study reports prepared for the Commission by public agencies, colleges and universities, private research organizations and individual authorities contain much factual data and discussion which demonstrate the close interrelationship between waters "as clean as possible" and adequate outdoor recreation opportunities for the American people. The Commission made several recommendations aimed at securing cleaner waters for recreation purposes. We appreciate this opportunity to present a brief summary of this information with the hope that it will be useful to the subcommittee during your deliberations on this important legislation. During its study ORRRC measured the magnitude of a phenomenon that has been apparent to many-that the demand for outdoor recreation in this country is growing faster than population growth and will continue to do so. ORRRC concluded that by the year 2000, when our population will nearly double, the overall demand for outdoor recreation in this country will triple. In addition, ORRRC identified two major patterns of concentrated demandwhere demand is and will continue to be heaviest. They are both directly relevant to water pollution control and abatement. One of these focal points of concentrated demand will be in and near our fast-growing metropolitan areas; the other will be on shorelines and bodies of water-especially near metropolitan areas. People want outdoor recreation close to home. Two out of three Americans now live in metropolitan areas and three out of four will by the turn of the century. It is here that the people have the greatest need for outdoor recreation: it is here that their needs will be most difficult and most costly to supply. And most people seeking the outdoors look for water-to swim and fish in, to boat on, to walk, picnic and camp by, and sometime just to look at. Swimming, fishing, boating, and water skiing are already among the most popular outdoor activities and swimming appears likely to be the most popular outdoor activity by the year 2000. ORRRC also found, by asking a cross section of 16,000 Americans, that the outdoor activities people now participate in are not necessarily what they would prefer to do when they have more afterwork time and more spendable income. The largest unsatisfied demand, for example, seems to be for fishing. Twentyone percent of those covered by ORRRC's survey either do not now fish and would like to fish, or would like to fish more often. The other outdoor activities most people would like to do more often include swimming, "going to the beach." boating and canoeing. The ORRRC report emphasizes the obvious point that a most practical and efficient way to increase outdoor recreation opportunities-where most people need them and of the kinds most people want-is to provide more clean waters and shoreline through water pollution control and abatement. The report notes what it describes as the "generally favorable relationship between most of the large concentrations of people in the United States and the physical location of recreation waters." Many of our great cities are within easy driving distance of the oceans or the Great Lakes, and nearly all of our larger inland cities are on major rivers. But, as the report observes, people are barred from using many of these areas for water-based recreation because water quality is too poor to permit many kinds of recreation activities or too poor to support fish or waterfowl. As examples, the report cites the Lehigh, Potomac, and Hudson Rivers. The temperature of the Lehigh, used heavily for cooling in steel mills, has been measured at more than 100° at the Lehigh's confluence with the Delaware River. At various times during the summer of 1961 the Potomac near Washington had a bacterial count 250 times greater than the maximum suggested by the Public Health Service for swimming areas. The report also points out the vast recreation potential locked up in the heavily polluted waters of just one river. the Hudson-in the center of our most populous metropolitan area. Only 35 miles of New York City's 575 miles of shoreline and waterfront are fit for swimming. A number of other shorelines in other areas which have been closed to recreation use because of domestic and industrial pollution are listed in one of the ORRRC study reports, "Shoreline Recreation Resources of the United States," prepared by George Washington University. Based on replies received from 24 of the 28 coastal and Great Lakes States, the authors of this report found that pollution of coastal waters is considered a recreation problem in 22 States and a serious problem in 12 of them. Another ARRRC study report, "Sport Fishing Today and Tomorrow," prepared by the U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, discusses causes of water pollution and its destructive effects upon sport fish species and recreational fishing. The report concludes that the Nation is still losing inland water areas to pollution as fast as, or faster, than they are being improved. Another ORRRC study report, "Water for Recreation-Values and Opportunities." prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey, discusses the relationships between the various kinds of water pollution and the various kinds of water-based recreation activities. A fourth ORRRC study report, "Hunting in the United States-Its Present and Future Role," prepared by the Department of Conservation at the University of Michigan's School of Natural Resources, examines the effects of water pollution on ducks and other waterfowl-especially in marshes, lakes and estuaries in industrial and urban areas. The Commission itself recommended to the Congress last year that "in programs and projects for pollution control, recreation should be recognized as a motivating purpose and as a necessary objective in the allocation of funds therefor." The Commission called upon the States to "give increased consideration to the recreation and esthetic values provided by clean waters" and to "use their authority to preserve present water recreation resources and to regain those lost to public recreation because of pollution." The Commission also recommended immediate action by all levels of government to acquire additional beach and shoreline areas for recreation, with highest priority to acquisition of areas closest to major population centers. At the same time, the Commission emphasized that the "first, great opportunity" is to clear up pollution. "In most major cities," the Commission said, "pollution has destroyed valuable recreation opportunities just where they are needed most. As a sanitation measure alone, the abatement of pollution is a necessity; inherently, it is also one of the best means of increasing recreation opportunities." I would like to offer for the subcommittee's files, copies of the ORRRC report and of the four ORRRC study reports which deal with the relationship between water pollution control and outdoor recreation. We hope that during your deliberations on the legislation now before you you will keep in mind this important relationship. STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL COAL ASSOCIATION, BY ERNST P. HALL Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I, Ernst P. Hall, present this statement as the representative of the National Coal Association, which organization represents the Bituminous Coal Operators of the United States. I am a member of the Land and Water Use Committee of the National Coal Association and a member of the Technical Subcommittee of the Land and Water Use Committee of the American Mining Congress, which represents all of the mineralextractive industries of the United States. I am also a member and secretary of the Coal Industry Advisory Committee to the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission. I am a registered professional engineer, hold a bachelors and a masters degree in engineering, and have had more than 15 years of direct and indirect experience in the control of pollution and the disposal of various waste products. On behalf of the various groups which I may represent, I want to express our appreciation for the opportunity of presenting to this committee our views on this very important proposed amendment to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The problem of water pollution and water pollution control is a complicated and involved problem. It is complicated by the technical intricacies of the 20-495-63- 46 |