City of Los Angeles; Hon. Warren Billings, councilman from South Pasadena, Calif. He will represent the Los Angeles Division of the League of California Cities. Then, John P. Robin, director of the Pittsburgh Redevelopment Authority, Pittsburgh, Pa. He will represent the United States Conference of Mayors. Then, Hon. Joseph S. Clark, Jr., mayor of the City of Philadelphia; Hon. Nicholas S. LeCorte, mayor of Elizabeth, N. J.; and Harold W. Kennedy, county counsel, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, Calif.

So, we will stand in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow, at which time we will hear the witnesses that I just named.

(Whereupon, at 11:30 a. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a. m., Wednesday, April 14, 1954.)

HOUSING ACT OF 1954

Air Pollution Prevention Amendment

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 14, 1954

UNITED STATES SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 11:20 a. m., in room 301, Senate Office Building, Senator Homer E. Capehart (chairman) presiding.

Present: Senators Capehart and Goldwater.

Also present: Senator Thomas H. Kuchel of California.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will please come to order.

We will resume the hearings which we recessed yesterday morning on the smoke elimination and air pollution amendment.

Our first witness-and let me say coauthor of the amendment with myself is Senator Kuchel from California. Senator, we are delighted to have you. Why don't you proceed in any way you care to? STATEMENT OF THOMAS H. KUCHEL, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Senator KUCHEL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, in coming here today, I desire to express not only my own appreciation, but that of many groups and agencies in California for the opportunity to urge legislation that will give an impetus to and supplement the varied efforts of local governments, civic organizations, and industries to overcome the vexatious problem of air pollution.

Because this smog problem is complicated, I have been very happy to join with the chairman of this committee, Senator Capehart of Indiana, in sponsoring the proposals now before the committee.

I should like to make a general statement on the seriousness of this problem which is becoming more and more acute in many metropolitan areas throughout the country. With me today are officials from southern California and others who as witnesses will go into detail about the extent of this problem, the activities and measures in progress to reduce if not eliminate the costly and dangerous hazard to the health and welfare of our people and to both the growth and the economic development of our cities, and the mounting damage to agriculture, properties, and even day-to-day affairs.

As most of you undoubtedly are aware, air pollution-generally referred to as smog-has become a matter of great concern in the Los Angeles metropolitan area and is of growing concern to the areas of San Diego and San Francisco. A variety of bold steps have been

taken to counter the problem and at every level our citizens are facing this threat to their happiness and well-being.

ORIGIN OF PROBLEM

Smog is no new phenomenon. Back in the Middle Ages, London first became alarmed about the serious consequences of contaminated air. But, in the last few years, growth of industry and the rapid expansion of major cities have caused public officials and civic leaders to begin measuring the cost of atmospheric pollution which has a wide range of consequences.

With the concentration of people in large communities, we have appreciated the need for joint efforts to solve problems which the bringing together of large masses of workers and residents inevitably brings into existence. One of these problems, and one that nobody denies justifies substantial expenditures, is the collection and treatment of sewage. To safeguard the health of the Nation, to prevent destruction of natural resources, and to avert deterioration of our communities, elaborate systems have been laid out and built to gather and render harmless and less offensive wastes from industries, homes, and office buildings that used to flow into our streams. Disposal of garbage and trash in most communities is a municipal function made necessary to protect health and prevent unsightly situations that destroy property values.

Air pollution cannot be overcome by the same methods. Yet it is just as vital to check and then correct contamination of the atmosphere as it is to dispose of sewage, garbage, and trash in an effective manner.

Because the smog problem is complicated, I have been happy to join in sponsoring the proposals before you. This legislation calls for a three-pronged attack, and I feel is very pertinent to the deliberations of your committee. If we are to encourage more homebuilding and halt deterioration of neighborhoods liable to become slums, it is only logical to take and to encourage action that will lead to better environments in which our people live and work.

ATTACKS ON PROBLEM

As for the problem in Los Angeles which has become so widely known, our people are not asking the Federal Government to take on responsibility for its solution. They already have undertaken energetically and with determination programs that call for substantial expenditures of money and human effort. The California Legislature paved the way several years ago by forming an air pollution control district now policing the metropolitan area, investigating causes of air pollution, studying remedial measures. Our leading industries are participating vigorously; one in particular, oil producing and refining, has already spent over $15 million to control and reduce pollutants and in addition spent $1,250,000 for what then was called the most extensive and expensive research program ever undertaken. The aid of automobile designers and manufacturers has been enlisted in the hope of preventing more contamination of the atmosphere by the growing number of motor vehicles.

However, these efforts must be supplemented by help and encouragement from the Federal Government. Education and persuasion alone

will not solve the problem. Adoption and enforcement of regulations and ordinances are only a partial answer to the question of how we are going to clean up our atmosphere. Closing of industries would upset our economy drastically, and dispersal would bring at best only temporary relief and be exceedingly costly.

The damages from smog are so great they cannot be computed. No one knows the toll in the way of infection of humans. Agriculture has suffered greatly-the loss to crops in the Los Angeles area during one short period of serious smog last year was figured at $500,000— and properties of all kinds, homes and automobiles and clothing, are affected.

PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT

All three phases of the proposed legislation will be of great value in furthering the attack against air pollution.

When we require industries to cut the output of smoke and fumes, we force them to make substantial outlays for equipment and construction changes. Floating roofs on oil storage tanks, precipitators for exhaust stacks, and intricate apparatus are very expensive. One feature of the legislation would permit accelerated depreciation of these capital expenditures. And I know many small industries, of which we have thousands in my State, cannot put out the money required to comply with antismog regulations unless they get help in the shape of tax relief.

The granting and insuring of loans for structural changes and new devices that will reduce the seriousness of air contamination is essential to encourage and make possible cooperation by homeowners and builders. In many communities, residences with furnaces that burn coal or oil contribute fumes and particles that could be reduced, if not eliminated, so the provisions of this legislation dealing with loans and insurance would provide practical assistance to property owners and further the efforts of local agencies of government.

The section of the legislation authorizing research and investigation is desirable to bring together the results of work previously and currently being done by Federal authorities and others and to make possible new programs that hold hope of showing the way for more effective results in reducing and wiping out air pollution. As evidence that the Federal Government is not being asked to do the entire job, I should like to mention that in Los Angeles there is just getting underway an ambitious and promising areometric survey by the Southern California Air Pollution Foundation recently set up with the backing of governmental bodies, industry, and civic groups.

The proposed legislation which I earnestly urge this committee to include in the new housing bill has been endorsed by several public agencies in California which feel it will promote efforts to deal with the smog problem. I should like to call your attention to the fact that the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors only a week ago unanimously urged Congress to enact such a measure. Earlier the tax features allowing fast amortization of antismog expenditures was advocated by the Legislature of the State of California and the League of California Cities.

Before you hear the California witnesses who have come here to discuss these proposals, I want to tell the committee that I am deeply

44750-54-pt. 2