Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "16972776",
    "label": "Aircraft Noise (11)",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/16972776"
}

{
    "id": "16972776",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/16972776",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Aircraft Noise (11)",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/16972776",
    "collections": [
        "James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)",
        "James Cannon's Issues Files"
    ],
    "subjects": [
        "Aeronautics, Commercial",
        "Aircraft",
        "Noise",
        "Regulatory reform",
        "Speeches, addresses, etc."
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0039/635863/16972776.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0039/635863/16972776.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0039/635863/16972776.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/16972776",
    "naId": 16972776,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "day": 18,
        "logicalDate": "1976-11-18",
        "month": 11,
        "year": 1976
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "day": 9,
        "logicalDate": "1976-09-09",
        "month": 9,
        "year": 1976
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/ford/grf-0039/635863/16972776.pdf",
    "mediaId": "5545265a8bf69b4e",
    "ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box 2, folder \"Aircraft Noise (11)\" of the James M.\nCannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nSome items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted\nmaterials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to\nthese materials.\nMEMORANDUM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nFORD & LIBRARY GERALD\nFROM: MEMORANDUM for FOR: JUDITH RICHARDS Cannon September HOPE\n21,1976\nAriation naise statistics and Date.\nSen\n/. are carriers received a 2%\nface increase, effective September\n15,1976. They have received\na total increase once the\nlast year of approximately 9-10%\nThat's\n2. airline faces are set on the\nThe\nhasis of historic casts, ascraged, not\nlaw Juel costs after the ed not be structure relected\nprospective conts the oil embargo for example, increased\nen the airline rate\nimmediately since. in 1973-74, they\nwere new, not historic, costs.\nFurther, an across- the Board foard\nDrice increase could not take into\naccount varying costs of compliance\nwith noise standards to different\ncarriers: TWA has a fleet of old,\nDigitized from Box 2 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nMEMORANDUM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\n2.\nWASHINGTON\nplaned; Delta's fleet is newer, and\nquiet.\nIf there were no CAB\nregulation, clearly a straight\nface increase to cance and pass on tothe them\naser\ndeavironmental costs would\nbe the asswer.\nThe surrent CAB\nrate- making structure,\nhowever, forecloses this possibility.\n[Note: This also means that any\nproposed excironmental\nsurcharge should probably\nbe done by legislation,\nnot aCAB rate-making. .]\nFORD Crune,\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 21, 1976\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJIM CANNON\nFROM:\nJUDITH RICHARDS HOPE\nSUBJECT:\nAviation Noise, Relavant\nQuotations from Secretary Coleman's\nNational Transportation Policy\nThe following statements in Secretary Coleman's National\nTransportation Policy of September 17, 1975, support the\nproposed noise policy.\nDomestic Air Policy Priorities (Pages 7 and 8) :\nTake measures to foster more efficient use of\nfuel,\nStrengthen the financial viability of the\nwell-managed carriers by\nroute\nstructure to provide reliable long-haul\ntrunk line service\nto enable healthy\ncompetition between efficient carriers,\npermitting them to earn a reasonable rate\nof return on capital;\nModernize Federal financing policies\nDefine the government's responsibility for\npromoting financially viable and competitive\nair carrier, airframe and engine manufacturing\nindustries;\nFacilitate efforts by the U.S. airframe and\nengine manufacturing industry to maintain\nits leading role in international aviation.\n\"In summary, our suggestions for a Federal subsidy policy\nare as follows:\" (Pages 19 and 20)\nFORD : LIBRARY\n2\n(1) Federal subsidies are necessary in certain\ninstances to serve important national purposes.\nThese include conservation of energy, pro-\ntection of the environment, preserving the\nurban centers, relieving congestion in certain\nhigh-density corridors, promoting rational\nland use in metropolitan areas, preventing\nultimate nationalization of a vital service and\nmaintaining access to remote areas;\n(3) Wherever possible the costs of Federal\nsupport should be recovered by user charges;\n(5) There should be a preference for capital\nrather than operating subsidies; however,\n(a) care must be taken that capital\nsubsities do not induce excessive\ninvestment.\nEnvironment (Page 37)\nIt is our continuing policy to seek additional\nmethods and tools to enhance our ability to\nprotect the human environment and to \"interna-\nlize\" environmental \"costs.\" Thus we are\ncurrently\ninternalizing the environmen-\ntal costs of transportation projects.\nNoise\nWe will move toward the goal of confining severe\naircraft noise exposure levels around U.S.\nairports to the areas included in the airport\nboundary. This policy will be advanced through\nregulations on aircraft engine noise, aircraft\noperational procedures and airport grant program\nrequirements, including those relating to\ncompatible land use around airports.\nInternational Aviation (Pages 45 and 46) :\nA healthy, financially viable U.S. air carrier\nindustry causes the development and continuation\nof a healthy aircraft manufacturing industry\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\n3\nThe demand for new generation aircraft first by\nU.S. carriers ultimately creates foreign demand\nfor such U.S. aircraft. We must adopt policies\nthat will enable the U.S. aircraft manufacturers\nto retain their world preeminence since the\nindustry yields the second largest balance of\npayable benefit to the U.S.\nDRD\nUNITED STATES\nENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20460\nTHE ADMINISTRATOR\n21\nAM 10 06\nTo: Jim Cannon\nThe attached is an\nin-house EPA publication\nbut it gives some useful\nperspections on the noise\nproblem- see of 3+4 +\non aircraft -\nRun\nFORD : LIBRARY\n092101\nEPALOURNAL\nSEPTEMBER 1976\nVOL. TWO, NO. EIGHT\nQUIET,\nU.S. ENVIRONMENTAL\nPROTECTION AGENCY\nPLEASE!\nPrinted on recycled paper.\nEDAJOURNAL\nTHE QUEST FOR\nU.S.\nENVIRONMENTAL\nARTICLES\nPEACE AND QUIET\nPROTECTION\nAGENCY\nCONTROLLING NOISE POLLUTION\nPAGE 2\nRussell E. Train, Administrator\nAn interview with Charles L. Elkins,\n\"One winter night I stood and listened beneath the stars. It was cold,\nPatricia L. Cahn, Director of Public\nDeputy Assistant Administrator for\nAffairs\nNoise Control Programs\nperhaps 20 below, and I was on a lake deep in the wilds. The stars\nCharles D. Pierce, Editor\nwere close that night, so close they almost blazed, and the Milky Way\nTHE ROAR FROM ABOVE\nPAGE 6\nStaff: Van Trumbull, Ruth Hussey,\nwas a brilliant luminous splash across the heavens. An owl hooted\nDavid Cohen\nA report on aviation noise and\nsomberly in the timber of the dark shores, a sound that accentuated\nwhat is being done about it\nthe quiet on the open lake. Here again was the silence, and I thought\nThe EPA Journal is published\nhow rare it is to know it, how increasingly difficult to ever achieve real\nmonthly, with combined issues\nHOME NOISES\nPAGE 8\nJuly-August and November-December,\nquiet and the peace that comes with it, how true the statement\nThe sounds in the home that\nby the U.S. Environmental\n'tranquility is beyond price.' More and more do we realize that quiet is\ncan interfere with hearing\nProtection Agency. Use of\nimportant to our happiness. In our cities, the constant beat of strange\nfunds for printing this periodical has\nTESTING, TESTING\nPAGE 9\nand foreign wave lengths on our primal senses beats us into\nbeen approved by the Director of the\nneuroticism, changes us from creatures who once knew the silences to\nOffice of Management and Budget.\nEPA opens new laboratory for\nViews expressed by authors do not\nchecking noise from trucks\nfretful, uncertain beings immersed in a cacophony of noise which\nnecessarily reflect EPA policy.\ndestroys sanity and equilibrium.\"\nContributions and inquiries should be\nLIBERTY PARK PLANNED\naddressed to the Editor (A-107),\n-Sigurd F. Olson, \"The Singing Wilderness.\"\nFOR JERSEY SHORELINE\nPAGE 10\nWaterside Mall, 401 M St., S.W.,\nThis need for quiet or at least less noise is the main subject EPA\nWashington, D.C. 20460. No\nJournal examines in this issue.\npermission necessary to reproduce\nSOLVING AN OILY DILEMMA\nPAGE 12\nWe begin with an over-all view of the Agency's noise control\ncontents except copyrighted photos\nand other materials. Subscription:\nNAVY CLEANS UP\nPAGE 13\nprogram in a question and answer session with Charles L. Elkins,\n$8.75 a year, $.75 for single copy,\nDeputy Assistant Administrator for Noise Control Programs.\ndomestic; $11.00 if mailed to a foreign\nCOUNCIL SAYS IMPACT STUDY WORKS WELL PAGE 18\nThen we take a look at one of the most irritating sound problems in\naddress. No charge to employees.\nmodern society-airport noise. Another article examines the little\nSend check or money order to\nSuperintendent of Documents, U.S.\nREGION VIII ON PARADE\nPAGE 19\nrecognized problem of noise in the home.\nGovernment Printing Office,\nAs an example of some of the actions EPA is taking to deal with\nWashington, D.C. 20402.\nPROTECTING THE NEW FRONTIER\nPAGE 22\nthese matters, the Agency's new laboratory in Sandusky, Ohio, for\ntesting truck noise is described in án article.\nCOVER:\nSHARING THE JOURNAL\nBACK PAGE\nOther subjects covered in this issue include:\nIllustration by George Rebh\nA photo essay on a New Jersey waterfront ship graveyard where a\nhuge new park is planned.\nPHOTO CREDITS\nINSIDE COVER\nA review of a report by the Council on Environmental Quality on\nLarry Higgins\nDEPARTMENTS\nPAGE 2, 16\nErnest Bucci\nthe effectiveness of the environmental impact statement process.\nPAGE 7, 9\nMichael Philip\nAn article on the progress being made by the U.S. Navy in curbing\nPEOPLE\nPAGE 16\nManheim*\npollution from its ships.\nPAGE 8\nDavid Brill*\nPAGE 10, 11\nNATION\nF. Roy Kemp\nPAGE 14\nAnother in our continuing series of regional reports, with the\nspotlight this time on the Region VIII Office in Denver.\nPAGE 12\nContinental\nAn article which should be of interest to everyone who changes the\nOil Co.\nINQUIRY\nPAGE 24\nPAGE 16, 17\nAl Wilson\noil in his car and is faced with the question: What do you do with the\n*DOCUMERICA PHOTOS\nNEWS BRIEFS\nPAGE 25\ndirty oil?\nCONTROLLING\nNOISE POLLUTION\nAn interview with Charles L. Elkins,\nDeputy Assistant Administrator for Noise Control Programs\nQ: What is noise and how is it distin-\nStates and municipalities generally in\nQ: Why was primary responsibility for\nguished from sound?\nthe control of noise?\nregulating airplane noise given to the\nA: Noise is usually defined as un-\nA: The Noise Control Act differs from\nFederal Aviation Administration?\nwanted sound. In some cases, of\nmost of the acts which EPA adminis-\nA: This was a matter of very hot\ncourse, one person's noise is another\nters. We do not have a grant program\ndebate during the passage of the 1972\nperson's music, but we find that there\nto initiate and support State and local\nNoise Control Act. The legislative his-\nis a general public consensus about\ncontrol programs. Our function is, in-\ntory clearly indicates that the Congress\nwhat constitutes major sources of noise\nstead, to provide technical assistance,\nwas generally very disturbed with the\nrequiring Federal regulation.\nleaving to the State and local govern-\nlack of progress in noise abatement in\nQ: In the Noise Control Act of 1972,\nments the funding of these programs.\nthe aviation field, and they felt that the\nCongress, in effect, instructed EPA to\nOur job in the past has been to\nmessage had to be gotten to the FAA\ndetermine the level of environmental\ndevelop model codes, ordinances and\nthat more and faster action was needed,\nnoise that would protect public health\nmaterials which they can use to run\nso they thought very seriously of giving\nand welfare. Is this an attainable mis-\ntheir programs. Region VIII is develop-\nthe entire authority to EPA.\nsion for the Agency?\ning a workbook which will take local\nHowever, Congress finally decided\nA: In 1974 we published the \"Levels\ncommunities, step by step, through the\ninstead to keep the regulatory authority\nDocument\" which sets out, based on\ndevelopment of a noise control pro-\nwithin the FAA since it is imperative\nour current knowledge, those levels\ngram.\nthat final decisions in the aviation area\nwhich would protect public health and\nI would be less than honest, how-\nbe based on a review of all the factors,\nwelfare with an adequate margin of\never, not to indicate that to date our\nincluding protection of health and wel-\nsafety. As new information is devel-\nprogram of technical assistance to States\nfare, economic feasibility and safety.\noped through research and studies, that\nand localities has been minimal, be-\nSafety is one particular factor in\ndocument will be updated.\ncause of resource constraints and the\nwhich FAA clearly has the expertise\nThe question of whether this country\nnecessity under the Noise Control Act\nand there is no need for EPA to try to\ncould ever attain safe noise levels for\nto proceed expeditiously with the set-\ndevelop a staff with these specialized\nall activities is uncertain at this time,\nting of national source standards. I\nskills. However, Congress did provide\nalthough I would certainly suggest that\nwould hope that we would be able to\nus the authority to propose regulations\nit would be a long time from now\ngive this effort much more emphasis in\nto the FAA. These are published in the\nbefore that would happen. The cost and\nthe future and our office has developed\nFederal Register as Notices of Pro-\nthe technical feasibility of achieving\nproposals along this line which the\nposed Rulemaking, leaving to the FAA\nvarious levels of abatement are being\nAgency is now considering.\nthe final decision of whether or not to\ndetermined. In setting the standards\npromulgate a final rule. If the FAA\nGeorge Rebh\nunder the Noise Control Act we have\ndoes not promulgate our proposed rule,\nshould be phased out or retrofitted with\nshould be written in such a case, but\nSecondly, the problem has been con-\ntried to achieve the greatest protection\nthey must publish explanations of why\nnoise control devices. This number of\nwe feel the time to deal with the\nstrued as being so technically difficult\nof public health and welfare taking cost\nthey did not accept the EPA recom-\nflights would also be a problem at\nproblem is at the start and not after\nthat citizens have had a hard time\nand technical feasibility into account.\nmendations.\nDulles in the future if the population\nthe horse is already out of the barn.\"\ncutting through the technical jargon to\nQ: Why wasn't regulation of noise left\nQ: Wasn't EPA's concern about noise\naround the airport continues to grow as\nQ: Is it economically practical and\nsee that, in fact, things are possible.\nto State and local authorities? Why did\nfrom the Concorde exaggerated?\nit has in the past.\nfeasible at this time to appreciably\nMany of the required actions do not\nthe Federal government have to get\nA: No. I believe our position was just\nThe \"foot in the door\" argument is\nreduce aircraft and airport noise?\ncost a great deal of money and we have\ninto it?\nnot fully understood.\nespecially relevant in this case because\nA: It definitely is. In fact, the history of\nnow developed a noise abatement plan-\nA: The Noise Control Act does empha-\nWe agreed that one Concorde flight a\nof our international treaty obligations\naviation noise is quite remarkable. It is\nning methodology which will help air-\nsize that the primary responsibility for\nday or two flights a day would be\nwhich prohibit us from discriminating\nour observation that very little has been\nport proprietors and communities assess\nnoise control rests with State and local\nhardly noticed at Dulles Airport and\namong airlines. If we give approval to\ndone to abate aviation noise, despite all\nthe relative effectiveness of a number of\nauthorities. On the other hand, some\neven at JFK.\nthe French and British airlines, there\nthe furor about it over the last 20 years.\navailable abatement actions which we\nsources of noise are products which are\nWhat we argued was that the initial\nwill be really no basis on which the\nAs we see it, there are so many\nhave identified.\nmanufactured in a few cities and sold\nflights constituted a \"foot in the door\"\nSecretary of Transportation can deny\nparties responsible for part of the prob-\nQ: It has been recommended that the\nall over the country, such as automo-\nfor the 25 flights a day into JFK and\nequal treatment to Iran Airlines, which\nlem that they have never been forced to\nairlines spend $1 billion to help muffle\nbiles, trucks, and aircraft. For this\nfive flights a day into Dulles which the\nhas already indicated they will purchase\nact together to abate the noise. The\njet engine noise. What is your reaction\nreason Congress determined that noise\nBritish and French have projected.\nConcordes or to, for that matter,\nairlines, the aircraft manufacturers, the\nto this proposal?\nabatement at the source would be\nThis number of flights would provide\nPanAm or TWA.\nairport propriétors, land use planners—\nA: The FAA's proposal is that $1\nachieved most efficiently by national\na serious noise impact at JFK because\nMr. Coleman's response to that argu-\neach of these groups points a finger at\nbillion be spent to retrofit their aircraft.\nuniform standards for the major sources\nthe Concorde is clearly noisier than the\nment is that he will issue an Environ-\nthe others, and says, \"I cannot solve\nFAA studies have shown that this\nof noise.\npresent generation of aircraft which we\nmental Impact Statement at the time\nthe whole problem. When you get the\namount of money would be very well\nQ: What is EPA's role vis-a-vis the\nCharles L. Elkins\nand the FAA believe are too noisy and\nthat any further applications are made.\nothers to do something, come back and\nspent.\nWe of course believe that an EIS\ntalk to me.\"\nContinued on page 4\nPAGE 2\nPAGE\n3\n\"Very little has been done to abate aviation\n\"New truck regulations will save the\nnoise, despite all the furor about it\ncountry half a billion dollars a year\nprovide for abatement independently of\nWe believe that it will be possible to\nunder the Noise Control Act to review\nContinued from page 3\napproximately 15 million people in the\nA: Specifically, we have established\nany actions by the workers. However,\nbring these trucks down to about 75\nregulations of other Federal agencies\nUnited States are exposed to noise\nstandards for in-use interstate motor\nthese changes are more expensive than\ndecibels sometime around 1985, al-\nand to provide them our comments and\nFor instance the 707's and the DC-\nlevels in the workplace which could\ncarriers and railroads. We have also\nhearing protectors, and there is ob-\nthough we have not established that\nrecommendations where we feel that\n8's now flying are ten to 12 decibels\nresult in hearing loss for example?\nestablished standards for new heavy\nviously a desire on the part of industry\nlower level as yet. Should these\nthey are not sufficiently protective of\nnoisier than the 1969 standard for new\nA: Yes, hearing loss resulting from\nand medium trucks and portable air\nto substitute individual hearing protec-\nchanges in levels seem small to you,\npublic health and welfare.\naircraft, which itself is way out of date.\nexposure to noise is a very widespread\ncompressors, with standards on six ad-\ntors for engineering controls.\nkeep in mind that decibels are calcu-\nThis is what we did in the case of the\nThese aircraft are contributing a great\nproblem; it is an important basis for\nditional new products, including buses\nDespite the drawbacks of hearing\nlated on a logarithmic basis and three\nOccupational Safety and Health Ad-\ndeal to the noise around our airports,\nclaims under Workmen's Compensation\nand motorcycles, coming out in pro-\nprotectors, they can be used as an\ndecibels represents a doubling of the\nministration standard and as a result\nand our airport proprietors today are\nin this country, and we find that people\nposed form early next year.\ninterim measure until engineering\nactual noise energy.\nEPA testified extensively at the OSHA\nbeing sued for hundreds of millions of\nare not as aware of this problem as you\nThe difficulty we face of course is\nchanges are made. There is no need to\nQ: Have these new standards been\npublic hearings. These hearings pro-\ndollars because of noise, and these suits\nmight expect. Hearing loss has one\nthat these standards on new products\nkeep exposing workers to hazardous\nfairly well received by industry?\nduced a great deal of new data for\nrepresent only the tip of the iceberg.\nsimilarity to another health problem\nwill not begin to pay off in terms of\nlevels simply because it may take sev-\nA: We have been sued by 5 members\nOSHA about the inadequacies of the\nThe $1 billion, in our opinion, would be\nwith which EPA is grappling-cancer.\nmaking the country quieter until the\neral years to get the engineering\nof the truck industry concerning these\n90-decibel standards. Essentially, the\nwell spent because it will solve a\nBoth have long latency periods, which\nnew quieter products begin to replace\nchanges made.\nstandards. Only one of the companies,\n85-decibel standard which we proposed\nsubstantial portion of this problem.\nmeans that the adverse health effect\nthe older noisier products in larger\nIn the long term, however, we believe\nhowever, is challenging the actual lev-\nwould be about twice as protective of\nQ: Is a major reduction in aviation\noften becomes apparent only after a\nnumbers.\nthat engineering changes are the most\nels. The rest are concerned about the\npublic health as the 90-decibel one. In\nnoise dependent upon the development\nlong period of time. Often, by the time\nFor this reason, State and local pro-\nappropriate way to proceed.\ntesting and enforcement provisions of\nthis case, the 85-decibel standard costs\nof the new, superquiet jets?\nsomeone realizes that he is losing his\ngrams which control the use and opera-\nQ: With present and foreseeable tech-\nthe regulation or about certain technical\nmore money, and economic studies are\nA: Definitely not. We believe the FAA\nhearing it may well be too late to do\ntion of older and noisier products are\nnology, how much quieter can indus-\ndetails.\nbeing done now to see how much more\ncan promulgate standards today to re-\nanything about it.\nessential.\ntrial equipment be made in the next ten\nQ: How does EPA plan to enforce\nindustry would have to pay.\nquire the production of quieter aircraft\nQ: It has been said that by defining\nQ: How effective has new jet. engine\nyears?\nthese truck standards and regulations?\nQ: I understand that all Federally-aided\nwith technology which is already\nnoise levels on the intensity of sound\ntechnology been in reducing noise?\nA: We do not have a good fix on that.\nA: The manufacturer of these products\nhighway projects must provide for noise\nknown.\nonly, EPA has ignored other scientific\nA: The wide-bodied jets such as the 747\nWe do know that it is technically\nmust test a representative number of\nabatement measures. What are they,\nSecondly, there are steps which the\nfindings about hearing loss-that the\nare significantly quieter for their weight\nfeasible for most industries to bring the\nhis products, and EPA has the author-\nand what role is EPA playing in this\nairport proprietors can take to reduce\nintermittency of sound and the purity of\nclass than the older 707's and DC-8's.\nlevels of noise down to at least the 85-\nity to require further testing if we have\narea?\nnoise very effectively. Let me give you\ntone influence human response as well.\nUnfortunately the economic downturn\ndecibel level which we have recom-\nreason to believe that his products are\nA: Major highway projects do have to\nan example:\nA: These factors were considered in the\nin the airline business has slowed the\nmended to the Department of Labor.\nnot meeting the standards. The Noise\nhave environmental impact statements\nThe Oakland Airport is one of the\nlevels established in the \"Levels Docu-\nintroduction of these quieter planes into\nHearing damage will still occur to a\nEnforcement Division has recently es-\nwritten and the Department of Trans-\npilot projects for our airport planning\nment\" and a very thorough analysis of\nthe commercial fleet.\npercentage of the population even at\ntablished a testing facility at Sandusky,\nportation has noise criteria by which\nprogram. We went out to speak to them\nthe scientific data was done in writing\nRemarkably, these noise reductions\nthose levels, and so we must continue\nOhio, which will be a site at which we\nthey judge whether the noise produced\nabout their doing a plan and looking at\nthat document.\nare accompanied by improvements in\nto look at the feasibility of reducing\ncan bring these products for testing if\nby a highway is acceptable or not. The\nvarious noise abatement options.\nOf course, we have a great deal yet\nfuel efficiency for these aircraft. This is\nthese levels even further in the future.\nwe want to verify that the testing going\nmajor noise abatement technique used\nWe suggested to them the very sim-\nto learn about intermittency, and the\nunderstandable since noise is, in many\nQ: The 1972 Noise Act gives EPA the\non at the manufacturer's facility is\nby the Department is the building of\nple idea of moving their noisy aircraft\ninfluence of tones, and as this informa-\ncases, an indication of inefficiency.\nauthority to require manufacturers to\naccurate.\nbarriers along the sides of highways in\nfrom the north runway to their south\ntion is developed we will be revising\nThe new truck regulation which we\nlabel products as to their noise generat-\nQ: Will EPA eventually regulate noise\norder to try to keep the noise away\nrunway, so that the noisiest aircraft\nour \"Levels Document\" to incorporate\npromulgated in March of this year will\ning characteristics. Does your office\nfrom motorcycles and recreational vehi-\nfrom surrounding developments.\nwould be taking off across the bay\nsuch new data.\nsave the country half a billion dollars a\nplan to require such labeling?\ncles?\nOf course, noise abatement is often\ninstead of over a residential neighbor-\nQ: Will the passion of teenagers and\nyear because of the fuel efficiencies\nA: Yes, we do. We see this potentially\nA: We have under way now a standard-\nmost effectively accomplished by plan-\nhood.\nother young people for hi-fi and ampli-\nbrought about by the use of quieter\nas a very effective tool to enable con-\nsetting process on motorcycles and we\nning for the location of highways in\nAs simple as that may sound, the\nfied rock music, motorcycles, snowmo-\ncomponents.\nsumers themselves to make the decision\nhope to have a proposal in the Federal\nareas where the noise impact will be\nairport proprietor had not considered\nbiles, and other gadgets with high noise\nQ: In lowering industrial noise, which\nabout how noisy the products they buy\nRegister sometime in the early spring of\nminimal, and we hope to work closely\ndoing that in the past, partly, I believe,\npotential contribute to an early onset of\nway should we go? Emphasize engi-\nshould be. There are many products\n1977.\nwith the Department of Transportation\nbecause the FAA had told him that he\nhearing loss?\nneering controls or individual hearing\nwhere the noise created affects primar-\nWe are considering setting standards\nto improve this aspect of the noise\ndid not have authority to do anything\nA: Yes, definitely.\nprotection, requiring workers to use\nily the purchaser of the product, and\non snowmobiles and motorboats. The\nabatement program.\nabout noise. Without even waiting for\nAlmost no meeting I speak to goes\nearplugs?\nthose products seem particularly suita-\nsnowmobile case is interesting, how-\nQ: Who are the beneficiaries of noise\nthe development of an airport plan, the\nby without someone in the audience\nA: Well, generally, we have taken the\nble for labeling.\never, because a number of States have\nregulation?\nOakland Airport authority held a press\nasking me to do something about dis-\nposition that one should utilize engi-\nQ: How about heavy trucks? Is it\nalready established levels for snowmo-\nA: The beneficiaries come from all\nconference, and announced they were\ncotheque music and stereo headphones.\nneering changes and not depend on\npossible to make a significant reduction\nbiles, and the industry has reduced the\nwalks of life. They include the 15\nmoving all their noisy traffic to the\nThis is a very unusual kind of problem\nindividual hearing protectors.\nin the amount of noise from these\nnoise levels of their product substan-\nmillion people exposed to levels which\nsouth runway and thereby substantially\nfor EPA to have to deal with, and we\nMany people do not like to wear\nvehicles?\ntially. Whether these levels are low\nendanger their hearing in their job; the\nabated the noise over the residential\nhave not determined whether and how\nhearing protectors because they may\nA: Yes. The standards which we set in\nenough or not is a subject we are now\n13 million people exposed to similar\narea. We feel that this experience\nit would be appropriate for the Federal\nbecome uncomfortable when worn for\nMarch will bring about dramatic im-\ninvestigating.\nlevels outside of their occupation, such\nwould be duplicated all over the coun-\ngovernment to intervene. However, one\nlong periods of time. In addition, it is\nprovement in these trucks.\nQ: There has been some controversy\nas snowmobile and motorcycle opera-\ntry if airports were to develop the\npossibility would be providing more\nsometimes difficult to get them to fit\nThe trucks being manufactured today\nabout the limit for maximum noise\ntions; the 97 million people potentially\nsystematic abatement plans recom-\ninformation to people through an educa-\ncorrectly. Depending on the job, hear-\nare producing about 86 decibels and our\nexposure necessary to protect health\naffected by traffic noise; over 30 million\nmended by EPA.\ntional program.\ning protectors may interfere with some\nstandard calls for a reduction to 83\nand welfare in the workplace. Can you\nexposed to aviation noise and 36 million\nQ: Can you comment on the magni-\nQ: What appreciable progress has been\npeoples' work, because they may not\ndecibels in 1978, and to 80 decibels in\ncomment on this?\npeople living in areas impacted by\ntude of the hazard that noise poses to\nmade in controlling noise levels from\nbe able to hear instructions as well.\n1982.\nA: We have the statutory mandate\nconstruction, rail, and industrial noise.\nthe general public? Is it true that\nheavy equipment?\nThe engineering changes, of course,\nPAGE 5\nPAGE 4\nDamage suits totalling hundreds of\npilots, aircraft manufacturers, local\nmillions of dollars have been filed in\nplanning and zoning bodies, city coun-\ncourts around the country against air-\ncils of communities which both benefit\nports because of the noise disturbances\nfrom the airport and suffer because of\ncaused by airplanes.\nit, air carriers, owners of private air-\nIn addition to threatening airport pro-\ncraft, and land developers. Because of\nprietors with huge financial burdens,\nthis diversity and the ensuing legal and\nthe suits, along with other concerns,\njurisdictional conflicts, there is no single\nhave nearly halted the construction of\nprivate or governmental entity with suf-\nnew airports and the expansion and\nficient legal clout or technical expertise\nmodernization of existing airports.\nto remedy the matter alone. Histori-\nTHE ROAR FROM ABOVE\nCommercial air travel has been avail-\ncally, each faction has blamed the\nable to the public since the 1920's, and\nother, or has claimed an inability to act\ncomplaints about airplane noise have\nalone.\nbeen around for just about as long. It\nFlight paths at many airports are\nSince air transportation comes under\n\"For some 25 years now, communities\nwas not until the postwar boom in civil\nclose to residential areas.\nthe heading of interstate commerce,\naround the major airports of this coun-\naviation, though, that the problem of\nmost regulatory action affecting the\ntry have experienced an ever increasing\naircraft noise reached major propor-\nindustry arises at the Federal level.\nexposure to noise. Day in and day out,\ntions.\nCongress has vested this authority in\nmillions of people in this country are\nIn 1959 commercial jet travel was\nthe Department of Transportation, spe-\ndeluged by the din of airplanes landing\nintroduced, and air transportation was\ncifically in the Federal Aviation Admin-\nand taking off over their homes. Many\nnever to be the same. The American\nistration (FAA). Recognizing the grow-\nof these people are subjected to noise\npublic flocked to the skies in record\ning problem of aviation noise, the FAA\nlevels so high that according to the best\nnumbers. As airports and airlines grew,\nset national noise standards in 1969 for\nscientific evidence now available they\nthe noise became louder and louder.\nnew type aircraft designs. A new gener-\nrun a very real risk of actually having\nThe growth of air travel demanded\nation of quieter, more efficient commer-\ntheir hearing affected. Opening a win-\nmore airports and runways, meaning\ncial jet aircraft has evolved from these\ndow to enjoy a warm, spring breeze,\nmore of the take-offs and landings\nstandards. Not only are the L-1011,\nusing the patio in comfort for a bar-\nwhich cause noise problems. Boeing\nDC-10, and Boeing 747 quieter than\nbeque, relaxing in front of a TV set\n707's have been measured at 120 deci-\nthe jets of the sixties, but they carry\nwithout being disturbed, or carrying on\nbels on take-off, roughly the equivalent\ngreater payloads as well.\nan uninterrupted conversation with a\nof the sound heard when one stands in\nfriend in the comfort of our homes:\nfront of a stereo turned up to near top\nNoise Act\nthese ordinary, everyday activities\nvolume. Currently there are more than\nTo further protect the environment\nwhich the rest of us take for granted,\n2000 commercial jet aircraft operating in\nfrom the adverse effects of noise pollu-\nthey cannot enjoy. We can, with some\nthe United States, serving nearly 500\ntion, Congress passed the Noise Con-\nassurance, estimate the physical effects\nmajor terminals. And every day this\ntrol Act of 1972 which requires EPA to\non those people of prolonged exposure\noverpowering noise assaults the ears of\nstudy the aviation noise problem and\nto airport noise levels. There is no way\nmillions of Americans.\npropose appropriate regulations to the\nwe can measure the profound mental\nWhy aren't airports and their noisy\nFAA. Using this authority, EPA has\nand emotional distress they must en-\nplanes moved away from people? Well,\nproposed a number of regulations and\ndure.\nthat has been tried many times. For\nolder airports have long since been\nwill soon propose an airport noise\n\"The problem is compounded by the\ninstance, the Seattle/Tacoma Airport\nsurrounded by urban growth. Airports\nabatement and planning process. The\nsense of utter hopelessness and help-\nwas built several years ago in a remote,\nlike Chicago's Midway, Washington's\nmost promising aspects of this process\nlessness that overwhelms them. They\nundeveloped site. But today, new hous-\nNational, and La Guardia in New York\nare participation of the affected parties\nhave often given up hope that they can\ning development in the vicinity of the\nwere designed to handle the noise and\nin the development of any noise abate-\ndo anything themselves to avoid this\nairport has attracted many who appar-\nair traffic of an earlier day.\nment plan, and, for the first time, a\nmisery except to move. They doubt that\nently did not understand initially the\nEach airport's noise problem is\nmethodology for comparing the benefits\nany governmental agency or private\nmagnitude of the noise at this location.\nunique. And every airport's noise im-\nof alternative abatement actions that\ngroup will do anything about it. When\nProblems similar to Seattle's have\npact will depend on a multiplicity of\ncan be comprehended and effectively\nthey have tried to get things done, they\noccurred at major airports around the\nfactors other than just land-use: the\nused by planners and the general pub-\nhave experienced only a most dizzying\nNation because for many people, and\nairport's size and location, flight opera-\nlic.\nand disheartening round of 'buck-pass-\nespecially for land speculators and de-\ntions (international and cargo flights\nSurprisingly, there are many reasona-\ning.' No one seems to have the author-\nvelopers, modern airports are exciting\nmay cause nighttime noise problems,)\nble cost measures which can be taken\nity, or the power, or the will to give\nand attractive places.\noperating hours, types of aircraft, air-\nby airport proprietors, and some local\nthem any real help. No one seems to\nport ownership and government in-\ngovernments to effectively reduce the\nbe in charge. At least no one will admit\nLand Values\nvolvement.\nimpact of aviation noise. Some airports\nto it.\"\nLand values usually increase rapidly\nThe solution may be as complex as\nsuch as Washington's National Airport\n-Administrator Russell E. Train in\nnear an airport, and the transportation\nthe problem itself. The parties who\nhave imposed curfews which ban flights\nlinks with the urban area the airport\nhave a stake in any aviation noise issue\nduring certain night hours. The airport\nremarks to the Inter-Noise '76 Confer-\nserves make it an inviting location for\nare as varied as the characters in a\nin Minneapolis/St. Paul has substan-\nence, Shoreham Hotel, Washington,\nThe Concorde supersonic transport lands at Dulles Airport.\nhousing, and other kinds of develop-\nplay. They include the Federal and\ntially reduced its noise complaints\nD.C., April 5, 1976.\nment.\nState governments, airport proprietors,\nthrough such steps as the use of differ-\nThere are also many cases where\nhomeowners near the airport, airline\nent take off and landing procedures.\nPAGE 6\nPAGE 7\nSuch efforts to quiet appliances are\nHOME NOISES\nessential, but they are not the total\nTESTING, TESTING\nanswer. Household noise created by\nthe construction and siting of the home\nitself is becoming an increasing national\nproblem. New types of thinner building\nDue to an often unrecognized form of\nmaterials tend to transmit noise vibra-\npollution, more and more Americans\ntion and in some cases may even\nare being deprived of a time-honored\namplify them. Houses built in airport\namenity-the peace and quiet of their\nflight paths or along superhighways are\nhomes.\nalso subjected to high levels of un-\nThis pollutant is the drone of kitchen\nwanted sound, which, in addition to\nappliances, the racket of an over-ampli-\ncreating a health hazard, may vibrate\nfied stereo, the sound of street noise\nwalls and pipes until they crack.\nthrough poorly-constructed walls and\nEPA is currently preparing a model\nwindows and the roar of overhead\nbuilding code for various types of struc-\naircraft.\ntures. The code, which can be adopted\nNoise in the home is reaching levels\nby communities, spells out extensive\nthat can cause more than irritation and\nacoustical requirements. Cities and\nemotional disquiet. In extreme cases, it\ntowns will be able to regulate construc-\ncan begin to rob us of our precious\ntion in a comprehensive manner to\nability to hear the sounds of the world.\nproduce quieter local environments in\nHome-grown noise can be grouped\nthe future.\nunder two general headings-that which\nMoreover, the U.S. Department of\nis emitted from appliances and that\nHousing and Urban Development has\nwhich comes from flimsy building mate-\ndeveloped \"Noise Assessment Guide-\nrials and home-siting problems. With\nlines\" to help evaluate the availability\nregard to the first category, a 1972 EPA\nof their funds for aiding community\nreport to Congress specifically exam-\nplanning. Likewise, the Veterans Ad-\nined noise levels produced by a number\nministration requires information re-\nof household appliances. According to\ngarding the exposure of V.A.-financed\nthe study, those appliances which fall\nhouses to noise from nearby airports.\ninto the below-60-decibel range, a rela-\nThe V.A. also has directed its offices\ntively low level of noise, include refrig-\nto take noise considerations into ac-\nerators, floor fans and clothes dryers.\ncount regarding development of prop-\nNoise meter measures truck sound\nStill, these modern conveniences pro-\nerty acceptable for G.I. loans.\nduce enough noise to interfere with\nThrough zoning, land use planning,\nA new EPA facility for testing the noise\nEPA will require manufacturers to test\nboth communication and sleep.\nand building regulations, many control\nmade by vehicles and machinery will\ntheir products' noise outputs and see\nNoise-producers registering in the\nagencies are working to abate noise\nopen this month at Sandusky, Ohio.\nthat they conform to regulations, Dr.\n65-75 decibel range include sewing ma-\npollution created by poor construction\nCalled the Noise Enforcement Facil-\nShutler said. The Sandusky facility is\nchines, dishwashers, and food mixers.\nThis youth is not deaf; he's left the power mower running.\nand siting problems. The homeowners'\nity, it consists of a building and test pads\ndesigned to assure by periodic checkups\nSince exposure time to these sources\nopportunity for battling noise can be\ncompleted last month and two van-\nthat the manufacturers' tests are effec-\ntends to be brief and infrequent, the\nDecibel levels between 75 and 85\nlabels on products that may generate\nmore than just insistence on quieter\nmounted mobile testing units. William\ntive. This will be done in a variety of\nrisk of hearing damage is negligible. But\nwere recorded for such appliances as\nnoise capable of adversely affecting\nappliances. Noise-absorbing materials\nHeglund is director of the 11-person\nways: by requiring manufacturers to\nthe level of the noise produced can\nvacuum cleaners, electric razors and\npublic health or welfare. By 1977 EPA\nshould be used wherever possible.\nstaff of engineers, technicians, and sup-\nship sample products to Sandusky for\ncause annoyance.\nfood grinders. The risk of hearing dam-\nwill be implementing this program to\nThick carpeting, heavy drapes, padded\nporting personnel. The facility's capital\ntesting, by conducting EPA tests at the\nage associated with the use of these\nensure that consumers are provided\nfurniture, and acoustical ceiling tile are\ncost is about $750,000. It reports to Dr.\nmanufacturer's plant using the mobile\nnoise sources is small but increases\nall means to this end. When choosing a\nNoise Around the Home\nwith such information. The new policy\nNorman D. Shutler, Deputy Assistant\ntesting units, and by simply monitoringa\nwith continuous or cumulative use.\nshould also encourage product manu-\nnew house or apartment, one should\nAdministrator for Mobile Source and\nmanufacturer's testing through EPA\nSound Level for Op-\nThe last class of noisy household\nerator of Equipment\nfacturers to produce quieter gadgets and\nlook for sturdy walls, non-hollow doors,\nNoise Enforcement.\npersonnel at the manufacturer's test\nNoise Source\n(in decibels)\nitems involved is those with a level of\nappliances.\nwall-to-wall carpeting, and insulated\nThe Sandusky center serves as an\nfacility.\nRefrigerator\n40\nabove 85 decibels. Some scientific opin-\nThere is much that homeowners\nheating and air conditioning ducts.\nEPA checkpoint for assuring that newly\nIf a manufacturer cannot afford his\nFloor Fan\n51\nion has it that continuous exposure for\nthemselves can presently do to help.\nTime should be invested in learning the\nmanufactured medium- and heavy-duty\nown noise testing and no private acous-\nClothes Dryer\n55\neight hours per day over an extended\nFor instance, by placing foam pads\nnoise sources in any neighborhood\ntrucks and portable air compressors\ntical test laboratory is available to him.\nWashing Machine\n60\nperiod of time to noise levels of about\nunder blenders and mixers, the noise\nwhere one might be planning to reside.\nconform to the noise limits promulgated\nhe may, for a fee, use the Sandusky facil-\nDishwasher\n64\n85 decibels can cause permanent hear-\nlevel of the machines can be apprecia-\nA current EPA public service an-\nlast March.\nVacuum Cleaner\nity for his production testing. The facil-\n67\nnouncement for television includes a\nElectric Shaver\n75\ning loss, although the degree of such\nbly reduced. Power mowers should be\nLater it will also serve to back up the\nity will also be available for the training\nFood Disposal\ndamage will vary among individuals.\nchecked to see if they are equipped\nview of the Washington Monument,\n76\nenforcement of noise regulations for\nof Regional, State, and local noise en-\nElectric Lawn Edger\n81\nThe appliances which fall into this\nwith good mufflers and sharp blades.\nover which a solemn voice intones,\nother types of noisy vehicles and\nforcement personnel. The site in north-\nHome Shop Tools\n85\ngroup are woodwork and shop tools,\nThey should also be run at low speeds.\n\"Two centuries of freedom of speech.\"\nmachines-motorcycles, buses,\nwestern Ohio was chosen because of its\nGasoline Power Mower\n87 to 92\ngasoline-powered lawn mowers and\nVibration mounts and proper insulation\nInterrupted by the roar of jet aircraft,\nbulldozers, loaders, compactors, and\nproximity to truck and machinery mak-\nGasoline Riding Mower\n90 to 95\nhedgers, snowmobiles, chainsaws, and\nshould be used when installing dish-\nthe narrator is forced to conclude in a\ntruck-mounted refrigeration units-as\ners, its \"reasonable weather condi-\nChain Saw\n110\nblaring stereo equipment.\nwashers. Noise can also be reduced by\nnear scream, \"So don't we have a legal\nrules are adopted for them.\ntions\" for outdoor testing, and its low\nSnowmobile\n112\nUnder the Noise Control Act of\nkeeping washing machines in an en-\nright to hear one another?\"\nUnder the Noise Abatement Act,\nambient noise levels.\nStereo\nUp to 136\n1972, EPA has the authority to require\nclosed place.\nPAGE 9\nPAGE 8\nWork has started on a massive\nLIBERTY PARK PLANNED\nproject to remove the derelict\nFOR JERSEY SHORELINE\nvessels and rotting piers along\nthe Jersey City, N.J., waterfront\nacross New York Bay from the\nStatue of Liberty so the area\ncan be developed as Liberty\nPark. Plans for this program to\nturn a marine graveyard into a\nIII\nsuperb park attracting millions\nof people annually have been\ndeveloped by the State of New\nJersey. The State, with the\nassistance of the Federal\nGovernment, hopes to provide\nexhibition halls, museums,\ntheaters, and restaurants as well\nas several different types of\npark facilities. An Environmental\nPark, where visitors can study\ntidal marshes, is included in the\nplans. Also proposed are\npedestrian passageways to\nboth Liberty and Ellis Islands.\nOld tug boats and SCOWS mouldering in Black Tom Channel.\nStatue of Liberty seen through weather-worn piers of the New Jersey waterfront.\nIn the foreground are several hundred acres of a Jersey City, N.J., wasteland which has been used as a dumping ground for\nderelict boats. The Statue of Liberty is at the right and the towers of Manhattan loom at left.\nPAGE 10\nPAGE 11\nSOLVING AN OILY DILEMMA\nNAVY CLEANS UP\nWith more and more car owners chang-\nThe largest single organization to be\ning their own engine oil for economy\naffected by ship sewage regulations re-\nreasons, a valuable and non-renewable\ncently promulgated by EPA is the\nenergy resource is being wasted\nUnited States Navy.\nthrough the indiscriminate disposal of\nThe Navy has had a program under-\nthe used crankcase oil.\nway for several years to convert its\nAlthough there is no accurate data on\nships so that wastes can be properly\nhow much used crankcase oil is poured\ncontrolled. The new rules ban the dis-\ndown the drain, the toilet, the storm\ncharge of untreated or inadequately\nsewer or out into the backyard, an\ntreated sewage in coastal and inland\nEPA official estimated that approxi-\nwaters or require on-board treatment\nmately 100 million gallons of waste oil\nand disinfection before discharge. Ap-\nare disposed of annually by car owners.\nproximately 400 ships of the Fleet and\nLarry McEwen, an analyst in the Re-\nRecycle\nabout 200 smaller ships and service\nsource Recovery Division of EPA's\nUsed\ncraft have been or are being converted.\n963\nOffice of Solid Waste Management\nPrograms, said this oil contains a number\nOil\nTo help stimulate the Navy's conver-\nsion program, Secretary of the Navy J.\nof contaminants among whichlead is the\nWilliam Middenorf II offers annual En-\nmost prevalent and potentially harmful.\nvironmental Protection Awards. At a\nAutomobile oil drainings contain approxi-\nrecent presentation, Mr. Middenorf\nmately one percent lead particulates\nsaid: \"I wanted to personally present\nwhich originate from the lead additives\nthe awards to this year's winners in my\nin gasoline.\npoints for used oil. Right now, our best\nused crankcase oil is a complex one\noffice to demonstrate my interest and\nThe problem of how to control the\nrecommendation is for citizens to en-\nand there are currently several ap-\ncontinued support of this important pro-\ndisposal of waste lubricating oil is not a\ncourage their local governments to\nproaches by which EPA is attacking it.\ngram to enhance and protect our envi-\nnew one. In the past, service stations\nmake such collection sites available.\nFirst of all, since lead is the major toxic\nronment.\"\ngave large quantities of the used oil\n\"For example, the Continental Oil\nmaterial involved, if it could be re-\nTotal cost of the waste control con-\nThis destroyer, the USS Spruance, is one of 30 ships that are being fitted with\nthey drained from cars to collectors\nCompany has been experimenting in\nmoved from gasoline, and therefore\nversions through fiscal 1975 has been\ncollection and incineration systems for sewage.\nwho either sold it to various industries\nthe Midwest with a system to collect\nfrom the lubricating oil which collects\nabout $106 million. The cost of com-\npoint of view, prior to national pollution\nThese will be systems which either\nfor re-use or dumped it anywhere they\nused oil in these service station holding\nit, a large part of the health problem\npleting the conversions is expected to\nstandards, there was no requirement for\nincinerate the sewage to a sterile ash or\ncould. Today, however, with the\ntanks for recycling. We enthusiastically\nwould be eliminated. EPA regulations\nbe $205 million. The Navy is confident\nsewage holding tanks or treatment de-\nevaporate it to a sterile residue. Very\nrise of the do-it-yourself oil changer the\nsupport this type of action.\"\nto reduce the lead content of gasoline\nit will meet the 1981 deadline.\nvices. But design requirements have\nsmall craft may have airplane-type toi-\nsource of the control problem has\nThe Federal Energy Administration\nhave been enacted and are now in the\nShipboard toilets constitute only part\nchanged, and space is now being found\nlets installed.\nshifted.\nhas followed up this initiative and is\nprocess of re-promulgation after being\nof the Navy's environmental program.\nin existing ships and designed into new\nNavy ships on the high seas, beyond\nNow in addition to the service station\ndeveloping a national waste oil recovery\nupheld in the courts following a chal-\nPier sewer lines must be installed at the\nconstruction.\nterritorial waters, will continue to pump\nowner trying to decide how to get rid of\nprogram. FEA's current efforts include\nlenge by the gasoline additive manufac-\nNavy's shore bases to handle the sew-\nAll large ships of the Fleet will have\nsewage overboard as they have in the\nlarge quantities of used oil, the car\na model law for State legislatures out-\nturers. In addition, by requiring the\nage pumped from ships' holding tanks.\nholding tanks installed and pump their\npast. There are advantages to this,\nowner, standing in his driveway holding\nlining an approach to used oil recycling\navailability of lead-free gasoline for cars\nA total of $77 million has already been\nsewage to shore-based treatment sys-\nmarine scientists have pointed out:\na gallon tub of dirty crankcase oil, must\nas well as a Citizens' Group Commu-\nequipped with catalytic converters,\nprovided for the necessary pier sewers.\ntems when they come to port. As of\n\"The sea requires basic plant nutrients,\nalso decide what to do with it.\nnity Kit with instructions to the local\nEPA has further reduced the amount of\nAn additional $28 million is recom-\nmid-1976, 122 ships and 53 submarines\nand residues from man, shrimp, fish, or\nWhere should you dump your used\ncommunity on how to organize and\nlead in waste oil.\nmended to complete the pier equip-\nshould be equipped with holding and\nwhales constitute such fertilizer; or\noil? According to Mr. McEwen, \"ide-\nconduct a local oil recycling program.\nment.\npump-out systems, with 205 ships and\neven a direct source of food.\"\nally, our solution is to recommend to\nBarring any success at these efforts\nMarket\nExtensive ship modifications and\n64 submarines remaining to be so\nAlthough the Navy is moving stead-\nthe car owner that he take his waste\nin the local community, Mr. McEwen\nHowever, regardless of these actions\nshore facilities are also needed to prop-\nequipped. The work is being done in\nily to equip its ships and ports with\ncrankcase oil to an approved collection\nsays that the least hazardous disposal\nthe problem of disposing of used oil will\nerly handle waste oil and oily bilge-\nconjunction with regularly scheduled\nbetter sewage handling systems, much\nsite or designated service station. From\naround the home is probably to pour\nstill remain. In this area the major\nwater that used to be routinely pumped\nship overhaul periods which occur\nremains to be done by others, espe-\nthere the waste oil could be picked up\nthe used oil into a container and place\nthrust of EPA's efforts has been toward\noverboard. The Navy has been working\nabout every four years.\ncially in providing shore pump-out facil-\nin large quantities and either re-refined,\nit in a garbage can. Although this\nstimulating the reestablishment of an\non these shipboard pollution abatement\nThe Naval Station in Mayport, Flor-\nities in commercial and foreign ports\nused as a dust suppressant or in asphalt\noption is wasteful of the resource, the\nactive market for used oil in the re-\nmeasures since October, 1970, when\nida, has complete pier sewer line instal-\nwhere Navy ships may call.\nproduction, or burned by utilities or\npossibility of groundwater contamina-\nfining industry.\nthe Chief of Naval Operations estab-\nlations. Comparable installations at San\nThe Intergovernmental Maritime\ninstitutions which use oil as fuel and are\ntion is hopefully small in a municipal\nIt is hoped an increased demand for\nlished an Environmental Protection Di-\nDiego, Calif., and Norfolk, Va., are to\nConsultative Organization, of which the\nequipped with controls capable of keep-\nlandfill. The storm sewer is the worst\nwaste oil by re-refiners will stimulate\nvision to direct and coordinate the\nbe completed soon. All Navy-owned\nUnited States is a member, has pro-\ning lead particulates out of the atmos-\noption because from there the oil might\nnatural market forces enough to enable\nwork.\nports will be equipped with pier sewer\nposed regulations that are very similar\nphere.\nrun directly into waterways where it\ncitizens to return used oil to designated\nThe Navy's total environmental pro-\nand waste handling facilities by 1980 or\nto the measures now being taken by the\nCollection\ncan be toxic to water organisms. To\ncollection points. These forces should\ngram now covers water pollution, air\n1981. In most cases sewage treatment\nU.S. Navy, although the United States\npour it down your drain or toilet can\nhelp reduce the dumping of oil in the\npollution, noise abatement, and solid\nwill be done by a nearby municipal\nand most other members have not yet\n\"We are currently attempting to get\ncause problems with waste treatment,\"\nlarger metropolitan areas where a mar-\nwaste management. The total cost\nplant.\nratified them.\ntogether with the service station associ-\nhe said.\nket exists. However, the economical\nthrough 1981 is estimated at $1.7 bil-\nMany small ships, gunboats, mine-\nIn summary, a major effort is being\nations and the Federal Energy Adminis-\nThe question of how to dispose of\nrecycling of used oil in the more remote\nlion.\nsweepers, and small service craft are to\nmade to control discharge of human\ntration to designate suitable collection\nareas remains a problem.\nFrom the traditional ship designer's\nbe fitted with marine sanitation devices.\nwastes from naval vessels.\nPAGE 12\nPAGE 13\n25 under the 1972 Amendments to the\nFederal court to enjoin CFI from\nsaid, are pyrolysis (heat treatment) and\nAlcatraz Co., Inc., Richmond, Va.;\nFederal Water Pollution Control Act,\nviolating or refusing to comply with the\naround nation\ncomposting (mixing the sludge with\nEmge Aviation Marine Products, Inc.,\ncalls for U.S. Steel to cut discharges of\nClean Air Act and to require the\norganic materials and allowing it to\nLanghorne, Penn,; Lincoln Industrial\nammonia, cyanide, and phenols to\ncorporation to adhere to a schedule for\ndecompose into a harmless soil\nChemical Co., Reading, Penn., and the\nlevels necessary for the improvement\nachieving compliance with emission\nimprover.) The permits cover New York\nLaco Corp., Baltimore, Md.\nand protection of water quality. The\nregulations or to \"cease all operations\nCity, Yonkers, four municipalities in\nprimary sources of these pollutants are\nnot in compliance.\"\nNassau County, Long Island, and six\nKANSAS CITY\nthe blast furnaces and the coke plant.\nmajor sewage authorities and 35 smaller\nThe Gary Works discharges about 750\nmunicipalities in New Jersey.\nmillion gallons of polluted water each\nquiet in sioux city\nDumping permits covering 93 New\nday to the Grand Calumet River and\nA noise control ordinance adopted by\nJersey communities were denied,\nLake Michigan. Regional Administrator\nSioux City, Iowa, approximately one\nbecause, Mr. Hansler said, alternate\ndisposal facilities are now available or the\nATLANTA\nGeorge Alexander said the cleanup\nyear ago has proved effective, city\norder was the result of a long\nofficials report. Following consultation\nSAN FRANCISCO\napplicant failed to provide information to\nadministrative proceeding which began\nwith representatives of Englewood,\njustify ocean dumping.\nair plans\nin September, 1974. Efforts to require\nColo., Sioux City adopted the first local\nBOSTON\nSix of the eight States in Region IV\nU.S. Steel to control its water pollution\nnoise abatement regulation in Iowa.\ncitizen forums\nnuclear study\nhave been asked by the Regional Office\nat the Gary Works go back to\nAfter the ordinance was adopted, the\nRegion IX has contracted with the\nEPA has announced funding of the\nto revise portions of their air pollution\nenforcement conferences held in the\npolice department began an educational\nCalifornia League of Women Voters to\ntime saving\nsecond phase of a four-year $425,000\ncontrol plans to assure the attainment\nlate 1960's.\nprogram which included talks to civic\nhold Citizen Forums on varying envi-\nThe Connecticut Department of Envi-\nin-depth study of the low level nuclear\nand maintenance of national air quality\ngroups, newspaper articles and radio\nronmental topics throughout the State.\nronmental Protection and Region I\nwaste disposal site at West Valley,\nstandards. The States were asked to\nand TV appearances. The department\nThe forums which begin this month will\nhave entered into a coordination agree-\nNew York. Leakages have been\ndevelop specific additional control\nalso conducted a one-week course to\ndeal with local issues involving EPA\nment for the processing of applications\ndetected at the site, which is now\nmeasures. Metropolitan areas which\ntrain its officers in the use of sound\nand other Federal, State or local offi-\nfor Federal funding of municipal waste-\nclosed. The goal of the over-all study is\nwill be affected by these changes are:\nmetering equipment. Three District\ncials. Proposed topics include such is-\nwater treatment facilities. The agree-\ntwofold. In addition to assisting New\nBirmingham, Ala.; Atlanta, Ga.;\nCourt judges were given demonstra-\nsues as offshore oil and its onshore\nment is expected to reduce processing\nYork State in determining the health\nLouisville, Ky.; Charlotte, N.C.;\ntions of how the sound metering equip-\nimpacts, preservation of agricultural\ntime and to accelerate the flow of funds\nimplications of the West Valley burial\nCharleston, S.C.; and Nashville, Tenn.\nDALLAS\nment worked. Before the use of scien-\nland, air pollution and transportation\nfor Connecticut's sewage treatment\nsite both as it now exists and for the\ntific equipment, many of the officers'\nand long term effects of ground water\nconstruction program.\nfuture, EPA hopes to use information\nlead content\ndeepwater ports\nnoise offense citations were thrown out\npumping. The Region hopes these for-\ngathered by this study to develop\nThe lead content of gasoline supplies in\nRegional officials have been reviewing\nof court because judges complained that\nums will help EPA and other agencies\ntreatment award\nenvironmentally acceptable criteria and\nthe capitals of Region IV's eight States\nCoast Guard draft environmental im-\nthe actions were not based upon con-\nunderstand what citizens think are the\nRegion I has selected a water pollution\nstandards for future burial sites.\nis now being tested. Regional\npact statements on the requests for\ncrete regulation. Recently all persons\nmost important issues and will help\ncontrol facility in Sturbridge, Mass., as\nAdministrator Jack Ravan said that\nlicenses for two deepwater ports, one\narrested for noise violations have paid\ncitizens understand what the agencies\nthe recipient of its \"Wastewater Treat-\ntechnicians will collect and analyze\noff the shore of Texas and the other in\nfines rather than go to court and the\ncan and can't do about these problems.\nment Plant Award.\" Operators at this\nnearly 1,000 samples of low-lead\nwaters off the Louisiana coast. EPA is\nnumber of violations has dropped drast-\nsecondary treatment plant have\ngasoline to insure that lead content does\nexpected to make a recommendation\nically. Education has been the key\nachieved outstanding success in the\nnot exceed Federally established limits.\nsoon to the Secretary of Transportation\nfactor in the decrease, Sioux City offi-\nremoval of pollutants. The award is\nOn Oct. 1, the Regional Office will\non whether the licenses should be\ncials report. Police officials anticipate\ndesigned to recognize the important role\nproperly operated and maintained treat-\nPHILADELPHIA\nresume enforcement of its previously\ngranted and, if so, under what condi-\npassage of a statewide noise pollution\npromulgated regulations for reducing\n10\ntions. The questions being considered\nlaw in Iowa.\nment plants are playing in the effort to\nlead in gasoline as a public health\nby EPA are whether the proposed\ndumping slashed\nSEATTLE\neliminate water pollution in New Eng-\nprotection measure. This regulation,\ndeepwater ports will comply with the\nland.\nRegion III has issued a new one-year\nissued in 1973 but tied up in court\nrequirements of the Federal Water Pol-\nInterim Ocean Dumping Permit to the\nchallenges until recently, limits the\nlution Control Act, the Clean Air Act,\nhalt ordered\nCity of Philadelphia requiring a\naverage amount of lead in gasoline to a\nthe Marine Protection, Research and\nRegional Administrator Donald P. Du-\nsubstantial reduction in the amount of\n2\nmaximum 1.4 grams per gallon in 1976.\nSanctuaries Act and other major envi-\nbois has ordered the City of Twin\nsewage sludge to be dumped during the\nThe level will be gradually dropped in\nronmental laws. The proposed ports\nDENVER\nFalls, Idaho, to stop discharging munic-\nnext year. The permit reduces the\nsucceeding years until a low of .5 grams\nwould be used to receive large imports\nipal and industrial sewage into Rock\namount of sludge the city can dispose\nis reached by January 1, 1979.\nof crude oil from supertankers. The\nCreek, a tributary of the Snake River.\nNEW YORK\nof in the ocean from 141 million pounds\nTexas Seadock port would be located 26\nsteel company sued\nThe order followed a report by the\nto 116 million pounds per year. Further\nmiles south of Freeport, Tex., in about\nCFI Steel Corporation of Pueblo,\nIdaho Department of Health and Wel-\nreductions are required in succeeding\ndumping deadline\n100 feet of water and would be connected\nColo., has been charged in U.S.\nfare that Twin Falls was discharging\nyears until 1981 when all dumping is to\nby pipelines to a shoreside storage\nDistrict Court in Denver with violation\nuntreated wastes into the creek at the\nSewage sludge dumping in the Atlantic\nend. The city is also being required to\nfacility. Louisiana's Loop deepwater\nof the Federal Clean Air Act. The suit\nrate of a half-million gallons a day.\nOcean off New York and New Jersey\nmeet a rigorous time schedule for\nterminal would be located approximately\nalleges the corporation's basic oxygen\nEPA said the discharge was from a\nmust end by December, 1981, under the\ndeveloping alternate means of sludge\nCHICAGO\n18 miles off the coast in international\nfurnace and coke plants have violated\nbypass around a pumping station that\nterms of dumping permits recently issued\ndisposal.\nwaters, from 105 to 115 feet deep.\nFederal particulate emission regulations\nhad broken down.\nby Region II Administrator Gerald M.\nDespite conservation efforts and search\nsince late 1974. The suit notes that\nThis order emphasized the city's re-\nHansler.\npesticide fines\nsteel plea denied\nfor alternate fuels, the United States'\nRegional Administrator John Green\nsponsibility for prompt and effective\nOther disposal methods can be put into\nFines totaling over $16,000 were\nA motion by U.S. Steel asking for\ndependency on foreign oil is expected to\nissued abatement orders to the\naction to stop polluting Rock Creek and\npractice by that date, Mr. Hansler said,\nrecently collected from five pesticide\npostponement of the effective date of\nincrease substantially by 1980, thus\ncompany in 1974. Company officials\nset the stage for possible further action\nand the new interim permits require the\nmanufacturing firms for violating the\nan EPA permit requiring the company\nrequiring improved transportation and\nhave said that their firm is engaged in\nby the Government to enforce the\napplicants to develop specific schedules\nFederal Insecticide, Fungicide and\nto reduce chemical discharges from its\ndistribution systems to handle the\nan air-quality control program. The\nFederal Water Pollution Control Act,\nfor changing over to meet the deadline.\nRodenticide Act. The companies are:\nGary, Ind., plant by July 1, 1977, has\nmounting volume of imported oil.\nU.S. Attorney's office has asked the\nMr. Dubois said.\nAmong the methods that can be used, he\nN. Jonas Co., Inc., Philadelphia;\nbeen denied. The permit, issued June\nPAGE 15\nPAGE 14\nPEOPLE\nWilliam T. Wisniewski was recently\nappointed Director of the Personnel\nDivision in EPA's Region III.\nBefore his EPA appointment, Mr.\nWisniewski served as personnel officer\nfor the Philadelphia District Office of\nthe U.S. Internal Revenue Service.\nMr. Wisniewski had spent eight years\nJohn Bonine, an EPA Deputy Associ-\nat the Mid-Atlantic Regional Office of\nate General Counsel, has been named\nthe Internal Revenue Service in a\nAssociate General Counsel in charge of\nvariety of capacities ranging from\nthe Air Quality and Noise Control\nmanagement intern to personnel officer.\nDivision. Before serving as Deputy\nA native of Philadelphia, Mr.\nAssociate for the Pesticides, Toxic\nWisniewski received a B.S. in\nWilliam D. Dickerson has been\nSubstances and Solid Waste Division,\nManagement from Temple University\nappointed Assistant Director for\nMr. Bonine was a senior staff attorney\nin 1965.\nin the Air Division of the General\nG. William Frick's selection by Ad-\nJames R. Marshall has been appointed\nResource Development Liaison in the\nministrator Russell E. Train for the po-\nDirector of Public Affairs for EPA's\nCounsel's office for three years. During\nCharles Mooney, Jr., son of Dorothy\nOffice of Federal Activities. The\nsition of EPA General Counsel has\nthose years, he helped develop EPA's\nRegion II Office in New York City.\nCotton and Charles Mooney, both\nResource Development staff is\nbeen approved by the U.S. Civil Ser-\nHe succeeds Donald R. Bliss, Jr., who\nEPA employees, was a member of the\nresponsible for liaison with those\ntransportation control plans and later\nvice Commission. Mr. Frick succeeds\nis now Public Affairs Director in the\nU.S. Olympic boxing team\nFederal agencies which are principally\nhelped defend them in the courts. Mr.\nBonine is a graduate of the Yale Law\nRobert V. Zener, who left to join a\nAgency's Region X Office in Seattle.\nand won a Silver Medal\nengaged in natural resource and energy\nprivate law firm. Having served in the\nMr. Marshall served with New York\ndevelopment such as the Departments\nSchool and a member of the California\nin the recent games at Montreal.\nGeneral Counsel's office for three\nBar.\nCity's Environmental Protection\nA native of Washington, D.C., Mr.\nof Interior and Agriculture, the Corps\nyears, first as Associate General\nAdministration for four years, ending\nMooney is the Armed Forces bantam-\nof Engineers, and the energy agencies.\nCounsel, Water Quality Division, and\nup as assistant administrator for\nweight titleholder. He won 56 out 61\nMr. Dickerson is a graduate of Kansas\nthen as Deputy General Counsel, Mr.\ncommunications with responsibility for\namateur fights in his career before\nState University and holds an M.S.\nFrick has extensive knowledge of the\nall the Agency's public affairs and press\nwinning a place on the Olympic team.\ndegree in Aeronautics and Astronautics\nrange of legal matters relating to EPA\ninformation activities. He has had long\nHis mother is a secretary in EPA's\nfrom the University of Washington. He\nactivities.\nexperience as a technical and\nOffice of Planning and Management\nhas been employed in the Office of\nMr. Frick was born and educated in\nenvironmental journalist. A native of\nand his father, Charles Mooney, Sr., is\nFederal Activities since 1972 as\nthe Midwest, receiving his B.A. and\nCanada, Mr. Marshall is a chemical\na public information specialist in EPA's\ntechnical coordinator for the\nlaw degree from the University of\nengineering graduate of Queens\nPublic Information Center.\ndevelopment of environmental impact\nKansas. After working in a private\nUniversity in Kingston, Ontario. He\nstatement review guidelines.\nMissouri law firm for two years, he\nworked as a chemical engineer for\nSix researchers of the Environmental\njoined the EPA as an attorney in the\nUnion Carbide Canada for four years in\nResearch Laboratory in Duluth,\nAir Quality and Radiation Division in\nMontreal East before moving to New\nMinnesota have been cited for their\nAugust 1971.\nYork in 1960. He is now a U.S.\ncontributions to the reference book\ncitizen.\nused by water chemists and\nDr. J. David Yount, an environmental\nbacteriologists throughout the world:\nW. Jan Chong has been appointed\nchemist in EPA's Ecological Effects\nRobert Schaffer, formerly an Associate\nMirko D. Lubratouich, Director of the\nChief of Region II's Support Services\nOffice in Washington, D.C., has been\nDeputy Assistant Administrator in the\nLaboratory's Office of Engineering and\nBranch.\nappointed Deputy Director of EPA's\nOffice of Research and Development,\nAdministration, chaired the committee\nA Brooklyn resident, Mr. Chong is a\nEnvironmental Research Laboratory in\nhas been appointed Director of the\nof scientists responsible for rewriting\nnative of Honolulu. He is a 1941 hon-\nDuluth, Minnesota. He was named to\nEffluent Guidelines Division in the\none of ten sections in \"Standard Meth-\nors graduate of Rensselaer Polytechnic\nthis post by Dr. Donald I. Mount,\nOffice of Water and Hazardous\nods for the Examination of Water and\nInstitute (N.Y.) in chemical engineer-\nDirector of the laboratory.\nMaterials. Before assuming his research\nWastewater.\"\ning.\nDr. Yount will act as liaison between\npost, Mr. Schaffer had been Director of\nMr. Lubratouich, former national direc-\nHis most recent position was manager\nthe Duluth Laboratory and EPA\nPermit Assistance and Evaluation,\ntor of the American Water Works As-\nof Facilities Engineering and Adminis-\nheadquarters in Washington, D.C. as\nOffice of Enforcement, for two years,\nsociation, was selected for the chair-\ntration Services at Seatrain Lines in\nwell as assume responsibility for\nand had previously served in several\nmanship because of his long standing\nWeehawken, N. J. He had previously\nmanaging research programs at the lab.\nwater pollution control positions in\ninterest and experience in water pollu-\nbeen Executive Director of Yon-\nDr. Yount has served as scientific\nEPA and its predecessor agencies.\ntion control.\nkers(N. Urban Renewal Agency\nspecialist for the freshwater pollution\nAll of the researchers involved in re-\nand project manager with the N.Y.\necological effects program including\nwriting the book were commended by\nState Urban Development Corp. He\neutrophication and lake restoration\nWilliam McBeath, Director of the\nhas also worked with private planning\nGreat Lakes research, and the effects\nAmerican Public Health Association.\nfirms and taught graduate courses in\nof environmental stress on freshwater\nThey are Richard L. Anderson, John\nurban planning.\norganisms and ecosystems.\nW. Arthur, Kenneth E. Biesinger, James\nPAGE 16\nM. McKim and Charles E. Stephan.\nPAGE 17\nBy Rich Lathrop\nMention Colorado, Montana, North\nCOUNCIL SAYS IMPACT\nand South Dakota, Utah and Wyo-\nREGION VIII\nwere cancelled because of uncertain\nenvironmental impacts, identified\nming and most people conjure up\nSTUDY WORKS WELL\nthrough the EIS process.\nimages of mountains, skiing, vast\nNuclear Regulatory Commission-The\nwheatfields, cattle herds and cowboys,\nNuclear Regulatory Commission used\nseemingly endless plains, deserts, wil-\nThe environmental impact statement\nactions simply does not wash.\nthe Atomic Energy Commission EIS on\nderness, national parks, forests.\nON PARADE\nrequirement of the National Environ-\n\"In the five and a half years between\nthe breeder reactor and its own on the\nFewer people think of cities in\nmental Policy Act (NEPA) is working\nJanuary 1, 1970, and June 30, 1975, a\nplutonium recycle proposal as definitive\nthese Region VIII States violating\nwell and fulfilling its objective of im-\ntotal of 654 actions has been brought,\nbases on which to develop stronger\nnational air standards or of raw sew-\nproving government decisions that af-\nalleging an NEPA issue. During that\nmeasures to safeguard against misuse of\nage degrading streams. Nor is there\nfect the environment. This is the con-\nsame period, Federal agencies initiated\nnuclear materials.\ngeneral recognition of incredible pres-\nclusion of a recent Council on Environ-\ntens of thousands of projects; in 1975\nCorps of Engineers-The Corps of\nsures being felt in those states as a\nmental Quality report to the President\nalone, agencies assessed more than\nEngineers decided to cancel or stop\nresult of the Nation's increasing de-\nand Congress, which analyzes the expe-\n30,000 projects for environmental im-\nwork on over a dozen proposed proj-\nmand for fuels.\nrience of 70 Federal agencies in prepar-\npacts. Since 1970, about 6,000 draft\nects because its NEPA process-not\nIn fact, spokesmen for the Regional\ning environmental impact statements\nEIS's have been submitted. Only 291-\nlitigation-revealed that significant envi-\noffice in Denver, familiar with other\nover the past six years.\nless than 5 percent-were challenged in\nronmental damage would result. Eleven\nparts of the nation, often found solace\nIn releasing the report, CEQ Chair-\ncourt as being inadequate,\" Dr. Peter-\nother projects have been stopped until\nin the idea that they had the relatively\nman Russell W. Peterson noted that the\nson pointed out.\nenvironmental analyses are completed.\neasy job of preventing environmental\nenvironmental impact statement proce-\n\"Our analysis indicated,\" he contin-\nDepartment of Transportation-D\ndegradation rather than the difficult\ndures have become increasingly routine\nued, \"that, of 332 cases completed by\nestimates that since 1970 scores of\ntask of correcting past abuses. That\nand effective parts of planning and\nJune 30, 1975, about one-third were\nmajor highway and airport projects\nbubble burst about the same time the\ndecision-making. Nevertheless, there is\ndismissed at the trial court level.\nhave been modified or dropped as a\nflow of Arab oil stopped. Suddenly,\nneed on the part of top management for\nRoughly 60 resulted in temporary in-\nresult of the EIS process. The decision\nprevention became a challenging task\ngreater sensitivity to the value of using\njunctions, which ranged from a few\nof Secretary Coleman to reject the I-66\nindeed.\nthe EIS process as a tool for better\nweeks to the time required to prepare\nextension into Washington, D.C., is a\nBecause under the plains lay thick\nprogram and policy analysis, he said. A\nan adequate impact statement. Only\nrecent example.\nseams of coal. In the mountains of\nmajor goal of NEPA is to make envi-\nfour cases resulted in 'permanent' in-\nGeneral Services Administration-In\nColorado, Utah and Wyoming billions\nronmental analysis as integral a part of\njunctions-and not even in these was\n1974 the Kennedy Library Corporation\nof barrels of oil lay trapped in shale.\nagency operations as economic and\nthe agency precluded from proceeding\nproposed construction of the Kennedy\nAn upsurge in demand for uranium\ntechnical analyses.\nwith its project or program after it\nLibrary and Museum just below Har-\nopened new mines, expanded others.\nOriginally, there was great concern\ncomplied with NEPA.\"\nvard Square in Cambridge, Mass. The\nWhether the new resource activity\nthat the EIS requirement would cause\nThe agencies most affected by com-\nGeneral Services Administration, which\nwas in fact feverish or only perceived\ncrippling red tape and needless delays\npleted NEPA litigation, according to\nwas to maintain the structure, issued a\nthat way by beleaguered planners and\nin federal decision-making that would\nthe report, have been the U.S. Depart-\ndraft EIS which focused on traffic and\ndecision makers throughout the region\nadversely affect the economy. The\nment of Transportation (26 percent of\nother impacts. Because of local contro-\nis still uncertain. What is certain is\nCouncil found that although NEPA\nthe cases), the U.S. Department of\nversy, the Library Corporation decided\nthat almost nobody was prepared for\ndelays occurred in years past, these are\nHousing and Urban Development (14\nagainst the Cambridge location and is\nit.\nnow becoming rare as agencies improve\npercent), and the Corps of Engineers\nnow proposing Columbia Point in Bos-\nPlans, proposals and rumors flew\nColorado State Capitol in Denver\ntheir environmental expertise and begin\nand the U.S. Department of Agricul-\nton for the Library site. As a result,\nabout the area like a startled covey of\nEIS preparation earlier.\nture (approximately 10 percent each).\nGSA is planning a new draft EIS.\nquail. They included coal-fired power\nreaucracy were hampering develop-\nmary standards for carbon monoxide\nThere are three points in the EIS\nOne of the appendices of the CEQ\nDepartment of Agriculture-The Soil\nplants, strip mines, underground\nment of resources at a moment when\nand oxidants into the 1980's. Salt\nprocess when delays can occur-in pre-\nreport gives a rundown of some of the\nConservation Service has successfully\nmines, plants to liquefy or gasify coal,\nthe Nation desperately needed them.\nLake City's revised transportation\nparing the draft, in preparing the final\nmore notable effects of the EIS process\nused preliminary draft EIS's to broaden\ntransmission lines to transport power,\nThe proposals keep coming and the\ncontrol plan should help achieve those\nstatement after comments are in, and\nslurry pipelines to move coal, new\ndecisions must be made sufficiently\nstandards by 1978.\non Federal decisions. Among them are:\nthe scope of project alternatives, partic-\nafter issuance of the final statement.\nDepartment of the Interior-The final\nularly those involving non-structural\nrailroad lines, even new towns to\nwell to stand the test of technology,\nAuto emission control equipment\nThe time required to prepare a draft\nEIS on the 800-mile Trans-Alaska Pipe-\nmeasures.\nhandle the expected influx of people.\nlaw, economics, politics, human and\nlargely designed and tested at or near\nEIS differs from agency to agency and\nline prompted important design changes\nPerhaps the most far-reaching use of\nBut the Federal government owns\nsocial needs.\nsea level does not perform as well at\nfrom project to project. The scope of a\nand other improvements in routing and\nthe EIS process has been the work of\nnearly a third of the region's land and\nSpeechwriters term that \"the awe-\nthese mile-high cities, thus reducing\nproject, the experience of the people\nconstruction techniques.\nthe Forest Service to develop a long-\ndecisions about how it would be used\nsome task of balancing conflicting\nthe effectiveness of the Federal new\npreparing the statement, the relationship\nrange program for forest lands pursuant\ninvolved the National Environmental\nneeds of society.\" Nobody's dead\ncar emissions control program.\nAn EIS prepared by the Bureau of\nof the EIS process to the decision-\nLand Management and the Forest\nto the Resources Planning Act of 1974.\nPolicy Act. Impact statements would\nsure it can be done.\nSo a heavier burden falls on the\nmaking process, and the priority ac-\nServices on proposed phosphate leasing\nThe draft EIS addressed the alternative\nhave to be prepared, and some of\nBut coping with energy develop-\ncities to devise controls to reduce air\ncorded by the agency management to\non 25,000 acres of the Osceola National\nprograms that best reflected public and\nthem would grow to more than a foot\nment is only one part of the Region\ncontaminants. Traffic and mass transit\nthe statement and the project itself are\nForest, Fla., prompted the decision in\nother agency perceptions of realistic\nin thickness.\nVIII task.\nimprovements, along with the new car\nall critical.\n1975 to defer a leasing decision pending\nprogram choices. After circulation of\nLiterally hundreds of regulatory\nprogram, have helped the cities hold\ncompletion of a two-year study by the\nthe draft statement and evaluation of\nbodies would become involved in the\nAir\nAs part of our survey of NEPA,\"\ntheir own against increases in pollu-\nDr. Peterson said, \"we checked into\ntion. Achieving reductions will require\nU.S. Geological Survey.\ncomments on it, the Forest Service\ndecisions, promoting developers'\nIn the Denver and Salt Lake City\nthe amount of litigation that has arisen\nAtomic Energy Commission-Two\nsubmitted its final program recommen-\ncharges that multiple layers of bu-\nmetropolitan regions auto-related air\ntougher measures.\nin connection with the EIS process and\npollution has produced problems fa-\nThere are bright spots in the picture\nmajor radioactive waste disposal pro-\ndations to the President in December\nconcluded the claim that NEPA-related\nposals of the former Atomic Energy\n1975. He sent them along with his\nRich Lathrop is a Region VIII Public\nmiliar to city dwellers. Denver, it now\nthough. Thousands of tons per year of\nsuits interfere with the timely execution\nCommission, one at Lyons, Kans., and\nstatement of policy to the Congress in\nAffairs Officer\nappears, will continue to exceed pri-\nContinued on page 20\nof a substantial number of Federal\nthe other at the Savannah River, S.C.,\nMarch 1976.\nPAGE 19\nPAGE 18\nContinued from page 19\nter than required by the National\nage wastewater in their areas well into\nreactive hydrocarbons, for instance,\nstandards.\nthe future.\nPesticides\nwill be kept out of Denver's air under\nWater quality continues to be im-\na vapor recovery program. The fumes\nWater\nMontana and Wyoming plans to cer-\nRegion VIII's\nproved as construction grant funds\ntify applicators of restricted use pesti-\nwhich evaporate when gasoline is\nAll major industrial and municipal\nawarded by EPA aid communities in\ncides have been approved and their\ntransferred from tanks into trucks and\ndischargers in the Region are under\nbuilding or improving their waste\nprograms are beginning. Certification\nLEADERSHIP TEAM\nfrom trucks into service station stor-\nthe permit system, and Colorado,\ntreatment works. As in other parts of\nplans from North and South Dakota\nage tanks will be captured and con-\nMontana, North Dakota and Wyo-\nthe country, fish are returning to\nare currently being reviewed. Plans\ndensed into gasoline.\nming have all taken over that program\nstreams thought to be \"dead\" just a\nare being developed in Colorado and\nA second phase in that program\nas the approved permit-issuing agen-\nfew years ago boaters and swim-\nUtah but problems of legislative au-\nwould capture hydrocarbons at service\ncies.\nmers are returning to areas formerly\nthority remain to be worked out in\nstation pumps themselves. Problems\nA vigorous Regional enforcement\nposted as dangerously contaminated.\nthose States.\nof safety and economics will make\nprogram, which has collected nearly\nAll Regional States have received\nColorado has received approval\nthat more difficult to implement but an\n$250,000 in fines from violators, has\ngrant funds under the Drinking Water\nfrom EPA to use a limited amount of\nDr. Cooper H. Wayman\nadditional 2,500-3,000 tons of hydro-\nconvinced area dischargers the\nAct and are now preparing program\nDDT to control a plague outbreak in\nDirector,\ncarbons would be kept out of the\nAgency is serious about cleaning up\nplans aimed at implementation of the\nRegional Administrator\nOffice of\ngroundsquirrels and similar rodents in\nsmog production cycle.\nwater pollution. And voluntary com-\nlaw.\nJohn A. Green\nEnergy Activities\nsix Colorado counties. The plague is\nNinety-eight percent of the major\npliance has improved considerably.\nstationary sources of air pollution in\nA major water problem still facing\nNoise\ntransmitted by fleas. The sheer size of\nthe area needing treatment, the short-\nthe Region are either meeting standards\nthe Region is pollution from non-point\nRegional noise control programs have\nage of personnel and the need for\nor are in compliance with their\nsources (diffuse run-off) and from irri-\nenjoyed remarkable success because\nmore lasting control than is provided\ncleanup schedules.\ngation return flows. Hopefully some\nof their reliance on a community ap-\nby carbaryl led to Agency approval.\nNew facilities will come under new\nanswers to these questions will come\nproach, aerial monitoring and a com-\nsource performance standards and, in\nfrom the 22 \"208\" agencies in the\nmunity noise control workbook that\nSolid Waste\nDavid A. Wagoner\nmany parts of the Region, will fall\nRegion.\nhas received international attention\nDirector,\nIrwin L. Dickstein\nRegion VIII solid waste highlights\nunder the new significant deterioration\nThose local agencies, with 100 per-\nand Agency acclaim.\nAir & Hazardous\nDirector,\ninclude the successful implementation\nEnforcement Division\nrules. Those rules are designed to\nMaterials Division\ncent Federal funding totalling $12.5\nWith EPA assistance, effective\nand spread of the Waste Not high-\nprotect air quality that is already bet-\nmillion, are developing plans to man-\nnoise control programs continue to\ngrade white paper recycling project. In\nproliferate in the Region where quiet\nless than a year some 361 tons of\nis an important personal value that\npaper have been reclaimed in partici-\nfigures prominently in the western\npating Federal agencies in the Denver\nlifestyle.\nDean E. Norris\narea.\nDirector,\nAir and water programs require a\nThrough the coordination of the\nOffice of\nRegional or basin approach, but noise\nFederal Regional Council in Denver\nDavid D. Emery\nCongressional &\nis largely a community problem, and it\nand with technical assistance from\nDirector,\nIntergovernmental\nwas within the communities that EPA\nEPA's solid waste staff, the program\nManagement Division\nRelations\nfound the people, the energy and the\nis mushrooming through Federal and\nresources to control noise.\nState agencies and the Region esti-\nRadiation\nmates a thousand tons of paper may\nbe reclaimed by year's end.\nAs the Nation seems to be moving\nSince about 17 mature pulp trees\ntoward increasing reliance on nuclear\nare required to produce a ton of\npower to generate electricity, uranium\npaper, the Denver program will help\nKeith O. Schwab\nmining and milling is increasing tre-\nstretch forest resources.\nCharles W. Murray\nDirector,\nmendously in the Region. Something\nAlso with EPA technical assistance,\nDirector,\nSurveillance &\nlike 70 percent of the Nation's known\nWater Division\nthe State of Montana has collected,\nAnalysis Division\nuranium reserves are located here.\ncrushed and recycled some 20,000\nEPA, the Energy Research and\njunked or abandoned automobiles\nDevelopment Administration, and\nsince 1973. Placed bumper to bumper,\nState health departments are still grap-\nthose cars would stretch something\npling with problems from a 1950's\nlike 56 miles.\nuranium boom. Radioactive sands—\n\"We are proud of the environmental\ntailings-left after milling of uranium\nachievements that have come about in\nCharles C. Gomez\nbearing ores have been implicated as\nthis Region as a direct outgrowth of\nDirector,\nexcellent cooperation of all sectors,\"\nOffice of Civil Rights &\nJames W. Sanderson\nhealth hazards in various parts of the\nUrban Affairs\nRegional Counsel\nRegion, most notably in Grand Junc-\nRegion VIII Administrator John A.\ntion, Colo., where they were often\nGreen said.\nused as a backfill material in excava-\n\"Most importantly, I think environ-\ntions for buildings.\nmental considerations have now become\nOngoing research is yielding an-\nan integral part of nearly any kind of\nswers to some of the questions of how\nplanning or development decision,\nto dispose of tailings and how to\nrather than a 'tack-on' item. That\nprotect unborn generations from their\nshould help us anticipate and deal with\nSamuel E. Landis\nHoward W. Kayner\nradioactivity.\nenvironmental aspects of change before\nFederal Regional\nDirector,\nproblem areas develop.\"\nCouncil Liaison\nOffice of Public Affairs\nPAGE 20\nPAGE 21\nPROTECTING THE NEW FRONTIER\nproduces more wheat than North Da-\ntuated, and then subsided, leaving\nbeets which yield much of our sugar.\nThe Great Divide forms the very\nMontana, for instance, is a Spanish\nthem is gone, sheep and cattle still\nkota, which is the most rural of the 50\nbehind a desert of salt, alkaline soil\nLarge scale irrigation has permitted\nbackbone of the North American con-\nword meaning mountain country. The\ngraze on the remaining short grass.\nStates with 90 percent farmland.\nand a number of lakes, including the\nthe cultivation of diversified crops.\ntinent. Here, the towering peaks of\nState is the fourth largest in America\nBelow the plains, the earth holds\nSouth Dakota has more sheep than\nGreat Salt Lake. Gulls, pelicans, and\nMost of the land that comprises\nthe Rocky Mountain range separate\nin geographical size, and yet it is so\npetroleum, natural gas and a wealth of\nhumans, plus large numbers of cattle\nblue herons skim over the sand flats\nRegion VIII was acquired by the\nAtlantic-bound waters from those des-\nthinly populated that it retains the\nmineral deposits, including coal.\nand hogs. The western part of the\nand mud shores of the water, which\nUnion as part of the Louisiana Pur-\ntined to reach the Pacific Ocean. Here\nquality of the remote wilderness which\nSince the admission of Alaska and\nDakotas is a semi-arid, treeless plain\nthrough evaporation has reached con-\nchase of 1803; most of the territories\ntoo the headwaters of such rivers as\ndistinguished it in the early twentieth\nHawaii to the Union, the Dakotas\nwhere cattle and sheep graze above\ncentrations of mineral salts several\nachieved Statehood toward the end of\nthe mighty Colorado and the Rio\ncentury. Montana is the home of\nconstitute the geographical center of\ncoal, gold and other mineral deposits.\ntimes greater than the oceans.\nthe 19th century. Colorado was one of\nGrande gather in the melting mountain\nsome of nature's most spectacular\nthe United States. The ancient rock\nSigns of America's westward ex-\nThe word Wyoming is of Indian\nthe first in the territory to be admitted\nsnows and course down past the un-\nattractions such as the granite peaks\nformations of the Black Hills and the\npansion flourish in these two States.\norigin and thought to mean \"large\nto the Union. The date was 1876,\nparalleled splendor of the canyons,\nand mountain lakes of Glacier Na-\nBadlands can be observed here, as\nIn South Dakota the stone faces of\nplains,\" although the State actually\nwinning it the name \"Centennial\nfarmlands, forests, plains, salt and\ntional Park and the geysers, hot\nwell as the colorful, deeply eroded\nfour Presidents gaze out over the\nmarks the end of the plains. In the\nState.\" This year Colorado is cele-\nmud flats, and vast deserts below.\nsprings and volcanic topography\nclay gullies and the marine and land\nBadlands from Mount Rushmore.\nwest, the tall grass gives way to the\nbrating its own centennial.\nThe State of Colorado is part of this\nwithin its three entrances to Yellow-\nfossils they hold. The Missouri river\nTheodore Roosevelt spent summers\nwooded slopes of the Bighorn Moun-\nIn the east, parts of Colorado's\nnatural grandeur. With a mean eleva-\nstone National Park.\nrolls southward through the States'\nranching in North Dakota between\ntains, the one time hunting ground of\nGreat Plains still retain the character-\ntion of 6,800 feet, it has been called\nThe western boundary of the State\nrugged terrain.\n1883 and 1886 and the State now\nthe Crow and Sioux. But only in the\nistics of the tidal flats they once were.\nthe \"top of the world.\" But other\nis crowned by the lofty Bitterroot\nConstant winds and a continental\ncontains three units of the National\ncentral section, where it is dissected\nThe plains eventually turn into breath-\nresidents of Region VIII could make\nrange, a part of the Rocky Mountain\nclimate cause the Dakotas to have\nMemorial Park in his honor.\nby the Great Divide, is the sweep of\ntaking mountains, the most famous of\nthe same figurative claim about their\nsystem. The Great Plains extend over\nsevere winters and short, hot sum-\nThe 1876 defeat of General Custer\nthe Wyoming plains broken. It was in\nwhich is Pike's Peak. Toward the\nStates— Montana, North Dakota,\nthe eastern landscape, and although\nmers, but several crops including corn\nby Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse in\nthis area that chains of covered wa-\nwest, beyond the Great Divide, lie\nSouth Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.\nthe high grass which once covered\nthrive in the rich soil. Only Kansas\nthe battle of the Little Bighorn oc-\ngons rolled westward over the Oregon\nsome of the most scenic spots in the\ncurred here. So did the massacre\nTrail.\nUnited States, including Rocky Moun-\nwhich terminated Indian resistance to\nThe Grand Teton and Yellowstone\ntain National Park, Mesa Verde Na-\nthe white man's relentless invasion—\nNational Parks are here, the latter\ntional Park and The Great Sand\nWounded Knee. Presently, there are\narea being where the Snake River\nDunes Monument.\nmore Native Americans living in the\nbegins its long and winding journey to\nThe Basket Makers, the earliest-\nWest than ever before in history, but\nthe Missouri. The production of petro-\nknown Indians, settled in the mesa\nmost are living on reservations in the\nleum and petroleum-related products\ncountry before the beginning of the\nDakotas and other States.\nboosts the State's economy, as does\nChristian era. In southern Colorado,\nUtah is \"the State the Saints built.\"\nits production of sodium carbonate\none can still see the rock-ledge homes\nIts capital and largest city is Salt Lake\nfrom its resource-rich underground re-\nof the Indian cliff dwellings.\nCity.\nserves.\nDue to low rainfall, Colorado has\nOf the American States, only Ne-\nIf there ever were any real cow-\nbeen forced to irrigate its land to such\nvada receives less rainfall than Utah.\nboys, they were surely to be found in\nan extent that it is now second only to\nIt is a geologist's paradise, rich in the\nWyoming. In addition to the livestock,\nCalifornia in acres of irrigated farm-\nnatural resources which have become\nseveral crops are farmed, including the\nland. Below are ores of silver, lead,\nthe life-blood of the technological soci-\ncopper, zinc and uranium.\nety we live in. The Bingham Canyon\nFamous cultural festivals are staged\nopen-pit copper mine is the largest\nat Aspen and Central City, where\nman-made excavation in the world,\nJohn Gregory struck gold in 1859 and\nmeasuring more than two-and-one-half\nattracted hordes of settlers. To this\nmiles across and one-half mile down.\nday, tourism remains a chief cash crop\nMassive mountains rise up in the\nof Colorado and the other Rocky Moun-\neastern portion of the State, while\ntain States.\nfarther west the land levels out into\nAs in the old West, a frontier has\nthe Great Basin. To the south, red\nsuddenly been formed, this time in the\nsandstone throbs through the can-\nnew West. The struggle is no longer\nyons. cut by wind and the Colo-\nfor land, but for what is underneath\nrado river. Remnants of ancient In-\nthe land. The resources to be found\ndian cliff dwellings can be found in\nthere are unquestionably of economic\nthese parts. Bryce Canyon National\nvalue, but hanging in the bâlance is\nPark and Zion National Park (70\nthe awesome threat of the gradual\npercent of the State's total acreage is\ndestruction of this magnificent land.\nfederally owned or administered) help\nThe degree of beauty which exists in\nto preserve the area's natural beauty.\nRegion VIII must now be matched\nAt one time western Utah was\nwith an equal degree of high-minded\nsubmerged beneath a huge Pleistocene\nenvironmental protection, lest we lose\nlake, Lake Bonneville. During many\nthat which is so precious its like could\nthousands of years the water fluc-\nnever be had again.\nPAGE 22\nPAGE 23\nINQUIRY\nWhat kind of noise bothers you most?\nnews briefs\nEmilio Escaladas, Noise Branch\n1,000 ft. or lower. So these people are\nthe sound is getting so annoying that\nRepresentative, Region II, New York\nassaulted twice-by subway and by\nwe have considered moving.\nCity:\naircraft noise. For them, noise is a\n\"The other type of noise that bothers\nFor me the most irritating noise\nmore real pollutant than those in the air\nme is inside my house. I have a\ncomes from being involved in the daily\nor water. Maybe to be tense, irritable\nteenage son who is learning to play the\ntransportation cycle. The awesome\nand half deaf is the price paid for\nbass guitar in a five-man band. They\nsubway ride. The average New Yorker\nmodern life?\"\npractice in our basement but since\nspends about a hour or hour and a half\nthey're just learning to play together\ndaily on subways, though, of course,\nJay Goldstein, Sanitary Engineer, Solid\nthey insist on turning up the amplifiers\nsome people have longer rides. The\nWaste Branch, Region V, Chicago, Ill.:\nso that each of them can hear his own\ntrains get you to your job and home\n\"The general background level of noise\ninstrument. The result is that the sound\nagain, but with accompanying pain\nin a city may be high, but we've all\ngoes through the vents and reaches\nrather than pleasure.\nbecome accustomed to it, and pretty\nevery corner of the house and can even\n\"The problem is that the subway\nmuch disregard it. It is the loud,\nbe heard outdoors if the windows are\nsystem is old, dilapidated and\nunexpected, silence-shattering noise\nopen. It's the kind of sound that is so\nmaintenance has been neglected for\nthat troubles me most.\nloud it stuns you because you literally\nyears. The wheels are mostly flat from\n\"I live in mid-city Chicago on the north\ncan't hear anything else. As long as\nALLIED CHEMICAL INDICTED IN KEPONE CASE\nlong use so they screech-and there are\nside, and it is a quiet neighborhood\nthey're going to have the band I don't\nAllied Chemical Corp., Life Science Products Co., and Life Science's\n16 wheels for each car. Some effort is\nmost of the time. But frequently in the\nsee anything that can be done about the\ntwo owners have been indicted by a Federal grand jury in Richmond,\nbeing made to upgrade the system by\nearly morning hours hot-rodders drag-\nnoise except to soundproof the room\nVa., on a charge of conspiring to violate Federal water pollution\n'truing' the wheels (grinding them round\nrace through the streets with roaring\nthey practice in.\"\ncontrol laws in the Kepone pesticide case. The indictment asserted\nagain) but this is an enormous job. The\nengines. Loud and unnecessary noise is\nthat an unusually close relationship existed between Allied and\nUrban Mass Transit Authority and\nagainst the city's noise ordinances, but\nWilliam Tripp, Oil and Hazardous\nNew York City have $40 million to\nseemingly little is or can be done to\nMaterials Section, Region I, Boston,\nLife Science whose sole business was manufacturing Kepone, the\nspend over the next ten years to\nenforce these rules. Certainly, this kind\nMass.:\npersistent pesticide which poisoned production workers and led to\nimprove the system and attempts are\nof noise is disruptive of the peace and\n\"The steady, high level of traffic noise\na fishing ban on the lower James River in Virginia.\nbeing made to acoustically treat the\nquiet of whole neighborhoods.\"\nthat surrounds me as I commute back\nstations. Sound absorbing materials are\nand forth to work bothers me most. I\nCAMDEN ORDERED TO END POLLUTION\nbeing put on the platforms facing the\nMary Rhones, Secretary, Office of\ntravel about an hour each way from my\nThe United States District Court for New Jersey in a landmark\non-coming trains and barriers are being\nPlanning and Management, Economic\nhome to the EPA laboratory in\naction has ordered the City of Camden, N. J., to repair two sewage\nput between the tracks to contain the\nAnalysis Division, Headquarters:\nLexington, Mass., on Interstate 95.\ntreatment plants that were discharging 40 million gallons daily\nnoise. Tracks are being welded to\n\"I live in Washington, D.C., on a main\nThis is a heavily travelled highway and\nof inadequately treated sewage into the Delaware River. The\nreduce vibrations.\nthoroughfare, near the Maryland line.\nthe noise from other cars and trucks is\n\"Levels of noise inside the cars rise to\ncourt action enforces the EPA plant discharge permits which require\nEvery morning at about 5:30 the sound\nunremitting.\"\n86 to 88 decibels, and on the platforms\nof concrete mixers and loading vans\nmaximum efficiency of operation.\nthe levels can reach 110-115; this is the\nbarrelling down the street seems to jar\nAnthony Wayne, Sanitary Engineer,\nthreshold of pain. These levels cause\nthe whole house. When we bought the\nEnvironmental Evaluation Branch,\nCONSTRUCTION REVIEW TEAMS SET UP\ntemporary impairment of hearing.\nhouse, although some trucks used the\nRegion VII, Kansas City, Mo.:\nAdministrator Russell E. Train has announced that a financial-\nHigher decibel levels can cause\nroad, I thought we would get used to\n'Noise to me is unwanted sound. I live\ntechnical review program is being established to help ensure the\npermanent damage.\ntraffic noise, but it has become\nin the country but I'm uncomfortably\nintegrity of EPA's multi-billion dollar construction grants\n\"In addition to this kind of noise, New\nprogressively louder and more frequent\naware of highway noises-roaring of\nprogram. Under this system, teams of EPA engineers and auditors\nYorkers living near major airports are\nsince more trucks now use the road.\nengines and the whining of heavy truck\nwill conduct thorough on-site reviews of selected waste treatment\nbombarded with aircraft noise. In a\nIt's so bad at times that my children\ntires. On quiet evenings this sound\nbusy airport like Kennedy, traffic\ncan't hear the radio or the TV even\nnuisance can be heard for two miles.\nplant projects throughout the Nation.\nsometimes becomes so heavy that\nwith all the windows closed. We really\nMuch of the noise results, of course,\nlike our house and neighborhood but\nfrom breaking the speed limit.\"\nNATIONAL NOISE EXHIBIT PREPARED\nplanes are going over every minute at\nA major EPA exhibit on noise pollution will be displayed at the\nFranklin Institute in Philadelphia this fall. The exhibit, which\nblends the use of animated film, slide shows, and sound recordings\nto demonstrate the problems of environmental noise, will be\ndisplayed at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry starting\nin January, 1977.\nEmilio Escaladas\nJay Goldstein\nMary Rhones\nAnthony Wayne\nWilliam Tripp\nPAGE 24\nPAGE 25\nU.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY\nPOSTAGE AND FEES PAID\nOFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS (A:107)\nU.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20460\nEPA-335\nU.S.MAIL\nTHIRD CLASS BULK RATE\nReturn this page if you do NOT wish to receive this publication ( ), or if change of address is needed ( ), list change, including zip code.\nSHARING THE JOURNAL\nThe EPA Journal, which has been an\ninternal publication since it was\nstarted a year and a half ago, is now\navailable to the general public on a\nOURNAL\nsubscription basis.\nVOL.ONE,NO.ONE\nPermission was sought from and\nJANUARY\nrecently granted by the Office of\nManagement and Budget to allow ex-\nternal distribution of the Journal. Nu-\nmerous requests for the magazine had\nbeen received from universities, civic\nand environmental organizations, in-\ndustries and other government agen-\ncies.\nThe subscription rates for EPA\nJournal, which are set by the Govern-\nment Printing Office, are $8.75 a year\nfor subscribers residing in the United\nStates and $11 annually for those\nliving outside the country. Subscrip-\ntion requests should be sent to the\nENVIRONMENTAL\nSuperintendent of Documents, U.S.\nGovernment Printing Office, Washing-\nton, D.C. 20402.\nUSEFULNESS\n83 percent of Journal readers prefer\nSingle copies can be obtained for 75\n94 percent like reading the Journal\nhome over office delivery.\ncents each at the same address. The\nat home\n56 percent indicated that other\nmagazine will continue to be distrib-\n86 percent said the Journal helps\nmembers of their family read the\nuted to EPA employees without\nkeep them posted about Agency\nJournal at home. According to the\ncharge.\nactivities\npoll, home delivery more than doubles\nThe format and policy of the maga-\n50 percent find it useful to repro-\nthe Journal's readership.\nzine will remain essentially the same\nduce Journal articles\nMail delivery is about 95 percent\nsince most of the subjects discussed in\nCOVERAGE\neffective in reaching Journal readers'\nthis issue-oriented publication are of\nMore emphasis desired on:\nhomes.\ninterest to external as well as internal\nLaboratories\n35 percent\nThese percentage figures are tabu-\naudiences.\nRegions\n24 percent\nlated from the responses of the 150\nWhen the EPA Journal was estab-\nHeadquarters\n18 percent\nJournal readers who answered the\nlished it was believed that its purpose\nPercent who always read the following\nsurvey. Seventy-five percent of these\nwould be best served by a home\nJournal department sections:\nwere EPA professionals who read\ndistribution system intended to give\nPeople\n64 percent\nevery issue.\neach employee, as well as his or her\nNews Briefs\n63 percent\nA number of helpful suggestions\nfamily, more leisure time to read the\nAround the Nation\n57 percent\nwere submitted in response to the\npublication. A questionnaire on how\nInquiry\n47 percent\nsurvey indicating additional areas of\nthe magazine was being received was\nDISTRIBUTION SYSTEM\nspecial reader interest as well as cur-\ncarried in the June issue. Here are the\nThe EPA Journal is currently dis-\nrent developments at EPA which need\nhighlights of the reader response about\ntributed to the homes of the Agency's\ncoverage. These ideas should bear\nthe Journal's usefulness, coverage and\n10,000 employees by third class bulk\nfruit in future issues of the Journal.\ndistribution system:\nrate mail.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate 9-22-76\nTO:\nJAMES CANNON\nFROM:\nfor\nJUDITH RICHARDS HOPE\nto\nX For your information\nFor your appropriate Handling\nFor your review and comment\nReturn to me\nReturn to file\nReturn to central files\nComments:\nFORD & LIBRARY\n09/2/7\nWED\n1156 15TH ST., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005 TELEX 89-2447 202-293-3400 1976 VOL. 227\nNO.\n15\nPage 113\nCONGRESSMEN BLAST ADMINISTRATION ON AIRCRAFT NOISE POLICY DELAY\nReps. Glenn Anderson (D-Calif.) and Norman Mineta (D-Calif.) yesterday criticized the Ford Adminis-\ntration for failing to establish an aircraft noise policy. Anderson accused the White House of moving to\n\"gag\" Transportation Secretary William T. Coleman Jr. In separate statements, both congressmen criticized\nthe Administration: Mineta said, \"The Ford Administration record on jet aircraft noise reduction has been\nand can be expected to continue to be no decision, no policy, no action.\"\nStatements were. issued after Coleman canceled for the third time his scheduled appearance before the\nHouse aviation subcommittee hearing on noise abatement (DAILY, Sept. 21). Coleman's aircraft noise pol-\nicy has been hung up at the White House level for some time now because there is disagreement within the\nAdministration over financing provisions of the policy (DAILY, Sept. 17).\nA White House spokesman yesterday told The DAILY \"discussions\" are still under way and \"there is\nno clue as to any timetable\" for release of the policy. Asked whether President Ford has decided to delay\nthe noise policy until after the election, the spokesman said, \"We will not say anything about politi-\ncal charges.\"\nAnderson, who is chairman of the House aviation subcommittee, said: \"The Environmental Protection\nAgency, the Federal Aviation Administration and Transportation Secretary Coleman have made construc-\ntive proposals to reduce aircraft noise but the White House will not permit a move for fear of offending the\nairlines, the airport operators, the public - - or all three.\"\nMineta said, \"Secretary Coleman has failed to testify for the simple reason that he has been unable\neither to get the White House to approve his policy on jet noise reduction or to devise a policy of its own.\nWe can assume from the failure of recent meetings between Secretary Coleman and President Ford to pro-\nduce an agreement on any policy that there will be no policy and no action by this Administration before\nthe adjournment of Congress and before the election.\"\nDECISION CLOSE ON WHETHER AIRLINE OREMEN CAN UNIONIZE\nThe big question of whether airline foremen and supervisors can legally organize their own union i:\nabout to be answered by the National Mediation Board. The case involves a four-year effort by the Airlini\nSupervisors Association, Selden, N.Y. to organize supervisory personnel on American Airlines.\nA board hearing examiner has finished his investigation and has made his recommendations to the\nboard which now must decide whether the association will be permitted to attempt to represent foremer\nand supervisors in plant, facilities and aircraft maintenance fields. About 900 foremen are believed to b\ninvolved. Although the foremen are not now members of a union most of them came up from the rank\nof the Transport Workers Union, over whose members they now hold supervisory positions, Most are il\ntheir 50s.\nThe big question the board has to decide, which is not answered for airline employes under the Rai\nway Labor Act is just who is a subordinate official and who is a member of management. An ancillar\nquestion that will have to be answered is what class or craft supervisors should be placed in. The airline\nclaim, of course, that supervisors are members of management; the unions that they are not.\nThe massive case (the record is now 15,000 pages) is supposed to apply only to American but ther\nare indications that employes of other carriers are awaiting the outcome. If the board should (Continued\nJames E. Skinner, Editor\nJames D. Baumgarner, Managing Editor\nRhonda S. Goodman, Senior Editor\n/ Kenneth Koppel, Publishing Direct\nPublished daily except Saturdays, Sundays and hclidays in Washington by The Public Transportation & Travel Division of The Ziff-Davis Publishing Company, In\nPhilip B. Korsant, President\nRichard P. Friese, Vice President\nSUBSCRIPTION RATE: One year $470, 6 months $290. Quantity rates on request.\nCOPYRIGHT © 1976 ZIFF-DAVIS PUBLISHING CO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. NONE OF THE CONTENT OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE REPRODUCED\nSTORED IN A RETRIEVAL SYSTEM, OR TRANSMITTED IN ANY FORM OR BY ANY MEANS (ELECTRONIC, MECHANICAL, PHOTOCOPYING, RECORDIN\nOR OTHERWISE) WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE PUBLISHER.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 22, 1976\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJIM CANNON\nFROM:\nJUDITH RICHARDS HOPE\nfell\nSUBJECT:\nYour Request: Current\nCAB Rate-Making Rules\nThe CAB sets domestic airline rates on the basis of the\nDomestic Passenger Fare Investigation (D.P.F.I.) formula, a\ncomplex procedure established in 1972 after a lengthy, nine-\nphase evidentiary proceeding before the CAB.\nThis formula has the force of law, but it is not immutable\nand can be changed by the CAB itself in two ways: (1) by\nanother evidentiary proceeding, which might take a year or\ntwo, and (2) by an administrative rule-making which must,\nunder new CAB practice, be completed within 150 days.\nUnder the DPFI formula, airline rates are computed on\npresent costs, not prospective costs. \"Present costs\" do\nnot allow for future inflation (although the CAB has a\nproposal pending on this possibility) and do not allow for\ncapital needs. Rather, the formula allows carriers a 12%\nreturn on their total investment, assuming a 55% load\nfactor. (\"Load Factor\" means the percentage of all operating\naircraft seats which are filled.)\nIn recent years, the airlines have been operating with\n\"excess capacity,\" that is at less than a 55% load factor.\nTherefore, their actual rate of return has been much less\nthan the 12% projected by the CAB formula. (For the last 12\nmonths the airlines in general have had about a 3% rate of\nreturn, but this situation is improving. As you know, many\nanalysts predict that the airlines will achieve a 12% rate\nof return in calendar year 1977.)\nFORD\nLIBRARY\n2\nCAB experts tell me that, even if '77 is a good year, the\nairlines' ability to raise capital next year will be shaky.\n(They add that they feel several years of 12% return would\nsolve this problem. The question is one of timing.)\nAgain, the important factor here is that airline rates are\ncurrently based on RETURN ON EXISTING INVESTMENT, NOT on any\nneed there may be to RAISE CAPITAL.\nIf thought necessary, the capital need could be factored in\nby means of the above-mentioned rule-making to amend the\nDPFI formula.\nFORD\nREQUEST\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 22, 1976\nMEMO FOR:\nJIM CANNON\nFROM:\nPAUL LEACH\n1938 -- Domestic Trunk Airlines had 1.3 million\nemplanements (i.e. passenger trips)\n1976 -- (12 months ending June 30) Comparable\nfigure is 154.5 million emplanements\n)\n6\n38\nGEBALO FORD LIBRARY\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 22, 1976\nTO:\nJIM CANNON\nFROM: PAUL LEACH\nThis article, which discusses the\npositive effect of tax bill on\naircraft purchases by the airlines,\nis relevant to the Coleman airplane\nnoise/financing issue.\nAirlines' Share Net Seen Particularly Helped\nBy Tax Bill's Expansion of Investment 976 SEP Credit\n12 30\nBy CHARLES J. ELIA\nsigned, could stimulate orders of new\nNew tax legislation sent to President\nplanes by the major carriers.\nFord by the Congress late last week could\nThe industry's total investment tax car-\nbe a particular boon to airlines.\nry-forwards are large in relation to ex-\npected earnings. Mr. Fried's list of credits\ntotals $662 million. He's estimating indus-\ntry profits this year at $325 million to $350\nmillion, and next year at $400 million to\n$500 million:\nWALL STREET JOURNAL\n9-21-76\nfir\n3\nf\n727's\n16\nFORD & LIBRARY GERALD\n092206\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nINFORMATION ON AVIATION NOISE\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nINFORMATION\nWASHINGTON\n12 07\nSeptember 23, 1976\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJIM CANNON\nFROM:\nJUDITH RICHARDS HOPE\nSUBJECT:\nAviation Noise: Aviation Industry's\nAbility to Obtain Capital\nThe attached article from the September 20 Aviation Week\nshows that the airlines' increased earnings are improving\ntheir prospects in the capital markets. Execpt for Flying\nTiger, the new financings are primarily being used to\nredress balance sheets, rather than modernize fleets.\nAttachment\nFORD it 978279 LIBRARY\n092811\nAmerican world Anways, whose\nprocedures is Still pending.\nproposal to sell $50 million worth of\nIn other legal action, airlines serving Logan airport have filed suit to prevent an\nconvertible debentures is getting mixed\nincrease of landing fees from 58 cents to 87 cents per 1,000 lb. of landing weight,\nreviews in Wall Street, also is paying some\neffective July 1. Representatives of the airlines maintain that the Increase would be\nattention to the California law in its offer-\nused to fund non-airport operations, such as a Boston area health clinic.\ning. Lehman Bros. is the underwriter.\nAviation Week & Space Technology, September 20, 1976\n33\nas a group, profitable carriers can con-\nTrust Certificates Used Frequently by Railroads\ntinue to command capital at reasonable\nterms\nEquipment\nstock in\nmethod\nproper-\nextensively\nromar in\nTheir\nof net\nLenders\nafter\nthey were\nover\nprofits to 1\nearlier\nAirlines,\ninvestment\nnew\ninstant lost\nployes to\npayments,\nCompany is\nAirlines\nwhich\non airline\nfuture\nsold to the\ncompaid out\npopularity\nminimum\nmoney and\nVenues, is\nstock as and\ninvestors\nthan those\nSale of the\ncontly to\nbanks to settle\nFrank\nnew agreement\nto effect\nelement of\nthrough Dec.\nsun is out. If\nthe climate\nearnings.\nexceedingly\nto, each\nPan America\nannual\ning plans\nand\nconsideration\nfund\" for\n1978 that work\nthe\nused Boeing\nandy 96.5%\nfreighters. Items\nment and\nand credit\nand on the\nican from\nand it is closes\nccounting\nments for the\ntax profit\nunder leases.\nrevenue\namount\nCapacity\nfund in a\nOne Wall\nAmerican is\nto\nwill be\nMinillion on\ndebenture\nused as a\nmore flexibilit\nmeet its\nairplanes, business\nMarget for\nfull-scale\nAlthough\nApportion of\nimproved this\nthe insur-\nthe debentur\nto reach\ngive Pan Amail\nthe fund\nOne result\nto the\ncate for the\nnew offering\nthe year,\nthe earlier\nand to the\nauditor note\nits profit\nprepared on\nused and\nis, that the\nployes. In\nbut that\nllowed to\npended on\nin excess\nthat there washing\ncan's ability\nis not\nloan agreement\nProposed by\nMotivation\nployes to\nsell new stocks\nused to\nAmerican's\nshare, no\nforestall month\nlue of the\nand its holdings in subsidiaries (AW&SI\nequipment mortgages. ITS mancing IS a\nshare, or anow employes to share in one-\nJuly 5, p. 32), as Pan American has had to\nsign that, whatever the stature of airlines\nthird of any airline annual profit.\n34\nAviation Week & Space Technology Sentember 20 - 1976\nShortlines\nDomestic trunk airlines paid 1.7% more\nAirline Observer\nfor fuel per gallon in July than in June of\nthis year, according to CAB statistics.\nDomestic trunks paid an average of 30.1\nDate when Boeing might decide to produce either the 7X7 or the smaller 7N7\ncents/gal. International flags paid 36.9\nremains in the air, but some airlines suspect Boeing will accelerate its\ncents in July, an increase of 0.8% from\nJune. Local service carriers' fuel expense\ncommitment to 7X7. They base this on Boeing requests for specifics on door\nlocation and similar details.\nincreased 1.7% to a cost-per-gallon of 32.2\ncents.\nGrowth in engine thrust requirements for the Boeing 7X7 transport is related\nEastern Airlines has selected Trans Com,\nlargely to the increase in fuselage size to accommodate dual LD-3 containers\na unit of Sundstrand Corp., to equip its\nin the belly cross-section. Earlier 198-in. fuselage diameter would take only a\nfleet of 30 Lockheed L-1011 aircraft with\nsingle LD-3-the wide-body transport standard size belly container. The\nmovie equipment and provide film pro-\nbigger fuselage and nonstop transcontinental range may push individual\ngraming (AW&ST Sept. 6, p. 53). Full-\nengine thrust requirements over 30,000 beyond the growth capability of\nlength movies will be shown in the\nthe General Electric/Snecma CFM56 and a stretching of the Pratt &\nU.S./San Juan market in English and\nSpanish.\nWhitney JT10Ds (AW&ST Sept. 6, p. 48).\nMajor U.S. air carriers have completed a\nGrowing demand for air cargo space to the Middle East is attracting U.S.\nnine-month program to resolve technical\nsupplemental carriers seeking cargo charters to help offset seasonal decline in\nproblems with the ground proximity warn-\npassenger charter business. Congestion at most Middle East harbors causing\ning system, according to the FAA. The\ndelays in freight shipments is the chief reason behind the drive for air cargo\nagency said the program met a Sept. 2\nmovements. Iran Air is operating three Boeing 707 all-cargo aircraft\ndeadline for having fully operational\nbetween the U.S. and Tehran and plans to add a fourth 707 freighter to its\nwarning indicators on all turbine-powered\nfleet next year. Principal problem is a traffic imbalance, with little\naircraft.\nwestbound freight available to offset heavy eastbound flow.\nPakistan International Airlines advance-\npurchase fare request has been suspended\nOne possible change in Middle East flight scheduling that could be brought\npending investigation by the CAB. The\nabout by the cargo demand would be a broader use of wide-body transport\ntariff proposed a one-way, seven-day\naircraft in passenger services. Large belly space of such aircraft can\nadvance-purchase 48% discount from Pa-\naccommodate freight overflows out of the U.S. and passenger traffic is\nkistan to the U.S. off one-way normal\nstrong enough to justify use of the wide-body aircraft.\neconomy fares. Fares were applicable to\ncitizens of Pakistan only.\nLatest in the series of recurring studies by United Airlines of retrofitting its\nearlier jet transports with fast heating ovens that permit use of frozen foods is\nPiedmont Airlines has filed with the CAB\naimed at its McDonnell Douglas DC-8 fleet. Because of off-line operations,\nfor authority to provide nonstop service\nbetween New York and Bristol/Johnson\nUnited could carry its own supplied frozen meals rather than rely on an\nCity/Kingsport, Tenn. The proposed daily\nunfamiliar catering service.\nroundtrip, non-stop flight would use\nBoeing 737s.\nSurveys of business travelers United Airlines took for its fall marketing\ncampaign that showed roominess on board aircraft as a significant considera-\nTrans World Airlines has requested CAB\ntion in their travel decisions could be a factor in the carrier's study for a pro-\napproval to substitute Jidda for Dhahran\nspective aircraft order. Route considerations might favor Boeing\nas its Saudi Arabian point. The carrier is\n727-200s, but more McDonnell Douglas DC-10s also are in the running.\nalso seeking temporary approval to serve\nBahrain until its request for permanent\nAllegheny Airlines has dedicated two McDonnell Douglas DC-9 transports to\nauthority can be acted on by the CAB.\nTWA proposes to operate two weekly\na brisk charter service underwritten by the Bahamian government to serve\nroundtrips between the U.S. and both\ncasinos at Freeport. Passengers who agree to buy $500 worth of chips are\nJidda and Bahrain.\nflown to Freeport in the early evening from various U.S. points, bused to the\nUnited Airlines has announced a $6-\ncasinos and back at 4 a. m. the following morning for a return TREAT flight to.\nU.S. in time to go to work.\nmillion ad campaign that is designed to\nexpand its share of the business travel\nBritish Airways has begun offering Concorde's full capacity on its Washing-\nmarket. United's campaign, which has\nton-London service, averaging during the first few days of September 95\nbeen budgeted for $3.7 million for televi-\nseats for sale. Air France will begin Oct. 1 offering 100 seats eastbound and\nsion, $1.6 million for newspapers and\n90 westbound on its Washington-Paris Concorde service. Sept. 12, British\n$500,000 for radio, will be based on the\ntheme \"You're the boss.\"\nAirways carried 101 passengers on its London-Washington flight. The flight\nwas sold out, and a Trans World Airlines captain paid full fare to ride in\nJapan Air Lines has been granted permis-\nConcorde's cockpit jump seat.\nsion by the Mexican government to carry\nfifth freedom traffic on two of the carrier's\nAir Transport Assn. has become concerned enough about the financial status\nthree weekly nonstop Boeing 747 flights\nof the travel agencies that airlines must deal with to establish a task force to\nbetween Vancouver, Canada and Mexico\nstudy the problem and perhaps develop guidelines for judging agency\nCity.\nfinancial viability.\nINFORMATION\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 23,1976\nTO:\nJIM CANNON\nFROM: PAUL LEACH Paul\nHere is a very significant news\nitem regarding United Airlines\naircraft purchase plans.\n092309\nUAL's United Airlines Expected to Clear\nMajor Order of Boeing 727s Next Week\nBy WILLIAM M. CARLEY\nto generate another $190 million to $200 mil-\nStaff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL\nlion in depreciation next year. Hence, the\nWALL STREET JOURNAL\nNEW YORK-United Airlines, a unit of\nairline easily could pay cash. \"If we bought\nUAL Inc # is on the verge of a major. order\nsome planes today. we d probably pay\nfor Boeing Co. 727 airplanes.\ncash,\" Mr. Ferris said In the recent inter-\nWhile the size of the purchase couldn't be\nview.\n10 579-23-76\npinpointed one source said United is consid-\nThe order expected next make would be\nen\nab\norgan\nTHE\nfo\nal\nde\nearn\ncare\nSEESEO\nfless\nca\nsu\nCard\nhome\nsame\nplant\ncerts\nby\nthey\nsame\nlesse\nairm\nm\nthe\nshow\nFORD & LIBRARY GERALD\nINFORMATION\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nRequested\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 24, 1976\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJAMES CANNON\nFROM:\nPAUL LEACH Pay\nSUBJECT:\nRecent Announcements of Aircraft\nOrders and the Tax Bill Benefits\nfor Airlines\nWithin the past few weeks, domestic trunk airlines have\nannounced several orders -- or expected orders -- for new\naircraft, primarily to replace older, noisy planes. These\ninclude two significant ones:\nUnited Airlines is considering ordering 25 to 28 new\nBoeing 727s at a cost of $275 to 308 million. These\ncan be financed out of $483 million in cash on United's\nbalance sheet. This is expected to be approved at the\nnext United board meeting, when the need for some DC-10s\nmay also be considered. See article at Tab A.\nAmerican Airlines is ordering ten B-727s in addition to\nsix B-727s ordered earlier this summer. The total cost\nof the 16 planes is about $182 million, which American\ncan finance with cash. See article at Tab B.\nAnother item of note is the effect of the Tax Bill on the\nairlines. There are several liberalized provisions for\ninvestment tax credits which benefit the airlines, including\none major change which exclusively helps the airlines.\nTreasury, OMB and Congressional sources estimate that the\nspecial tax benefits may total about $225 million over the\nnext three years ------------------------- equivalent to about 20 B-727s. See\narticle at Tab C.\n20\nGERALD FORD LIBRARY\n16\n20\n6\n/\n092406\nA\nFORD & LIBRARY GERALD\nUAL's United Airlines Expected to Clear\nMajor Order of Boeing 727s Next Week\nBy WILLIAM M. CARLEY\nto generate another $190 million to $200 mil-\nStaff Reporter of THE WALL 1337 JOURNAL\nlion in depreciation next year. Hence. the\nWALL STREET JOURNK\nNEW YORK-United Airlines, a unit of\nairline easily could pay cash If we bought\nUAL Inc. # is on the verge of a major order\nsome planes today we'd probably pay\nfor Boeing Co. T27 airplanes.\ncash, Mr. Ferris said in the recent inter-\nI\nWhile the size of the purchase couldn't be\nview.\n9-23-76\nbody planes in the past few years.\nB\nAmerican Air Set\nTo Buy 10 Planes\nFrom Boeing Co.\nThus, an American official said, the air-\nline plans to use its new 727s to replace\nolder planes on a one-for-one basis. If pas-\nPlanned 727 Order, Valued at\nsenger growth should continue to outstrip\nexpectations, however, the airline might de-\n$115 Million, Would Be\ncide to keep some of the older craft in ser-\nvice. Other factors that might put pressure\nIts Second in 1½ Months\non the line to continue flying older planes\nare the possibility of winning new routes for\nwhich American has applied and a possible\nBy WILLIAM M. CARLEY\nspurt in charter traffic, due to a recent Civil\nStaff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL\nAeronautics Board ruling easing restrictions\nNEW YORK-American Airlines is about\non charter flights.\nto order 10 more-Boeing Co: 727 airplanes val-\nMost airlines, including American, have\n727-100. The 16 planes involved in Ameri-\ncan's latest round of orders will be delivered\nnext year.\nWALL STREET JOURNAL September 10, 1976\nFORD LICRARY\nAirlines' Share Net Seen Particularly Helped\nBy Tax Bill's Expansion of Investment Credit\nBy CHARLES J. ELLA\nsigned, could stimulate orders of new\nNew tax legislation sent to President\nplanes by the major carriers.\nFord by the Congress late last week could\nThe industry's total investment tax car-\nbe a particular boon to airlines.\nforwards are large in relation to ex-\nAmong a host of other changes, the bill\npected earnings. Mr. Fried's list of credits\ncontains a liberalized provision for invest\ntotals $562 million. He's estimating indus-\nry profits this. year at $325 million to $350\nmillion, and next year at $400 million to\n$500 million:\nWALL STREET JOURNAL\n9-21-76\n1mc\nINFORMATION\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nREQUESTED\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 24, 1976\nFile\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nJIM CANNO\nSUBJECT:\nAviation Noise Policy\nWhen you discussed an Aviation Noise Policy Statement\nwith Cheney, Marsh, Greenspan and me last Saturday,\nyou suggested that your Policy Statement might take\nthe form of a message to Congress, or a major address.\nSince any message to Congress could be lost in the\nclosing days of this session, I believe that a speech\nwould provide a better opportunity for you to present\nyour views.\nAccordingly, I have drafted for your consideration an\nAviation Noise Policy Statement in the form of a speech\nwhich might be given to a knowledgeable audience gathered\nat one of the noisiest airports:\nAirport\nSerious Noise Affecting\nNew York - La Guardia\n1,000,000 persons\nChicago - O'Hare\n771,000 persons\nNew York - John F. Kennedy\n507,000 persons\nNewark, New Jersey\n431,000 persons\nBoston - Logan International\n431,300 persons\nFORD\nLos Angeles, International\n293,600 persons\nSince the New York metropolitan area has three of the\nnoisiest airports, I would suggest you speak at one of\nthem, preferably JFK.\nThe audience could include (by invitation) airport workers,\npilots, homeowners in the area, community leaders, environ-\nmental leaders, airline executives, civic leaders, a\ncross-section of the community most directly affected by\naircraft noise, and labor and management representatives\nof the airline and aircraft industries and their suppliers.\n-2-\nThis draft attempts to get across these points:\n-- your concern for an environmental problem;\n- your interest in preserving a healthy and\ncompetitive airline industry;\n- your concern for jobs;\n- your interest in energy conservation;\n-- your desire to avoid unnecessary Federal\nexpenditures;\n- your personal leadership in addressing a\ndifficult, complex, and interrelated set of\nproblems; and\n--\nyour decisiveness in proposing a balanced,\npractical and sound solution.\nBy the time of your return I will have reviewed this with\nMarsh, Greenspan and O'Neill.\nFORD & LIBRARY\nINFORMATION\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nREQUESTED\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 24, 1976\nMEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT\nFROM:\nJIM CANNO Jan\nSUBJECT:\nAviation Noise Policy\nWhen you discussed an Aviation Noise Policy Statement\nwith Cheney, Marsh, Greenspan and me last Saturday,\nyou suggested that your Policy Statement might take\nthe form of a message to Congress, or a major address.\nSince any message to Congress could be lost in the\nclosing days of this session, I believe that a speech\nwould provide a better opportunity for you to present\nyour views.\nAccordingly, I have drafted for your consideration an\nAviation Noise Policy Statement in the form of a speech\nwhich might be given to a knowledgeable audience gathered\nat one of the noisiest airports:\nAirport\nSerious Noise Affecting\nNew York - La Guardia\n1,000,000 persons\nChicago - O'Hare\n771,000 persons\nNew York - John F. Kennedy\n50.7,000 persons\nNewark, New Jersey\n431,000 persons\nBoston - Logan International\n431,300 persons\nLos Angeles, International\n293,600 persons\nGE34LD FORD\nSince the New York metropolitan area has three of the\nnoisiest airports, I would suggest you speak at one of\nthem, preferably JFK.\nThe audience could include (by invitation) airport workers,\npilots, homeowners in the area, community leaders, environ-\nmental leaders, airline executives, civic leaders, a\ncross-section of the community most directly affected by\naircraft noise, and labor and management representatives\nof the airline and aircraft industries and their suppliers.\n-2-\nThis draft attempts to get across these points:\n----- your concern for an environmental problem;\n- your interest in preserving a healthy and\ncompetitive airline industry;\n-- your concern for jobs;\n-- your interest in energy conservation;\n-- your desire to avoid unnecessary Federal\nexpenditures;\n--\nyour personal leadership in addressing a\ndifficult, complex, and interrelated set of\nproblems; and\n--\nyour decisiveness in proposing a balanced,\npractical and sound solution.\nBy the time of your return I will have reviewed this with\nMarsh, Greenspan and O'Neill.\nGERAL FORD LIGRARY"
}