appropriate enforcement programs. The problem is time. These agencies will need many months, and possibly more than a year, to issue permanent regulations.

At the present time only the Consumer Product Safety Commission has the statutory authority to promulgate and enforce safety standards for home insulation. You may know the CPSC has been aware of the fire hazard presented by improperly treated cellulose insulation since June of 1975 when it was alerted to the danger by its Denver district office. Yet today, almost 211⁄2 years later, the CPSC has done nothing. The inaction of the CPSC is inexcusable when one considers their responsibility to insure product safety and the near unanimous support for governmental action.

Senator Ford and I have both been pushing for months to try to force the CPSC into action. Because we have been unable to get results in time to protect the many consumers presently insulating their homes, we feel it is vital to introduce an emergency interim standard. This standard would be effective until more comprehensive ones can be developed.

The legislation we have introduced would help protect the public from the unnecessary risks that they now face. First, the act directs the CPSC to adopt within 120 days an interim mandatory consumer product safety standard for flammability and corrosiveness of cellulose insulation. Second, it directs the CPSC to conduct an interagency study on the various safety aspects of all forms of insulation and to make a final report and recommendations within a year.

The President has set a goal of insulating 90 percent of all homes in the United States by 1985. It would be tragic to reach that goal only to find that we have allowed the public to buy insulation which has exposed their homes to fire and flood and endangered their health and safety. It is the responsibility of Congress to see that consumers who purchase home insulation, at our prompting, can be reasonably sure that it is safe and efficient.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Mr. Moffett's prepared statement follows:]

STATEMENT OF HON. ANTHONY TOBY MOFFETT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to testify before this Subcommittee on this most crucial issue of home insulation. As you have pointed out, the safety problems associated with home insulation are very troubling, as in the lack of action on the part of the Government to provide the best protection possible.

Because of this inaction, I introduced the Emergency Interim Consumer Safety Rule Act of 1978, H.R. 10637. This act is designed to protect consumers from the dangers of flammability and corrosiveness which characterize some cellulose insulation products. Sponsored by Senator Wendell Ford (D-Ky.), a companion version of this act passed the Senate on January 23 of this year.

The lack of governmental action to protect consumers is especially upsetting since the Government is actively encouraging people to insulate. Last April, President Carter went on national television and asked Americans to insulate their homes, encouraging them to do so with the promise of a tax credit on insulation. Since then, dozens of Federal and State agencies have distributed pamphlets on energy conservation, urging people to insulate. Unfortunately, many of these pamphlets do not provide adequate cautions to insure the safe use of cellulose and other conservation devices.

Government encouragement, together with rising fuel costs and several exceptionally severe winters, have created the present national home insulation

boom. In 1977, approximately 6 million homes were retrofitted, more than double the number in 1976. Another 2 million new homes were insulated, most of them using 20 percent more insulation than before.

This increased demand has created a shortage of fiberglass insulation, the most established insulating material. At present, most manufacturers of fiberglass and rock wool have placed their customers on allocation and are not accepting many new customers. This means that more and more people will be turning to cellulose insulation, essentially shredded paper treated with chemicals to make it fire-retardant.

When cellulose insulation is produced and installed with quality control, the end product can be an effective, comparatively low-cost insulator. However, cellulose holds a potential for harm and fraud when marketed by unscrupulous sellers, installed by untrained personnel, or handled by unknowing do-it-yourselfers. Largely because of the low investment costs and uncomplicated production technology, the number of cellulosic manufacturers has tripled over the past 2 years. While some are highly competent, many are simply "fly-by-night" con men hoping to cash in on the insulation boom.

Of the 6 million homes retrofitted last year, approximately 40 to 50 percent of them were insulated with cellulose insulation. This means that almost 3 million homes were insulated with a material for which there are no enforced standards to guarantee product quality. This is the root of our present crisis-that there are no national and no State standards to effectively govern the safety and performance of cellulose insulation.

While it is clear that entry into the cellulose market is fairly easy, the manufacture of a quality insulation product is very difficult. According to a U.S. Department of Commerce study, (Boric Acid Market Situation Summary, Interim Report, September 7, 1977), "... substantial know-how is involved in production of a thermally effective product and in the selection and application of fire retardant chemicals needed to produce a safe product." It is essential that the paper base be properly fireproofed, but too high a proportion of chemicals can cause serious corrosion hazards. The perfect balance is very hard to achieve. Further aggravating this situation, producers of cellulose insulation are now being placed on allocation by suppliers of boric acid, the primary flame retardant chemical used to treat cellulose. Together with the rising cost of boric acid, this is creating a strong economic incentive for manufacturers to cut corners by substituting less reliable chemicals, which while adequately fireproofing the insulation create a dangerous potential for corrosion. Chairman Michael Pertschuk of the Federal Trade Commission has testified that this corrosive insulation is "like a time bomb waiting to explode."

A 1977 study by the Energy Research and Development Administration found that eleven out of nineteen samples of cellulose insulation tested produced excessive corrosion. A report by the Minnesota Energy Agency Insulation Testing Program in November, 1977, showed a wide variance of flammability among 15 samples of cellulose insulation tested for fire resistance. Four of the samples tested showed little or no flame retardant properties.

I have been in contact with the Governors of the 50 States, and I have received dozens of letters from them expressing their belief in the immediate need for Government safety standards. The strong support of the Governors, the insulation industry, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Energy, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the General Services Administration has confirmed my belief that the consumers in this country are in urgent need of protection through insulation standards.

Many Federal agencies, including the Department of Energy, the Federal Trade Commission and the Housing and Urban Development Department are now working to develop such guidelines and appropriate enforcement programs. The problem is time. These agencies will need many months, and possibly more than a year, to issue permanent regulations.

At the present time, only the Consumer Product Safety Commission has the statutory authority to promulgate and enforce safety standards for home insulation. The CPSC has been aware of the fire hazard presented by improperly treated cellulose insulation since June of 1975, when it was alerted to the danger by its Denver district office. Yet today, almost 22 years later, the CPSC has done nothing. The inaction of the CPSC is inexcusable when one considers their responsibility to insure product safety and the near unanimous support for governmental action.

31-737-78- -13

Senator Ford and I have both worked for months to try to force the CPSC into action. Because we have been unable to get results in time to protect the many consumers presently insulating their homes, we feel it is vital to introduce an emergency interim standard. This standard would be effective until more comprehensive ones can be developed.

The legislation I have introduced would help protect the public from the unnecessary risks that they now face. First, the Act directs the CPSC to adopt within 120 days, an interim mandatory consumer product safety standard for flammability and corrosiveness of cellulose insulation. Second, it directs the CPSC to conduct an interagency study on the various safety aspects of all forms of insulation and to make a final report and recommendations within a year. The President has set a goal of insulating ninety percent of all homes in the United States by 1985. We cannot afford to reach that goal only to find that we have allowed the public to buy insulation which has exposed their homes to fire and flood, and endangered their health and safety. It is the responsibility of Congress to see that consumers who purchase home insulation, at our prompting, can be reasonably sure that it is safe.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ECKHARDT. Your bill provides that the interim standards shall remain in effect until the Commission promulgates a final standard. Would you thereby mandate the Commission to establish a standard other than the GSA standard as it might be changed or altered or might the Commission adopt the revised GSA standard if it found that that were sufficient?

Mr. MOFFETT. It is my thought, and I think the thought of Senator Ford, that the emergency interim standard bill does not provide any kind of panacea to all the problems surrounding insulation products. We plan to introduce and would hope that this committee would work toward a more comprehensive bill that would more fully address the permanent standard and the enforcement problems. Until that time we think it is important to have a CPSC emergency interim standard. The bill provides that if GSA amends or improves its present standard, the CPSC would do so also. Naturally, we would like the best possible standard. If the GSA changes their standard and goes to, for example, 515D, it would be our hope that the CPSC would follow. Mr. ECKHARDT. Now that raises à question. I understand that the GSA procurement standard that is in 515C is presently to be revised so we can expect the following sequence: The GSA adopts the 515D, the existing GSA standard 515C becomes a mandatory standard under H.R. 10637 and then the GSA revision is adopted by the Commission as mandated in the bill, thus replacing C with D. Given that likelihood, it could occur that the industry would be faced with complying with two very different standards in a relatively short period of time. I mean, of course, sequentially. I understand that the new standard is to be adopted within a matter of a couple months. Would it be desirable then to try to gear this bill, this timing and so forth, to go into effect with the 515D standard rather than with a very short period of time in which it must under 515C?

Mr. MOFFETT. When I first became aware of the hazards involving cellulose insulation, I tried along with others to get CPSC to use existing standards. We held off introducing the bill because there was an implied promise that the CPSC was at least working toward that end. The promise never came true and leads to the conclusion that legislating on the basis of what a Federal agency may or may not do is an unwise path. Although I recognize the improvements in the 515D standard which may well be adopted as you indicate, the fact is there could be some protection right now through the 515C standard. Again,

I don't think it is wise and I am sure you don't think it is wise to legislate according to what might happen within a few months.

Mr. ECKHARDT. No; what I am saying is that perhaps what we ought to do is only time this bill so that we will know what GSA is going to do. The practical matter would be very difficult for this bill to go through very much before that time anyway. We might be able to avoid

Mr. MOFFETT. Yes; I certainly would favor the 515D standard if the standard could be agreed to promptly. My only fear is that we might put ourselves in the situation where we have an overly burdensome problem for industry which would have to meet two standards, one for Federal contracts and one for non-Federal purposes, if we were to use the 515D standard as the interim standard before it was adopted by the GSA.

Mr. ECKHARDT. That was one of my concerns, too.

There is one other little point here. Your bill specifies that the interim safety standard "shall be enforced in the same manner and to the same extent as the Commission"-and I emphasize Commission"enforces any other consumer product safety rule."

Now section 24 of the act authorizes private parties to bring private injunctive actions which in effect enforce the bill. It might be wise to say that interim safety standards will be enforced in the same manner that product safety rules may be enforced under the Product Safety Act, so as to also embrace that provision.

Mr. MOFFETT. Yes. As you may know, that language was put into the bill so that the interim standard would be afforded equal treatment with permanent standards, not simply shelved or treated as something temporary that need not receive proper enforcement treatment. Senator Ford and I are well aware that the emergency standard bill does not provide a panacea, as I said earlier. With the staffing difficulties also at the CPSC I think the third party enforcement should also be considered as one of the options.

Mr. ECKHARDT. You want to treat it just exactly as if it were a safety standard issued by the Commission.

Mr. MOFFETT. Yes.

Mr. ECKHARDT. Thank you very much, Mr. Moffett.

Mr. MOFFETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to working with you on this.

Mr. ECKHARDT. I appreciate your leadership on this.

Mr. MOFFETT. Thank you.

Mr. ECKHARDT. Dr. Maxine Savitz, Director, Division of Buildings and Community Systems, Department of Energy.

Will you please give your name for the record and the person who is sitting with you at the table.

STATEMENT OF MAXINE SAVITZ, Ph. D., DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF BUILDINGS AND COMMUNITY SYSTEMS, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ACCOMPANIED BY IRV BALES, Ph. D. PROGRAM MANAGER FOR MATERIALS PROGRAM

Mrs. SAVITZ. I am Maxine Savitz, Director of the Division of Buildings and Community Systems. I am accompanied by Dr. Irv Bales, program manager for the materials program of the Department.

If I could, I would like to submit my full statement for the record and summarize it.

Mr. ECKHARDT. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mrs. SAVITZ. I appreciate the opportunity to present the Department of Energy's views on H.R. 10637. As you know, insulation plays a major role in the achievement of our energy conservation goals. It is important not to overemphasize the role of insulation vis-a-vis other conservation investments but we must agree that insulation has been the focus of public attention.

There were two reasons why insulation emerged as the key strategic component to achieve this goal: First, the technology is already available. And second, it is generally recognized that insulation can yield precisely the kind of immediate and substantial results we so badly need. I think we would all agree that the quickness of the payoff is very important.

The interest in insulation began to accelerate following the oil embargo of 1973-74 and the subsequent rise in energy prices. It was heightened by the severe winter of 1976-77. And it received further encouragement in April 1977 when the President's energy plan proposed a tax credit for homeowners who install insulation or other approved conservation measures during the period April 20, 1977, to December 31, 1984. Present estimates are that over 9 million residential units have had additional ceiling insulation installed voluntarily since the oil embargo.

This intense activity has created heavy demand on all insulation materials. As Congressman Moffett has pointed, manufacturers of fiberglass and rock wool are placing existing customers on allocation based on past purchases and are accepting few, if any, new customers. Meanwhile, producers of cellulose insulation are being place on allocation by suppliers of boric acid, the primary fire retardant chemical.

The Department of Energy is actually aware of the problem. We have received numerous complaints from retailers, contractors and consumers that they are unable to obtain the insulation they need. Moreover, in Congress and elsewhere, there is legitimate concern about supply and related price and quality control problems.

As the demand for insulation escalates, the need for standards becomes obvious. It should be noted that over the years many insulation companies have been manufacturing products according to various Federal specifications. There are, however, inexperienced firms beginning to enter the business to capitalize on the increased demand. The availability and prices of critical manufacturing supplies causes problems, especially the shortage of boric acid and borates for fireproofing of cellulose insulation. Because of this particularly difficult problem in the insulation industry, DOE initiated and chairs an interagency committee to closely follow supply and demand trends. Activities of this task force include meetings and briefings sessions to provide a sounding board for the general views of the participants.

Major issues of concern to this committee have included supply shortages and their causes, the impact of boric acid shortages on cellulose supply, the availability and performance of boric acid substitutes and the likely impact of various Federal specifications and labeling programs on insulation supply.

Two public meetings have been held in the past 8 months on August 5, 1977, and December 16, 1977, on insulation. These meetings were at