good; because we did this in Chicago and had an awful lot of difficulty from the Soap and Detergent Association. We added that clause. Our theory had been that it would be very simple for any manufacturer to reduce their phosphate level, and then double or triple the recommended use level, and we would be right back where we started. So, in that area, the bill is exactly like ours, and I think it has worked effectively for us and should work effectively for the Federal Government.

Insofar as reduction by area is concerned, it leaves a two-edged sword and, I think the bill should be looked over a bit more carefully. It says that the administrator has the right to reduce the levels, and then also in another place it says that he has a right to give exemptions completely. So, the 8.7 might turn out to be strictly an academic provision in he first instance. So, it does require study from that point of view.

Senator SPONG. I believe when Senator Griffin testified this morning that rather than using geographic examples he was speaking of hospitals and places like that.

Mr. BILANDIC. I am glad you raised that, because that is another myth.

They said the hospitals would suddenly become contaminated. But phosphates have absolutely nothing to do with killing germs or with making hospitals clean or safer or anything else. So, that is a myth that has been perpetuated for too long a time.

Senator SPONG. Mr. Kretchmer, do you have anything to add?

Mr. KRETCHMER. I was sitting here thinking, Senator, if we had an obligation out of this collective hearing today, it was really to the consumer. I have listened very carefully to the Federal executive testimony this morning from the Surgeon General and Administrator Ruckelshaus, and really felt when it was done and when you and the other Senators were finished with your questioning that for this small group in this room, perhaps we put some of the questions to rest; but I am still concerned about how the public is going to get the appropriate information and how we are going to get the appropriate policy set across the country so that we who are vitally involved in local government all agree, and how that point of view is going to get back across the country.

Perhaps, the committee could have something to say on a public basis after it digests the testimony to recreate what we thought we were doing so well 3 weeks ago, before the 15th of September, which was moving away from the use of phosphates and moving to phosphate-free and alternative cleaning products. If you can help us do that, you will be doing a great public service.

Senator SPONG. I think the committee has a responsibility to try to do that. My thoughts about it are somewhat tempered by the possibility that it seems awfully easy to further confuse an already confused situation. I assure you that we are going to try to hear from everyone. The industry is coming in here, and we have got some very hard questions to ask them.

We will try in making any statement in our report to give the public the benefit of whatever collective information on that has come here. I quite agree with you, our obligation is to the consumer, from the standpoint of the consumer's health, and from the standpoint of

what the consumer is encouraged to buy, and from the standpoint of the environmental considerations involved.

I think about the only thing all of us have been able to agree on this far is it is a very complex problem, and since you gentlemen represent areas where the problem is so much more evident than in other parts of the United States, we are very pleased that you are here today.

Mr. Poston, your ordinance limiting phosphates to 8.7 percent Mr. POSTON. That was effective on February 1 of this year, and the content of detergents is lowered to zero effective June 30, 1972. Senator SPONG. How long? Since February 1?

Mr. POSTON. February 1. We found that we were able to—the merchants in the city were able to comply with phosphates on the shelves that met the level of phosphate content.

Senator SPONG. Do you have any measurements of Chicago's sewage that would indicate a reduction in phosphates flowing into Lake Michigan or the Illinois River as a result of the ordinance?

Mr. POSTON. I do not have with me; the Sanitary Department of Chicago makes measurements on this, and we are keeping in touch with that. At this present level, the reductions are not what we will expect from June 30 of next year.

We do know that there are downstream many problems, and I noted this morning that there was comment to the effect that a small part of the country is affected by this phosphate in waters, that it is attached primarily to areas where they have lakes and streams. I noticed particularly as I came in on the plane this morning Monongahela River that we crossed, and I noted the color of that river was green, it was just about as green as the forest, and this indicated to me the presence of large growths of algae in that river, green color in water being indicative of growth of algae.

I think this was occasioned by the channelization of the river; you could see the dams and the pools, so we had lakes there.

I would like to remind this committee that our waters are one of our most valuable resources, and we are having to use these and reuse them many times. Water from streams is pumped in from reservoirs, and this gives the opportunity-they pump the phosphates right along with it-it gives opportunity for intense growth of algae, which causes problems with the use of that water. Whether it is public water supply and troubles of treatment of it, the algae forms interfere with the filtration, it interferes with the taste and odors of the finished product, and I think there is a wide area of our country and a great amount of our water that are affected by the phosphates in them, in the nutrient. Senator SPONG. Have any of you had any complaints that the noand low-phosphate products do not work as well as the high-phosphate detergents?

Mr. BILANDIC. I think I could handle that question.

I think we probably had the most graphic illustration of the answer to that question during the public hearings which we held in August of 1970. The Soap and Detergent Association had indicated how we will be penalizing the housewife and her wash wouldn't be any good, it would be gray, and it wouldn't be a safe and sanitary, unhealthy, and all that sort of thing. And we had a witness that testified the following

71-179 O 72 pt. 2 - 6

day, she was a rather attractive looking young housewife. She had three children and a husband and wore very clean clothes. And she testified that she does the laundry at her home herself, that she does 14 loads of laundry every single week, and she would defy anybody to get a whiter or a cleaner wash than she has.

She said that she uses a nonphosphate detergent exclusively, and she identified the brand, and one time when she couldn't get it at her local store, this was prior to the time of our ordinance, she traveled 40 miles to get the kind of nonphosphate detergent that she wanted to have her clothes cleaned in.

Her testimony has been representative of generally all the people in the city of Chicago.

One thing we learned long ago is you can't fool the Chicago housewife. Somebody said that some of the nonphosphate detergents are really only as good as maybe ordinary water. That is bunk. No Chicago housewife, I would say no American housewife, would buy that product the second time. In order to have performance and in order to have stability in the marketplace, and the market studies in the city of Chicago have shown that although our ordinance presently only requires 8.7 percent of elemental phosphorus, that many of them are down to zero, and have been down to zero from the very inception, for quite a period of time, and those are the ones that are selling the most. Those are the ones that the housewives are using.

We submit that they would not be repeat customers, and the nonzero phosphates would not have captured as large a percentage of the market in Chicago had there not been some quality of performance to the products.

Senator SPONG. Mr. Kretchmer, do you think the housewives in Chicago are any smarter than those are in New York?

Mr. KRETCHMER. About the same. Consumers we hope all over the country are getting smarter. Our indications are identical.

the

Obviously, the day after the September 15 press conference, phones at our agency began to ring, the letters began to come in; the people stopped us on the street. Those who were using no-phosphate and low-phosphate detergents were satisfied, and they said they would continue to use them, and we shouldn't be whipsawed by the soap industry into changing our position.

That is one of the things we are concerned with. My interest was people. You are saying you are having the industry in. I can tell you we will carefully study, as I am sure you will, what the industry will have to say to you. One of the problems is we often find the industry will fight what we think it ought to be doing in adjusting to the environmental and social needs of the city and the country for that matter, so we will be curious to examine the industry's position.

Our clothes in my home are as clean as anybody else's, and we use a no-phosphate product, and have since the first one was available in the city of New York. It is interesting to note, of course, that the colored shirt, I notice, Senator, that you wear a white shirt

Senator SPONG. Today.

Mr. KRETCHMER. Today.

Perhaps as we move away from the detergents containing phosphates and to the nondetergent products, we will just not have to wear

as many white shirts as we did, but that seems to be the trend in the country anyway.

Senator SPONG. Would you gentlemen from Florida like to comment on the last question?

Mr. EDWARDS. Actually, the response in our county was quite a bit different. The housewives did not seem to be confused. They thought that someone was making a very poor attempt to fool them. They thought the statements were rather silly. There was no confusion. They just proceeded as they had been, using either low-phosphate or no-phosphate detergent. We have had no problem. I have received no calls, no letters; just some humorous comments on the statements that were made.

Senator SPONG. Thank you.

Mr. Kretchmer, has your agency received complaints-excuse me, did you want to comment, Mr. Poston?

Mr. POSTON. I have here a set of marketing tests by Triumph in studies that they have made, and they cover marketing studies, and they find that their nonphosphate detergent stands up above some of the regular detergents that are used. I will give you this for your information.

Senator SPONG. Thank you.

That will be received into the record.1

Senator SPONG. Mr. Kretchmer, has your agency received complaints of damage to automatic washing machines from the soap and soda combination or from nonphosphate detergents?

Mr. KRETCHMER. We have not. I do not believe we would be in a position to get that. Again, Senator, your question raises another obvious question to us and one that we have considered at our agency, and that is the whole problem of washing machine technology, the fact that the current washing machine as we know it has not really changed in an extraordinary number of years, notwithstanding that the problem with phosphorus and phosphates may have changed, and one of the things again that we would hope industry would do would be to look at some of these basic systems.

We run into the same problem in New York when it comes to demand for electricity, that these products probably use more electricity to serve their purpose than they need to, because for years there was no shortage of electricity, and these machines could be run with a higher energy demand.

We would hope that what the washing machine industry would do or the appliance industry generally would do would be to take a second look at their products and begin to understand that the structure and the operating mechanisms in those machines might not necessarily meet 1971 and later needs, and, therefore, they might adjust the cycles in some of those washing machines.

There is always the retrofit problem. What about all the old machines, how many new machines will be bought? Hopefully an intelligent economy and an intelligent industry can deal with that problem.

We are going to have the automobile problem all over again. We are going to clean the air by providing that all cars after a certain date, in

1 See p. 448.

this instance 1975, meet certain Federal standards, and it will take us a number of years to get the air as clean as we like it. We think the washing machine manufacturers and the appliance manufacturers generally have to get into that same thing.

This problem of suspended solids and the role phosphorus plays in holding suspended solids out, maybe the machine can be designed differently so that is not the same problem it is. Maybe the spin-dry cycle can be altered or adjusted so as not to throw the particulates or the solids back into the clothing.

I am not sure of any of that. It seems clear again here is a perfect example where the environmental problems have not really been dealt with by the large manufacturers. They have an obligation to either come forward to tell us that nothing can be done or describe why not, or else change the way those machines function.

Mr. BILANDIC. I believe I could add to that question and also advise my colleague from New York that the evidence that we received at our hearing in August of 1970 from one of the manufacturers of a zero phosphate detergent, who also at that time was a member of the Soap and Detergent Association but did not agree with their views, they presented evidence at our hearing that indicated that their product actually helps the automatic washing machine, and I think it was leter reported in Consumers' Report that some of the nonphosphate detergents, contrary to some of the information that has been given out that they would be detrimental to the automatic washing machine, actually improved-lubricated and improved the performance. If you want, I will name the product.

The product, and they do not need an endorsement from me, I think they have it from other people, but the evidence was presented by the De Soto Laboratories, they are the ones that manufacture the product for Sears, Roebuck & Co. They also make it for Armour, Dial, and they manufacture a product for Montgomery Ward & Co., all highly reputable companies. Basically the same formula and basically the same evidence would apply to all of the companies.

So they actually help the automatic washing machine, don't hurt it. Senator SPONG. Is there contemplated any change in the laws that you gentlemen have referred to in view of the recommendation that laws unduly restricting detergent phosphates be reconsidered?

Mr. BILANDIC. I will handle that one first, since we were the first ones to stir up all this trouble. I think as far as the city of Chicago is concerned, we very carefully considered our actions prior to going into them, and when we did go into the problem, we did not merely throw in an ordinance haphazardly. Under directions from the mayor, we held extensive public hearings, and we invited people from all over the country, and we did submit the transcript of our proceedings to the House Public Works Committee, we did send it to various other Members of the Congress, and if this committee desires, we would be very delighted to furnish our transcript to you.

Senator SPONG. Thank you. We would like that for our files.

Mr. BILANDIC. So we will furnish that with leave of the chairman. We have dealt with this question very extensively. We found this was the solution that we had to go to. The things that Mr. Kretchmen indicated are actually true from our experience. When we went in and