In the case of the first two markets contamination of cotton is limited to a maximum of 1 to 2 percent. Thus, increases in blends means greater control by the textile processors, resulting in increased cost. It also greatly reduces the usable yield from used textiles.

Fiber blends have essentially the same effect on the wiping cloth business. Wipers are less sensitive to small percentages of polyester fiber, but fiber blends with over 50 percent polyester do not have satisfactory absorption characteristics. (Garments with polyester/ cotton blends of 50/50 and 65/35 are extremely common.) The present percentage of such blends in mixed rag bundles is unknown, but the increased replacement of man-made fibers by synthetics is testimony that they are likely to increase, reducing usable yields.

Another major problem of textile recycling is that used textiles are losing ground in many traditional markets. Wool markets are one of the most serious problems, due mainly to the Wool Labeling Act (the effect has been a psychological one on consumers who perceive that virgin wool is cleaner or purer) and increased competition from secondary wool from foreign sources. Also, virgin based materials are replacing used textiles in some markets. The incentive for using secondary textiles as paddings, filler, etc. has traditionally been their low cost. Now, development of virgin based products such as urethane foams at competitive prices has resulted in fading used textile markets.

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE COMPOSTING PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES (1969)*

Source: Breidenbach, A.

Riker

Windrow

20

Garbage, raw sludge, corn
cobs
Mixed refuse

1955

Closed (1962)
Closed (1965)

1963

et al. Composting of municipal solid wastes in the United States. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971. 103 p.

Source: Systems study of air pollution from municipal incineration. 3 v. Cambridge, Arthur D. Little, Inc., Mar. 1970. (920 p.) (Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va., as PB 192 378 to PB 192 380.)

REFERENCES

1. Darnay, A., and W. E. Franklin. Salvage markets for materials in solid wastes. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. chap. 4. p. 35, 45-7.

2. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, p. 45-13 and 45-14.

3. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, p. 45–24.

4. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, chap. 4. p. 35.

5. Resource Planning Associates, Preliminary report on a federal tax incentive for recycling post-consumer waste materials. Unpublished data, 1972.

6. (1) Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, p. 49. (2) Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. Identification of opportunities for increased recycling of ferrous solid waste. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, [1973]. p. 116. [Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. as Publication PB 213 577.]

7. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, chap. 5. p. 58–2.

8. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, chap. 5. p. 49.

9. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, chap. 5. p. 58-11. 10. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, chap. 5. p. 49.

11. Battelle Memorial Institute, Identification of opportunities for increased recycling, [1973]. p. 118.

12. Battelle Memorial Institute, Identification of opportunities for increased recycling, [1973]. p. 167.

13. Midwest Research Institute, Economic studies in support of policy formation, 1972.

14. Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 2, v. 2-5. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 1972. [Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. as Publication PB 212 730.]

15. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, chap. 6. p. 59.

16. Battelle Memorial Institute, A study to identify opportunities, 1972, Book 2.

17. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, chap. 7. p. 65.

18. Darnay, and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, p. 66–67.

19. Midwest Research Institute, Economic studies in support of policy formation, 1972.

20. Darnay and Franklin, Salvage markets, 1972, p. 82, 83, 88-5.

21. Milgrom, J. [Arthur D. Little, Inc.] Incentives for recycling and reuse of plastics. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972, p. 3-18. [Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. as Publication PB 214 045.]

22. Milgrom, Incentives for recycling, 1972, p. 3-15, and internal communications from A.D. Little.

23. Milgrom, Incentives for recycling, 1972, p. 3–57.

24. Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. A study to identify opportunities for increased solid waste utilization. Book 3, v.

9, p. 10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972. [Distributed by National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. as Publication PB 212 731.]

25. Battelle Memorial Institute, A study to identify opportunities, 1972, Book 3, v. 9, p. 16.

26. Battelle Memorial Institute, A study to identify opportunities, 1972, Book 3, v. 9, p. 26.

4.9b Report to Congress on Hazardous Waste Disposal by the Environmental Protection Agency, June 1973.

PREFACE

Section 212 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (P.L. 89-272) as amended requires that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) undertake a comprehensive investigation of the storage and disposal of hazardous wastes. This document represents EPA's Report to the President and the Congress summarizing the Agency's investigations and recommendations in response to the Congressional mandate.

The findings of this report are based on a number of contractual efforts and analyses by Agency staff carried out since the passage of the Resource Recovery Act of 1970.

The report is organized into a summary, five major sections, and appendices. The first section discusses the Congressional mandate and the Agency's response to it. Next, the public health, technological, and economic aspects of the hazardous waste disposal problem are reviewed. A section detailing the case for hazardous waste regulation follows. The report concludes with a discussion of implementation issues, and findings and recommendations.