The agencies included in GAO's review generally lacked

tematic approach to identifying and solving solid waste disposal problems. GAO found that, in varying degrees and at various organizational levels, the agencies needed:

More effective responsibility centers,

Improved policy guidance from headquarters and policy implementation by regional offices, and

More effective inspection procedures.

GAO's review showed that both GSA and the Army could better reduce wastes and recover and recycle waste material. Although both agencies had taken some actions to reduce the amount of solid waste requiring disposal, they had different policies at the headquarters levels and practices at the field levels. A number of actions had been taken at individual locations that, in GAO's opinion, could be widely implemented.

At Fort Gordon, Georgia, for example, the post exchange sold soft drinks in returnable bottles from its 500 vending machines. In addition, the post exchange received shipments of certain items from central warehouses in returnable plastic baskets, which reduced the volume of cardboard boxes requiring disposal. Many of the Army installations GAO visited, however, used nonreturnable bottles and cardboard boxes.

Because Army installations purchase such large quantities of bottled beverages an estimated 10,000 cases a month at one post-GAO believes that a study should be made to determine whether, on the basis of economic, convenience, and environmental considerations, the Army's procurement of beverages in returnable containers should be emphasized.

Although both the Army and GSA have been recovering some wastes for reuse or recycling, they could recover much more. Generally the Army was recovering wastes only when it was economically advantageous; little consideration was given to salvaging and recycling primarily for environmental benefits.

GSA and the Army, in their procurement activities, should be aware of, and should emphasize, the environmental benefits that could be obtained through using more reusable or recyclable materials, containers, and packaging.

Recommendations

The Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior should direct the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service to:

Establish, at the various organizational levels, responsibility centers for solid waste matters.

Establish procedures so that (1) solid waste management policies are communicated effectively to all officials, (2) headquarters provides adequate policy guidance to regional personnel, and (3) regional officials carry out agency policies effectively.

Require periodic inspections and reporting of inspection results of (1) agency-operated and lessee- and permittee-operated disposal sites on Federal land and (2) disposal sites used by the agencies on private land.

The Secretary of the Army should make a study to determine whether, on the basis of economic, convenience, and environmental considerations, the Army's procurement of beverages in returnable containers should be emphasized. The results of such a study could apply to the other military services.

The Secretary of the Army and the Administrator of General Services should each make a study to determine those wastes generated in significant quantities at Federal installations that could be salvaged for reuse or recycling. Procedures should be established to insure that such wastes are salvaged, if feasible, at all GSA and Army field locations.

The Administrator of General Services and the Secretary of the Army also should emphasize to their headquarters and regional personnel the significance of the solid waste problem and the legislative requirements that (1) Federal agencies consider environmental values, along with economic and technical factors, and (2) the Federal Government be a leader in the effort to protect and enhance the quality of the environment.

Finally the Administrator of General Services and the Secretary of the Army should consider using more reusable or recyclable materials, containers, and packaging.

Agency actions and unresolved issues

The agencies generally agreed with GAO's findings and conclusions. They cited several actions taken or planned to implement the recommendations.

8. Richard D. Vaughan, "National Solid Wastes Survey Report Summary and Interpretation," 1968 National Survey of Community Solid Waste Practices: An Interim Report (1968) pp. 47-51:

What do these preliminary results imply about the solid waste problem in the United States? Up to now, when anyone asked how much solid waste is collected in this country, the usual response was either 3.5 or 4 or 4.5 lbs per person per day, depending upon who was answering the question. Our survey results show that the average amount of solid waste actually collected in this country is over 5.3 lbs per person per day, or more than 190 million tons per year. What does this mean in terms of future collection of solid waste materials? During the past 5 years the per capita expenditure for consumption of durable and nondurable goods, rose by about 4 to 6 percent. Since production and eventual discard of these goods are responsible for the waste materials, it would be logical to suppose that the per capita waste production will increase at a similar rate. Assuming the conservative 4 percent annual increase in per capita generation, the amount of material to be collected through municipal and private agencies will rise to 8 lbs per person per day by 1980. Assuming a national population of 235 million by 1980, this means that over 340 million tons of solid waste will be collected.

But these figures reflect only the amount of material that is collected. It must be recalled that 10 to 15 percent of household and commercial wastes are collected or transported by the individual generating the waste. Approximately 30 to 40 percent of the industrial wastes

are also self-collected and transported. Additionally, local regu tions or lack of them-permit over 50 percent of our population burn some type of household waste in their backyards. About 45 pe cent of commercial and other establishments are also allowed to pra tice controlled open burning of some type. Thus, although the amou of waste material that has to be collected is staggering in itself, t amount of material that is actually generated and could pose potenti collection problems is even more impressive. Conservative estimate indicate that 7 lbs of household, commercial, and municipal wastes an presently generated per person per day; this totals over 250 millio tons per year. To this must be added our estimate of over 3 lbs pe person per day for industrial wastes, amounting to an additional 11 million tons per year. Thus, estimates for 1967 indicate that over 10 lbs of household, commercial, and industrial wastes are being generated in this country for every man, woman, and child, totaling over 360 million tons per year.

To these figures we must add over 550 million tons per year of agricultural waste and crop residues, approximately 1.5 billion tons per year of animal wastes, and over 1.1 billion tons of mineral wastes. Altogether, over 3.5 billion tons of solid wastes are generated in this nation every year.

In the survey it was seen that, on the average, almost $5.40 per person was budgeted by communities for collection activities. An additional $1.40 was budgeted by communities for disposal activities, giving a total per capita expenditure of $6.80 for both collection and disposal. Thus the total amount budgeted by municipalities is approximately $1.6 billion per year. But this figure does not include expenditures related to solid waste management which are of a nonbudgeted nature. This means, for example, that any monies expended for capital improvements and construction that are supported by bond issues and retired out of the general municipal budget are not included. It has been estimated that expenditures of this type would add about $100 to $120 million to the expenditure for municipal solid waste management, giving a grand total of over $1.7 billion per year.

We have seen, however, that the investment in both manpower and equipment by the private sector is greater than that of the municipal sector so far as collection activities are concerned. Since collection expenditures amount to approximately 80 percent of the budgeted municipal expenditures, we estimate that the yearly expenditure by the private waste management industry is approximately $1.8 billion. These figures, of course, do not take into consideration the investment by individuals or private industrial organizations, that, because of necessity or preference, handle and dispose of their own waste materials. Considering the per capita investment in refuse containers, garbage grinders, on-site and backyard incinerators, and the money invested by industry for transporting and disposing of their own material, we estimate that the expenditure in the individual sector is about $1.0 billion annually. Thus, our current estimate of the annual expenditure to handle and dispose of the household, commercial, municipal, and industrial solid waste material in this country is $4.5 billion per year.

But, even with this impressive total expenditure, it must be concluded that present collection and disposal systems in this country are not really adequate. I believe the fact that 94 percent of existing land disposal operations and 75 percent of incinerator facilities are inadequate is a national disgrace which must be corrected if our environment is to be properly protected. In order to provide complete collection of household, commercial, and industrial waste materials, and, moreover, to upgrade the frequency of collection of these materials, it is estimated that an additional 12 percent of our total expenditures, or $540 million a year, must be allocated for operated expenses; this would entail an additional $20 million a year in capital expenditures for trucks and other equipment. Similarly, to upgrade our land disposal operations, an additional $80 million per year is needed in operating funds, while a total of $240 million, or almost $50 million a year for the next five years, is required for capital expenditures. Thus, an additional $130 million per year is required to upgrade our current land disposal operations.

But we must also rectify our past mistakes. If the cost of converting and covering existing open dumps is only 65 cents a ton, and if these dumps are converted at a rate equal to current production, over $100 million per year for five years would be required to complete this task.

It is estimated that approximately $150 million is required to construct new incinerators for replacement of existing inadequate incinerators and conical burners. An additional $75 million is required for air pollution control equipment to upgrade or replace existing inadequate incinerators.

In summary then, it is seen that approximately $560 million per year is required to upgrade our current collection systems. Approximately $230 million per year is required to eliminate the open dumps now in use and improve the level of our sanitary landfill operations. An additional $45 million per year for five years will be required to provide adequate incinerator capacity. This represents a total of $835 million per year for five years required to upgrade existing collection and disposal practices in this country to a satisfactory level. This total is in addition to the estimated $4.5 billion spent annually for solid waste management. To these figures must also be added each year 4 to 6 percent of the previous year's total expenditure to allow for costs due to population growth and increased per capita generation of solid waste. This additional expenditure represents an increase of approximately 18.5 percent over the present funding level, which is not doing the job.

9. "Maryland Nurse Killed on Turnpike," Washington Star-News October 25, 1973, p. A-17:

A Silver Spring nurse, who was to be married this weekend, was one of at least nine persons killed yesterday in three major pileups on the New Jersey Turnpike.

Smoke from a smoldering garbage dump and heavy fog are being blamed for the 30 chain-reaction accidents in which more than 40 persons were injured on a portion of the turnpike near Kearny, N.J.

Janet Van Nest, 31, of 8622 Manchester Road was killed when her car plowed under the rear of a maintenance truck.

Miss Van Nest, a registered nurse, was an instructor in nursing education at D.C. General Hospital. Except for her German shepherd dog, which also was killed in the accident, Miss Van Nest was traveling alone.

According to associates at the hospital, Miss Van Nest was on her way to her parents' home in Rumson, N.J., where she was to be married Saturday. She was to be joined there by her fiance who lives in Camillus, N.Y.

William J. Flanagan, executive director of the New Jersey Turnpike Authority, said the fire had been burning for 10 days in the Hackensack Meadowlands dumping grounds within a mile of the turnpike.

"With proper atmospheric conditions and smoke covering the roadway," he said, "the fog will drop like a curtain."

We're certain the smoke from the fire had to contribute to the visibility problem," said Joseph T. Barbern, deputy commissioner of environmental protection.

Police feared the death toll could go higher once the wreckage was cleared in the areas of the major pileups, the Associated Press reported. Police were searching for a truck driver, last seen running into the swamps alongside the highway, who had been coated with hot asphalt from another truck.

Lt. Thomas Arnold of the Rutherford police department said rescue workers had difficulty getting to the accidents because of the number of cars and the lack of visibility.

"They had so much fog they couldn't even find the accidents," he said. "They knew they were out there but couldn't find them."

State Police Lt. Thomas Messineo said as many as 50 to 65 vehicles may have been involved in the north and southbound lanes.

10. Selection of reported instances of health problems resulting from improper disposal practices:

GAS MIGRATION

A child was killed and her parents suffered severe brain damage when carbon monoxide from a near-by smoldering dump migrated into the crawl space of the family's home. (Philadelphia Enquirer, January 9, 1973, Sec. C, p. 6.)

An explosion occurred in an armory in September 1969, in Winston-Salem, North Carolina killing three people and seriously injuring six others. The explosion was caused by the ignition of methane gas which had percolated from an old dirt-covered landfill over which the armory was constructed. (Koontz v. City of WinstonSalem, 280 N.E. 513, 180 S.E. 2d 897 (1972).)

Two men were killed, four others and a recreation center was completely demolished in Atlanta, Georgia when workmen accidentally ignited methane gas which had concentrated in the basement. The area surrounding the building had been used as a landfill and been subsequently covered. (Fire Journal, Vol. 62, No. 4, pp. 23, 25, July, 1968.)