V 'fiAH {1.7173 s = mam? Automobile scranning Processes Automobile Scrapping Processes and Needs for Maryland A FINAL REPORT ON A SOLID WASTE DEMONSTRATION This report (SW-10d) was prepared for the Maryland State Department of Health byLMANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY INC. supported in part by a demonstration grant (1-DOI—UI-00187) from the Bureau of Solid Waste Management U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE LU; Public Health Service ,1 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICE a“: f mi Bureau of Solid Waste M'anagement I 970 a???” . fla’r. fig“ If t.‘ . ’._/ p 5' /g:// i" // .1 , ,a'i' / PUBLIC HEALTH Public Health Service Publication No. 2027 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD N0. 73-605837 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents .8. Government Printing Office 20402 Washin ton, D.C. rice $1.25 Foreword N ESTIMATED 900 MILLION POUNDS of solid wastes of all types are produced in the United States every day. What to do with these solid wastes, how to dispose of them without needlessly endangering public health and welfare, and how to recover and reuse valuable materials now discarded are among the most challenging and perplexing of current national problems. Because of lack of suitable planning, interest, and public understanding, these problems have reached such propor- tions that nationwide attention is demanded and action for the development of adequate solutions must be taken. Intensified action concerning these problems was made pos- sible by the Solid Waste Disposal Act, Title II of Public Law 89—272, which was signed by the President on October 20, 1965. This legislation directs the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to initiate, encourage, and sup- port a national program aimed at discovering and evaluating better methods of coping with the solid waste problem. The Secretary is authorized: (1) to conduct and support re- search on the nature and scope of the problem, on methods of more safely and efficiently collecting and disposing of solid wastes, and on techniques for recovering from solid wastes po- tentially valuable materials and energy; (2) to provide training and financial and technical assistance to local and State agencies and other organizations in the planning, development, and con- duct of solid waste management programs; (3) to encourage and support projects that may demonstrate new and improved methods of solid waste collection, handling, and disposal. To carry out these responsibilities, the Bureau of Solid Waste _ Management was established. Among the responsibilities with which the Bureau is charged is that of providing grant support for demonstrations relating to the development and application of new and improved methods of solid waste collection, storage, proCessing and ultimate disposal; and also for studies and in— vestigations that may lead to a demonstration of improved dis- posal practices, or may provide solutions for regional or national solid waste disposal problems. Associated with this is the respon- sibility of collecting and making available by appropriate means the results of, and other information pertaining to, such fed- erally supported demonstrations, studies and investigations. Ell 092 This report attacks the problem of automobile disposal using a systems analysis approach. Although the analysis has been directed to solving the problem in Maryland, the model can be applied to other States or regions. The basic components of the disposal reclaiming cycle are discussed as well as the problems associated with each. The seven problems identified would be expected to exist in locations other than Maryland. The magni- tude of the seven problems will vary, and the solutions peculiar to any location will be dependent on this magnitude. Hence, guided by the basic model presented in this report, it should be possible for those working in the field to determine the modifica- tions that would be necessary to solve the problem of automo- bile disposal for any location in the United States. —RICHARD D. VAUGHAN, Director Bureau of Solid Waste Management iv Contents SUMMARY The Problems, Conclusions, Recommendations SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The Approach . The Junked Car—Location and Users The Junked Car The Abandoned Vehicle The Impounded Vehicle The Auto Dismantler The Scrap Processor The Scrap User The Problems in the Cycle MARYLAND—THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM The Current Situation . . The Abandoned and Impounded Vehicle The Auto Dismantler and Scrap Processor Projected Vehicle Disposal MARYLAND—A SOLUTION . Resource Utilization Technological Developments The Disposal/ Reclaiming Cycle—Solution to the Under- Utilized-Resource Problems Recommended Government Action Stopping Vehicle Abandonment Reporting Abandoned Vehicles Ensuring Proper Disposal of Junked Cars Laws and Titling Requirements Solving Aesthetic and Pollution Problems Police/Industry Cooperation Contingency Considerations . Subsidizing Scrap Junkyards of Last Resort Level of and Responsibility for Action The Abandoning of Vehicles Reporting Abandoned Vehicles Ensuring Proper Disposal of Junked Cars Laws and Titling Requirements U PAGE 4&0on 10 13 13 16 21 23 Solving Aesthetic and Pollution Problems The Systems—Current and Projected: An Integrated Overview The Current Situation The Projected Situation The Dynamic Relationships EXHIBITS Disposal/ Reclaiming Cycle for Junked Cars (Exhibit I) . Problems and Approaches (Exhibit II) State and County Data—Current and Projected (Exhibit III) New Car Sales—A ctual and Projected (Exhibit I 1/) Vehicle Disposal (Current Flow) (Exhibit V) Vehicle Dismantling/Processing (Current Flow) (Exhibit VI) Vehicle Disposal (Projected Flow, Incorporating Conclu- sions and Recommendations) (Exhibit VII) Vehicle Dismantlng/Processing (Project Flow Incorporat- ing Conclusions and Recommendations) (Exhibit VIII) Matrix of Problems/ Conclusions/ Recommendations (Exhibit IX) APPENDICES A THROUGH H County Data . Cars Entering the Scrap Cycle . Long- Range Forecasts . . . Prices Paid by a Shredder Operator pits, and Dumps Technological Developments in the Scrap Industry Used-TireReuse . . . . . . . . . . Bibliography EC)”: HUOwtb TABLES (APPENDIX B) Table 1. Nationwide Scrappage Figures—Actual versus Predicted Table 2. Maryland Scrappage Figures—Actual versus Predicted . . Table 3. Garrett County Scrappage Figures—Actual versus Predicted Table 4. Queen Anne’s County Scrappage Figures-— Actual versus Predicted . Table 5. Prince George’s County Scrappage Figures— Actual versus Predicted . . . Table 6. Reference Table for Calculating the Number of Vehicles Entering Scrap Cycle in a Given Year In Excerpt from: Plants for Screening J unkyards Gravel- PAGE 24 \lhk 59 60 61 62 63 28 29 33 41 48 49 52 56 57 36 37 37 38 38 39 Summary ONSIDERING the abandoning, col- electing, storing, disposing, salvaging, and processing of junked cars as an integrated system, we analyzed each com- ponent of the system—the Junked Car, the Abandoned Car, the Impounded Car, the Auto Dismantler, the Scrap Processor, the Scrap User—and identified seven problem areas in the system, each requiring a solu- tion. Information regarding each compo- nent of the system was collected from Fed- eral, State, and local governments, from auto dismantlers, steelmakers, and scrap processors, and from other available sources, including trade associations, States other than Maryland, and reports of other consulting firms. The magnitude of the scrap automobile problem in Mary- land was accessed through the use of a questionnaire responded to by all the coun- ties of _Maryland and the City of Baltimore, interviews with State and local officials, and projections of the future number and distribution of junked cars in the State. Based upon the data collected, alterna- tive approaches to each problem were evaluated. In this evaluation, all alterna- tives, based on both technological changes in the private sector and suggested gov- ernment actions, were analyzed to deter- mine the effect of each on all problems and components of the system. Finally, a set of conclusions and recommendations was developed. Problems, Conclusions, Recommendations The seven problem areas considered, the conclusions reached concerning the activi- ties of the private sector in each area, and the recommendations for government ac- tion, have been summarized briefly below. Problem 1. Vehicle abandonment con- tinues at an alarming rate. Conclusion: No action by the private sector will result in significantly reducing the number of ve- hicles abandoned annually. Recommenda- tion: The passage of State legislation im- posing heavy penalties on those who aban- don vehicles. The retrieval of vehicle registration information will become more rapid and precise with the implementation " 'l of National Highway Safety Standard 4.4.2, which requires an integrated motor vehicle registration program, thereby as- suring the ability to trace ownership. Problem 2. A vast inventory of aban- doned vehicles requires location and col- lection. Conclusion: Increasing demand for vehicle hulks to feed scrap shredders that will be operating in Maryland shortly will result in the collection of some, and per- haps all, of the current inventory of aban- doned vehicles. In other geographical areas, the appearance of this method of processing scrap has resulted in vehicles being drawn into these operations from as far as 500 miles. Recommendations: To supplement this anticipated demand for vehicle hulks, and to reduce the number of abandoned vehicles as rapidly as possible with the least expenditure of public funds, l/abandoned and junked vehicles should be defined as public nuisances andjit should be required that they be reported and re- moved to junk dealers or scrap processors; ?'free dumping areas should be established in political subdivisions at which junked cars may be deposited. -' xv. \.. r r .v‘ .1 ,\_ \ ,_.,« Problem 3. Current laws and titling requirements restrict vehicle collection and disposal. Conclusion: No action by the private sector will alleviate this problem. Recommendation: Reduce the legal and titling requirements currently hampering the collection and disposal of vehicles by enacting sections (b) through (g) of Senate Bill No. 16. Problem 4. Auto dismantlers and scrap processors present air pollution and aes- thetic problems. Conclusion: Industry in- itiated action to solve these problems has not been sufficient. Recommendations: Re- quire screening of all extant auto dis- mantlers’ and scrap processors’ facilities from public view; require each facility to present a plan for screening within 6 months of effective date of legislation. En- courage counties and municipalities to stipulate in master plans the available 10- cations for future dismantlers and proces— sors and provide them with technical as- sistance. Permit interim controlled open burning until and subsequent to the open- ing of scrap shredding operations. Problem 5. There are currently in auto dismantlers’ yards a considerable inven- tory of vehicle hulks, that is, junked cars stripped of usable parts. Conclusion: This inventory will be reduced upon the initia- tion of shredding operations in the State of Maryland and will continue to be re- duced as the quality of, and demand for, scrap increases. Recommendation: No gov- ernment action is required to decrease the current inventory of vehicle hulks. Problem 6. The quality of scrap pro- duced from auto hulks using current methods frequently does not meet the quality standards of potential users. Con- clusion: This problem has been solved by the development of the scrap shredding process. Sufficient shredding facilities will be available by mid-1969 to process all junk vehicles in the State of Maryland through at least 1979 based on our pro- jections. Recommendation: No govern- ment action is required to support or subsidize the scrap industry. Problem 7. The current production methods used by the steel and foundry industries do not generate sufficient de- mand for processed scrap to utilize all junked cars. Conclusion: The increasing use of electric furnaces and the continuous casting process by the foundry and steel industries, both of which generate consid- erable demand for acceptable scrap, will result in the eventual utilization of the total inventory of junked cars as a re- source. Recommendation: No government action is required to increase the use of scrap. In essence, then, problems created by an inadequate demand for processed scrap and a technologically unacceptable supply of processed scrap are being solved by in- dustry. The aesthetic problems, however, require government action. Sysfem Description lived its usefulness as a transporta- tion vehicle, it becomes an aesthetic problem—but also it becomes a valuable source of materials. In a sense, it becomes a mine from which valuable metallic . . . materials can be obtained. So begins Auto- mobile Disposal, A National Problem, published in 1967 by the Bureau of Mines. The problems created by the junked car as a major component of the bulky solid wastes being discarded at an ever-increas- ing rate in our society are the major sub- jects of this study. It is, moreover, the two characteristics of the junked car noted in the above quotation that provide an in- sight into two types of problems, each of which requires a distinct approach: first, those problems related to the junked car as an aesthetic problem, i.e., as a nuisance and an eyesore; second, those problems re- lated to the junked car as an available, but not fully utilized, resource. Solving those problems in the second group, the resource-related problems, is of first importance, since it is only by ensur- ing the rapid, and profitable, reuse of these available raw materials that the gal- loping growth of solid waste accumulations can be stopped. By drawing more of the resources into the production cycle, we can minimally reduce the time from the discard of obsolescent material until it is reusable as a raw material, and, optimally, reduce the inventory of unprocessed scrap and the blight resulting from the abandon- ment of vehicles. The aesthetic problems, more noticeable but perhaps less significant, are more w HEN AN AUTOMOBILE has out- 378-884 0 - 70 - 2 tractable to solution by government ac- tion; however, solutions to aesthetic prob- lems are likely to be regarded unjustifiably as a cure, which they are not, rather than merely as camouflaging of the actual prob- lem. It is only by a combination of re- quired actions for solving the aesthetic problem and the utilization of potential resources in the junked car that significant progress can be attained. The Approach To better understand the problems cre- ated by the junked automobile (and other metallic solid wastes)and to ensure an in- tegrated approach to the solution of these problems, systems analysis techniques were used to define and analyze the cur- rent and projected situation. This approach clarified the interrelationships between the problem areas and identified those actions that could result in solution of the prob- lems and those actions that could serve only to temporarily alleviate undesirable conditions. First, a system flow chart of the scrap cycle was prepared in order to present clearly the distinct activities which comprise this cycle. Second, the individual components of this cycle were investigated and described. Third, the problems related to the components were identified. Fourth, data regarding the current magnitude of these problems in Maryland were collected by means of a questionnaire sent to all counties in Maryland and the City of Bal- timore and interviews with government officials, junk and scrap dealers, and other interested persons. Fifth, land use plans for the counties of Maryland were re- Problem 1 Abandoning by owner B Abandoned Vehicle C Impounde Vehicle 7“ Problem 3 Collection and Disposal of Abandoned Vehicles Problem 2 Locating Abandoned Vehicles EXHIBIT I. viewed. Sixth, projections of the future level of disposed vehicles in Maryland were made. Seventh, alternative solutions to each problem were developed. Eighth, the alternative solutions were evaluated in light of the data collected and the cur- rent changing patterns of operation in the scrap processing and steelmaking indus- tries; a set of recommendations was then developed. The J unked Car—Location and Users The first step in our analysis was to de- fine the problem limits by charting the flow of the vehicle from the time of its ceasing to be a usable means of transpor- tation until the reusable materials it con- tained were back into the manufacturing industry. , Problem 7 Insufficient Demand for Manufac- Scrap turer \ \ Problem 5 Large Inventory of stripped Vehicle Hulks Problem 4 lier M . Low Quality Pollution processed Difficulties Scrap Disposal/Reclaiming Cycle for Junked Cars. Exhibit I, Disposal/ Reclaiming Cycle, depicts the flow of the vehicle through this cycle. The six sections that follow cor- respond to the symbols designated A through F in Exhibit I and describe briefly the following component parts of the cycle: the junked car; the abandoned vehicle; the impounded vehicle; the auto dis- mantier; the scrap processor; the scrap user. . The Junked Car. The junked car en- ters the scrap cycle when a vehicle owner decides that he no longer can use a vehicle as a means of transportation because it is: (1) inoperable and the cost of repair ex- ceeds its value to him; (2) wrecked; or (3) because there is no demand by others for the vehicle an a means of transport. When the vehicle owner finds himself in this situation, he follows basically one of four courses of action: (1) he keeps the vehicle on his property; (2) he abandons the vehicleon public or private property; (3) he sells or gives the vehicle to an auto dismantler or scrap processor; (4) he takes the vehicle to a dump. The Abandoned Vehicle. Nationally, according to a survey conducted in 1965 by the Bureau of Mines, approximately 21 percent of the total junked car inventory was in automobile graveyards, municipal car pounds, public dumps, held by the owner on his property, or abandoned on public or private property. A 1967 report prepared by the U.S. De- partment of Commerce, Motor Vehicle Abandonment, indicated that 10 percent of the total number of cars leaving active service annually were abandoned. The reasons for abandonment, and the percent- age of respondents who proffered each, are as follows: (1) the car broke down and I left it where it was (30%); (2) it costs too much to have the car removed (25%); (3) I don’t know where to take the car or whom to call (25%); (4) I couldn’t find the title (or) the bank had the title (10%); (5) other varied reasons (10%). The primary causes for abandonment are then that, (a) it is the least expensive and most expeditious way to discard a no longer wanted item, and (b) no effective campaign has been conducted to advise those who have or will have this problem of the proper means of disposal. Abandoned motor vehicles are normally in one or more of the following categories: deteriorated motor vehicles with little or no monetary value for resale; unservice- able vehicles with repair costs that exceed their value; and, vehicles which have been wrecked, misappropriated, or stolen. Automobile graveyards are tracts of land where “abandoned” junked cars have accumulated. In the main, these vehicles do not currently find their way into the dismantler/ scrap processor/ steel producer cycle. The graveyards, which nationally represent about 3 percent of junked car inventory, according to the, Bureau of Mines’ Automobile Disposal, A National Problem, are principally of four types: (1) abandoned-auto wrecking yards; (2 ) auto dealer’s storage yards for inoperative trade-in vehicles; (3) storage areas initi- ated by the accumulation of hulks by car repairing and rebuilding hobbyists and re- pair groups; (4) farm property used by the owner for a “crop of junk vehicles.” The Impounded Vehicle. When a ve- hicle is abandoned on public property or on private property other than that of the vehicle owner and discovered, either by observation by government personnel (pri- marily law enforcement officers) or by complaint, the vehicle is impounded in many instances by the local government and held in a “car pound.” After impounding, the subsequent series of actions is normally followed: (1) an ef- fort is made to trace the vehicle owner- ship; (2) the owner, if located, is notified that his vehicle has been impounded and allowed time to claim the vehicle upon payment of towing, and other charges; (3) if unclaimed, and subsequent to required title clearance procedures, the vehicle is normally auctioned. Such procedures are common in urban areas; vehicles currently abandoned in rural areas, however, are not normally im- pounded and, therefore, continue to blight the countryside. The Auto Dismantler. The auto dis- mantler (synonymously, junk dealer) pro- vides, basically, two services to the com- munity by: first, accepting worn out, wrecked, or obsolete vehicles that are no longer wanted for service as a car, and, second, supplying used parts for replace- ment to individuals, automotive repair shops, and rebuilders. The auto dismantler depends for his continued existence not only upon the sale of parts, but also on the sale of stripped ,3'-' vehicle hulks to scrap processors. A low price from, and in some instances a charge to the dismantler by, the scrap dealer causes the inventory of hulks to accumu- late in “junk yards.” Nationally, auto dis- mantlers indicate that 23 percent of their inventory has no further value as a source of parts. Auto dismantlers are the primary de- pository, and in many areas currently the only aceptable depository, for disposing ofjunked cars. When the scrap cycle is operating properly, that is, when the de- mand for processed scrap is sufficient to permit scrap processors to sell their inven- tories and purchase all available hulks for processing, junk vehicles flow in and out of the dismantlers’ yards at virtually the same rate; reusable parts are removed from the vehicle for resale and the residue, the stripped vehicle hulk, flows forward in the cycle to the scrap processor. The Scrap Processor. Fundamentally, the scrap processor collects scrap, proces- ses it into the physical forms and grades required by customers, and sells it, in some instances through brokers, to steel mills and foundaries. The scrap processor normally retains only a small working inventory of vehicle hulks. A 1965 Bureau of Mines report indi- cated that, nationally, only 6 percent of the total junked car inventory was in scrap processors’ yards. The processors reported that for every vehicle at their facility at year’s end, 16 had been processed and sold. The Scrap User. Iron and steel scrap is used as ferrous raw material in the iron and steel industry, including foundaries. Scrap comprises about half of the metallic raw material input in steel and ferrous castings production, the balance consisting primarily of pig iron. Scrap is used as a metallic raw material because: (1) it normally provides adequate quality metalics in competition with pri- mary sources; (2) the price of scrap tends to be lower than primary materials to most steel producers, except in periods of material shortages. The free market sets prices at levels that make the use of scrap attractive. This attractiveness, however, varies among consumers primarily as a re- sult of varying degrees of production inte- gration and different types of furnaces; (3) a large quantity of scrap is produced by the steel makers themselves as a by- product of their operations. This scrap is generally of relatively high quality and of known composition.‘ Briefly, then, we have presented an overview of the components of the Dis- posal/ Reclaiming Cycle. The Problems in the Cycle The seven primary problems in the cycle are: (1) the continuing flood of vehicle abandonments; (2) the vast inventory of abandoned vehicles which must be located and recovered; (3 ) the legal limitations re- stricting the recovery and disposal of abandoned vehicles; (4) the aesthetic and pollution problems associated with auto dismantlers and scrap processors; (5) the current inventory of stripped hulks in auto dismantlers’ yards due to insufficient demand by scrap processors; (6) the qual- ity of processed automotive scrap; (7) the production methods used currently by the steel and foundry industries. These problems are depicted by the rec- tangles numbered 1 through 7 in Exhibit I, Disposal/ Reclaiming Cycle for Junked Cars. Exhibit II, Problems and Aproaches, ex- pands the description of these seven prob- lem areas, relates them to the system components, and lists the normally con- sidered alternative approaches to the solu- tion of these problems. Before we examine that combination of activities by private enterprise and actions by government which is most likely to provide a solution to these prbblems, we must first assess the current and projected status of these problems in Maryland. EXHIBIT II. THE PROBLEMS AND APPROACHES THE ALTERNATIVES THE SYSTEM THE PROBLEMS COMPONENT . Abandoned vehicles continue to cover the countryside in ever-increasing numbers. This spreading pall must be ABANDONED stopped AUTO . The vehicles already abandoned require an integrated system of retrieval The abandonment of vehicles can be stopped, or minimally reduced, by: a) Instituting heavy fines for those who abandon a vehicle b) Placing an artificial va_l_ue on a junk vehicle by paying a fee to all who turn in their obsolete auto c) Subsidizing those who retrieve aban- doned auto d) Penalizing those who create scrap by demanding cars which become junk— taxing new car purchasers e) Charging manufacturers who produce items which become obsolete for the “social” costs involved in the retrieval of these items f) Informing the public of how and where to dispose of vehicles properly g) Licensing all junk dealers and defining them so that anyone who leaves an “abandoned” vehicle on his property is subject to licensing requirements . Current statutes often restrict both government and private IMPOUNDED action in obtaining, storing, AUTO and disposing of junked autos Institute state and local legislation to: a) Permit freer access to abandoned vehicles for the purpose of retrieving them b) Reduce title clearance requirements 0) Stipulate maximum time allowance for owner to retrieve vehicle d) Increase charges to those who do not retrieve vehicles immediately e) Inform public of locations where vehicles can be recovered . The auto dismantler’s facility: a) Is frequently offensive in appearance, particularly in certain areas, and b) Presents a pollution problem due primarily to the requirement for burn- ing vehicles when they are AUTO to be processed as scrap DISMANTLER by most current methods . The current inventory of hulks, Require that: a) Extant auto dismantlers facilities be shielded b) Future facilities be located away from areas of public congestion andlor' shielded c) Effective pollution control be imple- mented that is vehicles stripped of a) Artificially support the scrap industry saleable used parts, in auto dis- to permit them to expand their sales to mantlers’ yards, is extensive. the scrap users and to purchase more The demand by processors for vehicle hulks from the auto dismantler these hulks must be increased . The scrap processor’s facility is a) Require that scrap processors shield frequently not acceptable their facilities in accordance with stand- either in appearance or as a ards for the zone in which they are safe operation located . The quality of scrap produced SCRAP a) Artificially support the scrap processing by the processors from auto PROCESSOR industry so that the price of technically hulks is frequently such that it low-quality scrap will be acceptable to is unacceptable to user except scrap users at extremely low prices b) Improve the quality of scrap by utilizing more advanced technology in its pro- duction . The current methods of produc- a) Increase the amount of scrap consumed tion used by scrap users do not, by expanding the use of steel and cast- at most times, allow them to SCRAP USERS ing production methods which can utilize sufl‘icient scrap to clear (Mills and utilize greater amounts of processed the junk auto hulks from the Foundries) scrap system b) Decrease the price of scrap by artificially supporting the scrap processingindustry Muryland—The Scape of the Problem is intended to provide a basis against which to assess the results of the implementation of certain courses of action, which are expected to follow in the steel and scrap processing industries, and which we hope will be established by the State of Maryland. The data in The Current Situation, was developed from the responses to our ques- tionnaire received from government per- sonnel of all counties of Maryland and the City of Baltimore, from interviews with government officials, from interviews with auto dismantlers and scrap processors, and from land use plans provided to us by Maryland’s political subdivisions. The data in Projected Vehicle Disposal, is the result of the application of a sta- tistical model we developed (which cor- related historical new car sales with cars junked in past years with great accuracy) to projected new car sales. T HE DATA in the following sections The Current Situation The Abandoned and Impounded Ve- hicle. The Annotated Code of Maryland currently permits the “disposition of lost, abandoned and stolen motor vehicles” in Maryland and specifically in Anne Arun- del, Montgomery, and Prince George’s Counties, and incorporated municipalities. Further, county commissioners are em- powered by the State to institute and im- plement ordinances for impounding and disposing of vehicles left on private prop- erty. Some political subdivisions have passed legislation permitting the impound- ing of vehicles from both public and private property, whereas others have ordinances covering only abandonments on public or private property; still others have no pol- icy established in this regard. In the State of Maryland, abandoned, lost, or stolen motor vehicles that are im- pounded by the Department of Motor Ve- hicles must be held for a period of 3 months, although in Anne Arundel, Mont- gomery , and Prince George’s Counties, and in incorporated municipalities, this time period is reduced to 30 days. If the owner, lien holder, or other per- son or corporation entitled to the vehicle cannot be located within the specified time limit, the vehicle may be disposed of. However, if the owner of the vehicle does not claim it, a notice describing the ve- hicle and the date and place of its sale must be placed in a local newspaper at least once a week for the two weeks pre- ceding the proposed sale date. Also, a registered notice must be mailed to the last owner as shown on Department rec- ords at least ten days prior to the sale. A special fund is created from the sale of these vehicles to cover the expenses of storing and processing them prior to auc- tion and the balance of proceeds from the sale, after expenses, is held for 1 year by the responsible government agency for payment to the vehicle owner if he sub- mits a claim during that time. If no claim is made within a year, this balance is transferred to the General Treasury. An abandoned vehicle having salvage value only may be sold by the property owner or person having custody of the ve- hicle after 30 days. Prior to selling, a cer- tificate stating the vehicle has salvage value only must be obtained from the De- partment of Motor Vehicles or the appro- priate police department. Further, the vehicle owner must be notified that the abandoned vehicle will be sold unless it is promptly claimed. In addition, a notice of sale must be sent, by registered mail, to the last owner of record at leasth days prior to the sale. A certificate of sale and certification of salvage value must be ob- tained following the sale on forms pre- scribed by the Department of Motor Vehicles. This certification constitutes the certificate of title if the purchaser is an auto dismantler or scrap processor who in- tends to destroy the vehicle in question. The seller is absolved of any liability to the original owner if the procedures out- lined above are followed. A survey conducted in 1966 by the Di- vision of Solid Wastes of the Maryland State Department of Health found more than 51,000 abandoned vehicles in Mary- land, exclusive of Anne Arundel, Balti- more, and Frederick Counties. Although no attempt was made in this study to “count” the abandoned vehicles in Mary- land, data received in response to our questionnaire indicated an abandonment rate of approximately 23,000 vehicles an- nually for the State (Exhibit III). The Auto Dismantler and Scrap Proces- sor. State trader’s licenses are issued by the counties to auto dismantlers and scrap processors based on the value of their in- ventory and the cost of these licenses var- ies from $15 to $800. The operation of auto dismantlers is governed by zoning ordinances passed by certain counties and municipalities. In some localities, prior approval by a zoning commission or certain other agencies is required to expand or open new facilities. The political subdivisions also vary widely in the restrictions placed on the size, fenc- ing, and screening from public view, and 10 the distance from a public highway of auto dismantlers and scrap processors. Air pollution controls are affecting the scrappage of automobile hulks. Burning of these hulks in the open in prohibited; how ever, in many instances permission to burn has been granted. This permission has been granted normally after a review of the individual operation, taking into con- sideration the proximity of other industry, residential areas, and fire hazards. Responses to our questionnaire resulted in the identification of approximately 700 auto dismantlers in the State, with an estimated current inventory of roughly 160,000 vehicles. Fourteen major scrap processors were identified; these had either shears or balers for the preparation of hulks for sale to mills and foundries. Two shredders are planned in the State—one to be located in Baltimore, the other in the suburbs of the District of Columbia. Exhibit III, State and County Data— Current and Projected, presents a consoli- dation of the data received from the coun- ties and the City of Baltimore in response to our questionnaire. Appendix A, County Data, is a compilation of the essential in- formation received from county officials and land use master plans. Exhibits III through VIII may be found following the appendices at the end of this book. Projected Vehicle Disposal To assess future magnitude and distri- bution of junked cars in the State of Maryland a projection of these vehicles for the State, its counties, and the City of Baltimore was made for each year from 1968 through 1979. These estimates ap- pear on the lower half of Exhibit III, State and County Data—Current and Pro- jected. The method used for these projec- tions, which is explained in detail in Ap- pendix B, was to develop a predictive statistical model which could accurately correlate historical data with the actual number of cars leaving active service an- nually in past years. The model finally selected predicted the number of vehicles leaving active service annually with extreme accuracy (within 2.5% of the actual for the State of Mary- land) and was based on the number of new cars sold in the 20 years preceding the year for which scrappage data was being collected. Having determined the efliciency of the model, new car sales for the State of Maryland and its political subdivisions were projected. This projection, which ap- pears in Exhibit IV, New Car Sales—Act- ual and Projected, was developed using the linear least squares regression tech- nique and was checked against other fore- 378-884 0 - '70 - 3 11 casts that had been made of new car sales (Appendix C). This projection correlated well with general industry and government estimates. Finally, the predictive model for scrap- page was applied to the projected new car sales and resulted in our estimate of fu- ture annual vehicle scrappage for Mary- land, its counties, and the city of Balti- more. The projection indicates that the num- ber of vehicles annually leaving active service by 1979 will be close to 200,000, re- quiring that facilities for processing and demand for the processed scrap must reach this level by that time. Maryland—A Solution N the last part of this report, we noted lthat the problems with which we are concerned are of basically two types: First, problems related to the junk car as a nuisance and eye-sore, abandoned singly or in graveyards, or visible to all who pass in auto dismantlers’ and scrap processors’ yards; second, problems re- lated to the junk car as an available, but not fully utilized, resource. We will first examine, in detail, resource- related problems since government action should be directed only toward removing any residue of problems remalnlmg after action by the private sector. 7“ A ,, Secondly, we will discuss this residue of problems and propose government actions to remove them. Resource Utilization The purpose of this section is to assess the effect of certain recent technological developments in the scrap processing and steel producing industries, and to deter- mine the extent to which current problems in the Disposal/ Reclaiming Cycle will be resolved by the implementation, in Mary- land, of these developments. Technological Developments. Certain recent developments in the steelmaking and scrap processing industries indicate that the demand for processed scrap will increase significantly in the near future and that the supply will be improved technically to a sufficient degree to permit the inclusion of all junked car hulks in the scrap cycle. These developments are: (1) the increase in the percentage of steel pro- 13 duction by electric furnaces, which use 98 percent scrap; (2) the reduction (halving) of home scrap by the expanding use of the continuous casting process; (3) the produc- tion of technically better scrap by the scrap processor, particularly when using the shredding process. The electric arc furnace uses a high pro- portion of scrap-about 98 percent of the charge. This furnace has been accounting for an increasing share of the steel produc- tion, rising from 7.7 percent in 1958 to 11.6 percent in 1967, according to the 1968 In- stitute of Scrap Iron and Steel Yearbook, and this percentage is predicted by Union Carbide, a leading manufacturer of elec- trodes for those furnaces, to rise to 25 per- cent by 1975. The supply of home scrap, which is scrap originated in the iron and steel in- dustry and reused there, is being reduced substantially by a relatively new process known as continuous casting. It is esti- mated by the Business and Defense Ser- vice Administration (BSDA) U.S. Depart- ment of Commerce that 18. 5 percent of new steel will be continuously cast by 1970 and 38.5 percent by 1975. Although certain types of steel cannot be continuously cast at present, the steel industry expects that the current tech- nical limitations will be overcome in the not too distant future. The characteristic of this process, an essential element in this study, is its elim- ination of approximately 50 percent of the home scrap produced using conventional methods. The following table, from the U.S. Department of Commerce, BSDA, Office of Metals and Minerals, presents the differences in raw material requirements between the conventional method of mak- ing steel and continuous casting, assuming the use of the current 45 percent scrap in steel making. Contin- uous By By casting conven- contin— as per— tional uous cent of method method conven- (tons) (tons) tional method Gross scrap and pig iron used ................. 158 133 84 Less home scrap... (36) (19) 53 Net purchased scrap and pig iron used ..... 122 114 93 Less nonrecover- able losses ......... - (22) (14) 64 Finished steel pro- duced ....................... 100 100 100 Addenda: Purchased S crap U seoL ................. 37 41 111 Pig Iron Used ........ 85 73 86 Source: US. Department of Commerce. In order to make 100 tons of steel using traditional methods, 158 tons of raw ma- terials, scrap and pig iron, are used. Of this amount, an average of 73 tons is scrap. Thirty-six tons, however, is home scrap, that is, scrap resulting from the produc- tion of steel and available to the steel manufacturer for later reuse. This scrap never leaves the plant and can simply be recycled. The balance of the scrap used, an average of 37 tons, is purchased. On the other hand, using the continuous casting process, only 60 tons of scrap are required. But this process reduces home scrap to only 19 tons and requires the purchase of 41 tons of scrap. The result is an increase of 4 tons purchased scrap for 100 tons of steel produced or an increase in scrap demanded of 11 percent. If continuous casting were substituted for the conventional methods throughout 14 the steel industry, however, the decline in home scrap would make it impossible to maintain the current domestic steelmak- ing scrap proportion, because not enough scrap, both home and purchased, would be available, even if all metallic wastes were processed and all scrap exports diverted to domestic use. If this should occur, the most likely result would be an upward shift of the demand curve for scrap; i.e., a higher price per unit for processed scrap at each quantity demanded. In review, the demand for scrap is rising with the expanding use of electric fur- naces, and the supply of home scrap is declining with the continued growth of continuous casting. These factors com- bine to indicate an expanding market for technically acceptable scrap. And the new shredding process provides a solution to the problem of technically unacceptable scrap. This new process, as used by the largest scrap shredding firm, shreds automotive scrap into small pieces, from 1/2 inch to 8 inches in length and width. The process next magnetically takes out much of the nonferrous mater- ials. The shredded ferrous scrap is then heated in order to melt or burn off some of the remaining nonferrous metals and other materials. This hot shredded ma- terial then moves through a rolling process which compresses it and breaks loose ad- ditional contaminants. The material is then passed over a second magnetic sep- arator. The resultant material is shredded scrap. Perhaps the best measure of the tech- nical acceptability of shredded scrap is the fact that it is reported as selling at appre- ciably higher prices than No. 1 heavy melting scrap, which normally sells for about 30 percent more than N o. 2 bundles, the traditional processed form of a junk auto hulk. (Appendix D presents a list of prices currently paid by a shredder in Massachusetts for vehicle hulks). Further, this method of processing eliminates the problem of open burning. Finally, the combination of a high quality product with an acceptable price has resulted in large shredding plants reaching out as far as 500 miles to find enough cars for processing. An early appearance of shredders was in Southern California, and, currently, no junked car problem exists in the areas reached by these operations, which in- clude most of California and the western parts of Nevada and Arizona. Most aban- doned cars have been removed from the countryside and auto dismantlers have a ready market for their stripped hulks; this was accomplished with no subsidy of any kind. The closest shredder to Maryland cur- rently in operation is in Philadelphia. It is owned by Pollock—Abrams Company and has a 200,000-ton-per-year processing ca- pacity, which amounts to approximately 650 cars per working day. The process used by Pollock—Abrams is similar to that described above, except that there is no heating (or burning) of the scrap. Cur- rently the plant attracts vehicles from a 60 mile radius, including the northern part of Maryland. Cars are brought in by auto wreckers who are paid $11 to $13 per car hulk, which is considerably higher than the average price paid by scrap processors using other methods. Pollock-Abrams Company has a shred- ding facility planned for the Baltimore area. The planned capacity is the same as their Philadelphia operation—200,000 tons annually. On November 4, 1968, Mr. Abrams estimated that the Baltimore fa- cility would be in operation in 8 months time—in July 1969. A second shredder, in Prince George’s County, with a capacity of 25,000 vehicles annually is planned for installation by Joseph Smith and Sons, Inc., in Kenilworth, Maryland, a suburb of the District of Columbia. A third shred- der, also with an annual capacity of 25,- 000 vehicles, is planned for installation by the Alexandria Scrap Corp., Alexandria, 15 Virginia. These three shredders, together with the shredder currently in operation in Philadelphia, provide more than suffi- cient capacity to process both the current vehicle hulk inventory in Maryland, and all projected junked cars through 1979, and to process these hulks to meet the quality requirements of the steel industry. In Maryland, therefore, the wider use of the shredding technique—now, merely a matter of time—will make processed auto- motive scrap acceptable in its entirety to the expanding scrap user market and will thus eliminate the accumulation of stripped junk auto carcasses. The Disposal/ Reclaiming Cycle—Solu- tion to the Under-Utilized-Resource Prob- lems. To relate these observations, then, to the seven problem areas identified in the first section of this report, the follow- ing results are anticipated: First, Problem 1—Vehicle abandoning continues at an in- creasing rate. Solution: The expected in- crease in the value of junked cars will re- sult in little or no change in the number of vehicles abandoned, although more will be retrieved subsequent to abandonment as the value of the junked car rises. There— fore, government action, as indicated in the following section, is required to solve this problem. Second, Problem 2—There is a vast current inventory of abandoned ve- hicles which cover the countryside. Solu- tion: The increasing demand for processed scrap and the development of shredders in Maryland will result in the retrieval of at lease some, and perhaps all, of the cur- rent inventory of abandoned vehicles. This forecast is based on the results achieved in other geographical regions subsequent to the initiation of shredding as the pri- mary method of scrap processing. In these areas, including California, Missouri, Tex- as, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Massachu- setts, plants have attracted vehicles from as far as 500 miles. And new, more eco- nomical techniques of transporting junked cars have been developed to make these distances feasible; cars are flattened and loaded 20 and more on large trucks. The value of auto hulks has risen markedly in the areas served by these shredders and hulks move readily into these plants _ rather than remain in auto wrecking yards, auto graveyards, or singly aban- doned. Third, Problem 3—Currently, State laws and titling requirements unnecessar- ily restrict both the collection and dis- posal of abandoned and junked vehicles. Solution: Government action, as described later, is required to solve this problem. Fourth, Problem 4a—The auto disman- tlers’ and scrap processors’ facilities are not aesthetically acceptable. Solution: No im- provement in this situation will result from the technical improvements in scrap proc- essing or the increasing demand for proc- essed scrap. Government action is re- quired to solve this problem. Problem 4b— Air pollution is caused by the burning of vehicle hulks—a required preprocessing for the traditional methods of automotive scrap preparation. Solution: The shred- ding process will eliminate this problem and State legislation has already been passed which prohibits open burning. Fifth, Problem 5—The current inventory of hulks, that is, vehicles stripped of sale- able used parts, in auto dismantlers? yards is extensive. Solution: This inventory will be reduced upon the initiation of the shredding operations and will continue to be reduced as the demand for and quality of scrap improves. Sixth, Problem 6—The quality of scrap produced from auto hulks is often not acceptable to the steel and foundry industries. The traditional meth- od of processing automotive scrap, that is; the compression of burned vehicle hulks into No. 2 bundles, often results in un- desirable quantities of nonferrous ma- terials remaining in the end product. Solution: This problem has been solved technically by the development of the scrap shredding process. And, in Mary- land, suflicient shredding capacity to proc- ess all vehicle hulks will be available shortly. Seventh, Problem 7—The current 16 methods of production used by the steel and foundry industries do not create suf— . ficient demand for processed scrap to al- low all automobile hulks to enter the scrap system. Solution: The increasing use of electric furnaces and the continuous casting process, both of which will create considerable additional demand for scrap, will result in the dissipation and disap- pearance of this problem. In summary, then, the demand-related problems are expected to be solved due to the development of better scrap process- ing methods and an increase in the de- mand for scrap. On the other hand, the problems related to the junked car as a nuisance and an eyesore will only be solved by appropriate government actiOn. Recommended Government Action The problems in the junked car cycle which require government action for solu- tion are: 1. The abandoning of vehicles 2. The locating and collecting of aban- doned vehicles 3. The restriction of vehicle collection and disposal resulting from extant State laws and titling requirements 4. The aesthetic and pollution problems created by auto dismantlers and scrap processors. In order to assure solution of these problems, integrated government action is required to: 1. Stop vehicle abandoning 2. Require reporting of abandoned ve- hicles 3. Ensure proper disposal of worn-out or inoperable vehicles 4. Permit easier collection and disposal of vehicles 5. Solve aesthetic and pollution prob- lems. Stopping Vehicle Abandonment. The best method for halting the continuing flood of abandoned vehicles is the imposi- ' tion of heavy penalties on those who ~_ abandon them. A fine of up to $200.00, as was proposed in Senate Bill No. 16, is recommended. It is only by the legislation of such penalties that the impetus re- quired to motivate vehicle owners to dis- pose properly of unwanted vehicles can be developed. In effect, such legislation will say to the vehicle owner that proper dis- posal of a vehicle is the least expensive method for ridding himself of it. The traditional argument against this approach has been that the cost of finding the vehicle owner was excessive; and this is true since records were kept in such a way as to make quick retrieval of the re- quired information difficult. However, the ' National Highway Safety Standards, issued June 27, 1967, require that the indi- vidual States establish an integrated Motor Vehicle Registration record system. Specifically, Highway Safety Program Standard 4.4.2 requires that: Each State shall have a motor vehicle registration program, which shall provide for rapid identification of each vehicle and its own- er; and shall make available pertinent data for accident research and safety pro- gram development. I. The program shall be such that every vehicle operated on public highways is registered and the following information is readily available for each vehicle: Make Model year Idetification number (rather than motor number) Type of body License plate number Name of current owner Current address of owner Registered gross laden weight of every commercial vehicle. II. Each program shall have a rec- ords system that provides at least the following services: Rapid entry of new data into the records or data system Controls to eliminate unnecessary 17 or unreasonable delay in obtaining data Rapid audio or visual response upon receipt at the records sta- tion of any priority request for status of vehicle possession au- thorization Data available for statistical com- pilation as needed by authorized sources Identification and ownership of vehicle sought for enforcement or other operation needs III. This program shall be periodically evaluated by the State, and the National Highway Safety Bureau shall be provided with an evaluation summary. With the availability of these records, the tracing of vehicle ownership will be- come significantly easier and the imposi- tion of fines for vehicle abandonment could serve as a deterrent. In Maryland, compliance with this standard is near completion. The requisite data has been collected and formated for computer input. The task yet remaining is the actual inputing of the data. A [second argument often proffered against such a policy is that those who abandon vehicles can‘least afford to be penalized (as a matter of fact, the expense involved in moving a junk car is frequent- ly great). However, it must be remem- bered that with the development of shred- ders for processing scrap and the expected increase in the demand for this more tech- nically acceptable scrap by mills and foundaries, the value of auto carcasses will increase and, if the experience in other locales is duplicated here, the de- mand for junk cars will be such that the owners of these vehicles will be able to dispose of them at little or no cost. Therefore, the effective date for legisla- tion instituting penalties for vehicle aban- donment should be held in abeyance until the shredding operations are open. {In '/ Reporting Abandoned Vehicles. Not only must the flow of vehicle abandon- ments be stopped, but also the extant in- ventory of abandoned vehicles must be located and collected. In order to assure that such vehicles are reported, an aban- doned vehicle should be declared a public nuisance and its removel from public or private property to auto dismantlers and scrap processors required. In the event that vehicles on private property do not belong to the owner of that property, the property owner must have the resposibil- ty for reporting the presence of such ve- hicles and requesting their removal by the police. When the abandoned vehicle belongs to the property owner, responsibility for re- moving the vehicle or having it removed belongs to the owner. In all instances, the failure to report and/or dispose of a junked car should be a violation of law and result in a heavy fine (suggested $100.00). In order that legislation could be ef- fected to require the reporting and removal of motor vehicles, the following definition of an abandoned motor vehicle is recom- mended: “Abandoned Motor Vehicle” means a motor vehicle that is in- operable, is over 8 years old, and, is left unattended on public prop- erty for more than 48 hours; or a motor vehicle that is inoperable, is not validly licensed, and is left unattended on publc or private property over 48 hours; or a motor vehicle that has remained illegally on public property for a period of more than 48 hours; or a motor vehicle that has remained on private property Without the consent of the owner or person in control of the property for more than 48 hours. Under such a definition, a vehicle would be considered abandoned even if it were on the owner’s property simply because it 18 was inoperable and not validly licensed. It would be the responsibility of the vehicle owner therefore either to license the vehi- cle, to remove it, or have it removed. An exception to such a provision should be provided for those who repair vehicles as hobbyists or who have a vehicle they are using for spare parts. It is recom- mended, therefore, that vehicles used for parts still be reported but that a 6-month exemption certificate be available to the owner of the vehicle upon his stipulation that the vehicle is being used as a source of parts or awaiting repair. In no instance should such exemptions be given for any more than two vehicles to any one individual. The owner of property shall be liable to fine when any vehicle that fits the defini- tion of abandoned, as provided above, is discovered by the police on his property - unless he has reported the vehicle if he does not own the vehicle or unless he has obtained an exemption certificate if he does own the vehicle. It is further recom- mended that after discovery of such vehi- cles, the police provide a warning to the property owner, and require that he take action within seven (7) days or be fined. Ensuring Proper Disposal of Junked Cars. The two recommendations made above, the legislation of penalties for aban- doning vehicles and for failing to report or dispOse of abandoned vehicles, are designed to force the proper disposal of motor vehi- cles. It is necessary, therefore, both to pro- vide a proper method for vehicle disposal and to publicize it. It is recommended that the following procedure for vehicle disposal be imple- mented: vehicle oWners have the first re- sponsibility to dispose of their unwanted vehicles; this disposal should be accom- plished in one of two ways; either the vehicle owner shall contact an auto wrecker to have his vehicle taken away, or the vehicle owner shall take his vehicle to central collection points provided for the purpose of accepting worn-out vehicles. If A, >- the vehicle owner is unable to take his un- wanted vehicle to a free dumping area and has contacted an auto wrecker who has re- fused to accept his vehicle, the owner shall contact the police, who shall have the vehicle removed. A central collection point or free dump- ‘ ing area should be provided by each county and incorporated municipality and its loca- tion well publicized. The costs to the po- litical subdivision of identifying and locat- ing abandoner would be saved in every instance in which the would;be abandoner brought in his own vehicle. Moreover, these areas would proivde a reasonable alterna- tiev to potential abandoners who would face a stiff penalty for vehicle abandon- ment. In the event the vehicle owner can neither take his vehicle to a central col- lection point, nor contact an auto wrecker who will pick up his vehicle, the owner shall contact the police to have his vehicle removed. Upon request for vehicle re- moval, the police shall mail to the vehicle ” .1 owner a form which will be completed and returned to the local police department. This form should include the make and model of vehicle to be collected, its loca- tion, its ownership (if known), and the name of the auto wrecker who was con- tacted and who refused to pick up the vehicle. Upon receipt of the completed form, the police will pick up the vehicle using its own personnel, equipment, and facilities or will hire persons, equipment, and facili- ties for the purpose of collecting and stor- ing these vehicles. Laws and Titling Requirements. The imposition of penalties for abandoning ve- hicles and for failing to report and/or re- move abandoned vehicles, together with the availability of central collection or free dumping yards for vehicle disposal and the design and publicizing of an approved and acceptable method for vehicle disposal will all help to expedite the flow of junked 378-884 0 - 70 - 4 19 and abandoned vehicles back into the eco- nomic cycle. Further legislation, however, is required to ensure ease of impounding and dispos- ing of vehicles. Many low value abandoned and junked vehicles do not return to the economic cycle because of titling require- ments or other provisions of State law which impose costly and time consuming requirements on motor vehicle sales and transfers. The problem is that these laws treat all motor vehicles as if they were of sufficient worth to warrant an owner to incur these costs. However, almost all abandoned and junked autos have a very low value. Since, basically, titling require- ments are designed to protect an owner’s interest in substantial property, and yet when that property is a motor vehicle it loses its substantial character, it is desir- able that the state exclude, under care- fully prescribed conditions, low value abandoned motor vehicles from the nor- mal resale titling requirements. Some States have already taken legislative action in recognition of this need by passing sta— tutes which, while continuing to protect the interests of vehicle owners, also allow public impounding and make a few excep- tions to titling law. They have, thereby, provided a means for surer and more expe- ditious movement of junked and aban- doned motor vehicles into the economic cycle. Provisions to revise titling requirements were incorporated in Maryland Senate Bill No. 16, introduced January 17, 1968, and these provisions [sections (b) through (g)] were based on recommended legislation proposed by the Committee of State Offi- cials on Suggested Legislation of the Council of State Governments. We recom- mend that these provisions of Senate Bill No. 16 be enacted as they were written with the possible exception of the require- ment for sale of the vehicle at public auc— tion; a potential change to this provision is discussed below. Solving Aesthetic and Pollution Prob- lems. The aesthetic and pollution prob- lems created by auto dismantlers and scrap processors can be solved either by the free action of these industries or by legislation which requires that, in order to continue in operation, firms in these in- dustries meet specific criteria. Although certain actions have been initiated by in- dustry toward solution of the aesthetic problem, particularly by beautification of facilities (the most successful of which has been Project Green/Screen sponsored by the Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, Inc.), a drive along most of our major highways adjoining metropolitan areas clearly exhibits the scope of the problem as it still exists. In order, therefore, both to ensure compliance with the Highway Beautification Act and to remove these scars from our environment, it is recom- mended that the State adopt legislation requiring: licensing of all auto dismantlers and scrap processors; screening of all auto dismantlers’ and scrap processors’ facilities. Licensing of these facilities would pro- vide the State with a record of the popula- tion of firms engaged in these industries. Further, a prerequisite to obtaining a license should be the meeting of screening requirements. The following screening provisions are recommended: all auto dismantlers’ and scrap processors’ facilities must be shielded or screened; such shielding or screening shall be accomplished only after approval of a shielding plan prepared by the facility owner and submitted to a responsible State, county, or municipal officer to be designated; the plans for shielding of each facility shall be presented to the respon- sible government representative within six months subsequent to the effective date of the enabling legislation; within six months of the approval of a shielding plan, the facility owner shall have completed the screening of his facility when he is using screening other than trees or shrubs; in the event he is using trees or shrubs, he 20 shall complete his screening within six months of the date of approval of his plan, or as soon thereafter as the plants he has selected become available, in which in- stance a schedule must be determined and presented to the responsible government representative for approval. In the event an auto dismantler or scrap processor fails to comply with these shield- ing requirements he should be subject to the loss of his license and a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. In assessing the best methods for screen- ing these facilities, we contacted; among others, the deputy director of the National Arboretum, and the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University for advice regarding ornamentals to shield junked autos from the public View. The Deputy Director of the National Arboretum recommended the Cryptomeria japonica (Empress tree). In this latitude the cryptomeria grows at the rate of ap- proximately 5 to 6 feet a year. It is a very bushy, pine-like tree with short needles, but it absolutely shields things from view. A tree approximately 8 years old was about 40 ft high and about 10 to 12 ft in diameter at the base, while one approxi- mately 15 years old was perhaps 60 or 70 ft high and about 20 ft in diameter at the base. The diameter refers to the diameter of the foliage. As anti-intrusion protection, in lieu of the chain link fence, he recom- mended the Gerbers julianne (Barberry). This particular barberry is very hardy and has sharp thorns approximately one and one half inches long. It grows into an impenetrable hedge. As an alternate, one might consider the Poncirus trifoliata (hardy orange). This bush also has thorns approximately an inch to an inch and one- half long, but the specimen we saw did not seem to be as effective a screen as the barberry. An excerpt from Arnoldra, a publica- tion of the Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University, containing a further discussion of plants suitable for screening junkyards is presented in Appendix E. The air pollution problem caused by the open burning of vehicles cannot be solved immediately, but can be abated. Until scrap shredders are installed and operat- ing in the State of Maryland, it will be necessary for auto dismantlers and scrap processors to continue burning vehicles. We, therefore, recommend that interim controlled open burning be permitted only when the air is sufficiently unstable to en- sure the dissipation of pollutants into the atmosphere. Specifically, we recommend: that open burning of vehicles be permitted only after the passage of a cold front or if the lapse rate is at least a negative 3 degrees F per 1,000 ft of altitude; this meteorological con- dition will result in an adequate dispersal of pollutants; that a regulation to this effect be implemented by the State Department of Health; that the meteorologist in En- vironmental Health Services determine when open burning is permissible and have prime responsibility for informing the auto dismantlers and scrap processors of the times when they may burn; that the radio communications net currently used by the auto dismantlers for finding demanded re- placement parts can be used for the rapid dissemination of the requisite meteorolog- ical reports. We do not believe that the imposition of such a regulation will be harmful to these industries since: cold fronts pass through Maryland on an average of 3 to 4 days, and seldom more than 10 days apart, and conditions are such that burn- ing could be permitted for 24 hours or more at each passage. Police/Industry Cooperation. In Laws and Titling Requirements, above, we sug- gested that the requirement for sale of impounded vehicles at public auction might be dropped. This recommendation 21 is based on the fact that it would be help- ful if the police of the local political juris- dictions could develop agreements with the auto wreckers in their locale to pick up all abandoned and junked vehicles re- ported by the populace. These agreements would provide that the consenting auto wreckers would collect all vehicles of which they were informed by the police. In return for providing this service, dealers who signed such agreements would be the only ones eligible to purchase any unclaimed vehicles impounded by the police. Further, all vehicles delivered to free dumping areas would be available to participating dealers. Those dealers who refused to sign such an agreement would not be eligible to purchase or collect any vehicles through the police or from the free dumping areas. In effect, exclusion from certain privileges would be based on noncooperation. In order to permit the entering into such agreements by police and auto wreckers under the general police power, the public auction provision as stated in Senate Bill No. 16 would have to be dropped and the police given the power to invite only cooperating wreckers to vehicle auctions. Contingency Considerations We anticipate that the combination of industry activities and government actions discussed in Resource Utilization and Recommended Government Action, above, will result in the solution of the seven problems distinguished in the Disposal/ Reclaiming Cycle. This solution is, of course, predicated on our forecasts of the future availability of scrap shredders and increasing demand for technically accept- able scrap resulting from the increased use of electric furnaces and the continuous casting process. We feel, therefore, that no action by the government exceeding those described above would be desirable. If, in future years, government action is necessary in the actual collection and proc- essing of junked cars or in the creation of demand for scrap, and any actions in these areas would be premature at this time or for the next few years, there are two basic alternative courses of action which govern- ment can follow: first, artificially support- ing the demand for scrap by subsidizing the scrap industry, or second, entering into the dismantling and scrap processing in- dustries to supplement the market suffi- ciently to clear it of unwanted junked vehicles. Subsidizing Scrap. It has often been suggested that subsidies should be used to encourage the consumption of scrap. Sub- sidies should always be considered undesir- able because of economic and administra- tive problems inherent in their use, and should be considered only as a last resort. As has been shown, the difficulties con- cerning the consumption of the unused auto hulks promises to be resolved in the near future, under a free market system, as a result of the expansion of shredding and increased demand for scrap. There- fore, it appears premature to consider sub- sidizing the scrap industry or its users at this point in time. If, however, it becomes necessary to subsidize the industry in future years, and this decision can only be made after a re- view of the effect of shredding on the cur- rent situation, the optimal method for subsidization would appear to be the fol- lowing: Impose a $10 charge on each new vehicle sold in the State to be paid by the vehicle purchaser; impose a $10 charge on each vehicle registering in the State from out of State; place these monies into an escrow fund; pay $10 from this fund to a scrap processor for each hulk purchased or accepted; limit the inventory a scrap processor may hold. The imposition of a $10 charge on only , _ new cars or cars entering the State results in less of a bookkeeping difficulty than 22 would exist if an attempt were made to impose such a fee on all registered vehi- cles. Since the number of vehicles leaving service annually is substantially less than the combined number of new cars sold in the State plus vehicles entering the State, the fees received would be more than ade- quate to cover expenses, including those for administering such a program, and re- sidual funds could be applied to deficits in- curred in the collection of abandoned vehicles. The payment of this subsidy or “bonus” would serve to clear the economy of junked vehicles since: the subsidy would reduce scrap processors costs substantially; some of this cost saving would be passed to scrap users since only by a lowering of prices would demand be increased enough to reduce processors inventories and allow the scrap processor to receive more vehi- cles and thereby collect further subsidiza- tion and increase his profits; a further por- tion of this subsidy would be passed back to the junk dealer since the hulks would be worth more to the scrap processor than formerly; the junk dealers would accept junked cars more readily since their value to him would increase as the value of the hulk increased; more abandoned vehicles from a wider radius would be recovered due to their increase in value; the tempta- tion to abandon vehicles would be reduced as the value of the vehicle was increased. However, no such action is recom- mended at the current time. Junkyards of Last Resort. A second approach, and, if accumulating metallic solid wastes becomes an acute problem, we believe a more advisable approach would be the establishment of “junkyards of last resort.” These facilities would be govern- ment owned and operated and their pri- mary purpose would be to supplement the existing dismantling and processing indus- tries in order to clear the economy of un- wanted vehicle hulks and other metallic solid wastes. We believe the establishment of these facilities is preferable to subsidization of industry in the unlikely event that either will be required. The most pertinent rea- sons for favoring this method of absorbing undemanded junked vehicles into the eco- nomic flow are: the difficulties mentioned above with the administration of subsidies; the danger inherent in providing a method whereby an industry will be supported if it fails to operate in a desirable manner; the potential and likely reaction of indus- try to the possibility of being supported in the event that they do not solve this prob- lem would be to continue operation at cur- rent levels in anticipation of future gov— ernment support; if this occurs, then the suggestion of possible future action (subsi- dizing) will result in the later necessity of government subsidization; such facilities could provide a place of employment for handicapped persons, school dropouts, and job corps personnel, and thereby provide a desirable social service. Government facilities required to pro- vide this service would be: scrap shredding facilities with sufficient capacity to process residual balances of metallic solid wastes remaining after private industry process- ing; auto dismantling and parts storage facilities in each county; portable vehicle flatteners and flat bed trucks for transport of vehicle hulks to shredder(s). A preliminary attempt was made to de- scribe more specifically the size and loca- tion of the requisite facilities; however, since we feel that the ramifications of the recent technological developments in the steelmaking and scrap processing indus- tries are going to be extensive, design cri- teria and cost analyses for needed facilities made at this time would be no more than guesses. Prior to any such detailed anal- ysis, it will be necessary to assess the re- sults of scrap shredding and an adequate analysis will require the operation of such facilities for, we feel, a minimum of two years. Only then will it be possible to 23 assess the magnitude of any residual problems. Level of and Responsibility for Action The following paragraphs are designed to serve as a brief review of the problems and the conclusions we have reached and to indicate the level of government which would have responsibility for action with the enactment of legislation incorporating the above recommendations. The Abandoning of Vehicles. We have recommended the imposition of heavy fines for vehicle abandonment. Legisla- tion is required at the State level to make such penalties Statewide and effective. We are in agreement with the provisions of Senate Bill No. 16 regarding these penal- ties. Enforcement of antiabandonment pro- visions would be accomplished by local police and courts using records available from the State Department of Motor Vehicles. Reporting Abandoned Vehicles. We have recommended that an abandoned ve- hicle be defined by law as a public nui- sance and the reporting and/ or removal of such vehicles be required, with penalties for noncompliance. Such a provision should be incorporated in the same legisla- tion as the antiabandoning provision out- lined above. Ensuring Proper Disposal of Junked Cars. Free dumping areas cannot be leg- islated and the establishment, therefore, of such facilities is a responsibility of local political jurisdictions. Incorporated in the same legislation as the antiabandoning and reporting provisions recommended above should be a requirement that vehicle owners contact at least one auto wrecker before requesting removal of a vehicle by police. Laws and Titling Requirements. We recommend that the provisions contained in sections (b) through (g) of Senate Bill N o. 16 be enacted as written with the ex- ception of the requirement for the sale of vehicles at public auction. In place of this provision we recommend that the police departments of local political jurisdictions be permitted to dispose of vehicles as they wish. Solving Aesthetic and Pollution Prob- lems. We recommend that separate legis- lation be written requiring the licensing of auto dismantlers and scrap processors and that as a prerequisite to operating such facilities a screening requirement be im- posed, to include: a 6-month period after the effective date during which plans for screening must be developed and pre- sented; a 6 month period thereafter dur- ing which screening must be accomplished; a requirement that all future facilities meet screening requirements prior to li- censing; no legislation concerning pollution is required since laws currently on the books appear adequate. We do recom- mend, however, the regulation of open burning to meet the following stipulations: burning be permitted only after the pas- sage of a cold front or if the lapse rate is at least a negative 3 degrees F per 1,000 ft altitude; the meteorologist in Environ- mental Health Services be responsible for determining when such burning is allow- able; that a regulation to this effect be developed by the State Department of Health. The Systems—Current and Projected: An Integrated Overview This study began with a description of the junked car, what happened to it, and the problems that resulted from a systems approach. That is, we defined the boundaries or limits of our system to include the flow of the vehicle from its ceasing to be useful as a mode of transpor- tation until the salvable materials it con- tained were used (or could be used) by the industries for which they were raw ma- terials. We then defined the components of this system and the problems in its cur- rent operation. Each component and prob- 24 lem was analyzed, conclusions were drawn, and recommendations were made to pro— vide a solution to these problems. In pre- vious sections, the problems, conclusions, and recommendations have been considered individually. This section is composed of a systhesis of our conclusions and recom- mendations to estimate their integrated effect on the operation of the junked car disposal/reclaiming cycle. Four flow charts are presented: A1 (Exhibit V)-—a modified decision logic flow chart of activities com- prising the disposal and collection of junked vehicles as they currently occur; A2 (Exhibit VI)—a modified decision logic flow chart of the operations of vehicle dis- mantlers and scrap processors as they cur- rently occur; B1 (Exhibit VII)——a modified decision logic flow chart of the activities comprising the disposal and collection of junked vehicles as they will occur incorpo- rating our conclusions and recommenda- tions; B2 (Exhibit VIII)—a modified decision logic flow chart of the operations of vehicle dismantlers and scrap processors as they will occur incorporating our rec- ommendations and conclusions. The flow charts have been delimited to include those activities and decisions which are related to the problems as they currently exist. On both pairs of flow charts (A1 and A2 describing the extant situation, and B1 and B1 and B2 depicting the anticipated results of the recommended actions), 15 points in the flow have been designated by circled numbers; these points are the same on each pair of charts and are discussed briefly below. These have been selected to delineate, statically, points in the flow where signifi- cant changes are anticipated contingent upon implementation of our recommenda- tions. We will first discuss, briefly, the 15 selected in flow charts A1 and A2—the current situation. We will then analyze the same 15 points in the flow after implementation of the proposed recom- mendations. Finally, we will discuss one of our conclusions in the dynamic situation, _ in other words, we will trace the effect of a single change through the entire flow to describe the effect of this change on all parts of the system. The Current Situation. The following 15 paragraphs relate to the 15 symbols in flow charts A1 and A2 (Exhibits V and VI) accompanied by the circled numbers 1 through 15. 6) Know Proper Disposal Method? As indicated earlier in this report, one of the prime causes of vehicle abandonment is the ignorance of vehicle owners regard- ing the proper methods of vehicle disposal. C2) Cost of Proper Disposal Excessive? A vehicle owner is likely to consider any costs which he incurs in disposing of a ve- hicle to be excessive; these costs include money expended, inconvenience, time lost. In such an atmosphere, vehicle abandon- ment is flourishing and will continue to do so. (9 Junked Car on Owner’s Property Since the owner did not properly dispose of the vehicle and since the police cannot retrieve such vehicles, these vehicles re- main abandoned. ® Junked Car on Other Private Property If the property owner complains to police about vehicle(s) abandoned on his prop- erty, they are retrieved. However, from the accumulation of junked cars on private property, especially farmlands and other areas of low-population density, it is ap- parent that frequently no such complaints are forthcoming. @ Junked Cars on Public Property . Vehicles abandoned on public property are retrieved by police or their agents after discovery or complaint. Most vehicle re- trievals are currently from public property. @ Collection of Vehicles by Police Conditions under, and methods by, which vehicles are retrieved vary greatly, and the cost to citizens is high. 25 @ Trace Vehicle Ownership A manual system of ownership record- keeping makes information retrieval a slow and tedious process. Sale of Impounded Vehicles at Auction Such sales are the rule and tend to reduce the number of vehicles that would be re- trieved by wreckers since the vehicles are here available already collected at a cen- tral point and, therefore, transportation costs can be reduced. @ Junk Dealer Accept Junked Car? Frequently, due primarily to the low value of vehicle hulks, auto dismantlers refuse to pick up or purchase junked cars. Junkyard Inventories Inventories of junk vehicles are unsightly and junk yards are normally located ad- jacent to transportation routes and open to public scrutiny. ® Demand for Hulks? The demand for stripped hulks is a func- tion of the demand for processed scrap. Lack of demand results in stripped hulks remaining in junkyard inventories. @ Burning of Vehicles Required? Current methods of scrap processing re- quire that vehicle hulks be cleaned by burning. ® Scrapyard Inventory The functions performed by scrap proces- sors result in their facilities being un- sightly when not adequately screened. Demand for Processed Scrap? When demand for processed scrap is in- sufficient, vehicle hulks remain in scrap- yard inventories and purchases from auto dismantlers and others are reduced. ® Accepted by User? When processed scrap is technically unac- ceptable to scrap users, either the users do not purchase it, or they refuse to accept shipments which fail to meet quality specifications. The Projected Situation. The following 15 paragraphs relate to the 15 symbols in flow charts B1 and B2 accompanied by the circled numbers 1 through 15, and the hexagonal figures, indicating conclusions and recommendations, related to each. 6) Know Proper Disposal Method? Publicity of proposed method for proper vehicle disposal combined with fines for vehicle abandonment would eliminate this cause of vehicle abandonment. @ Cost of Disposal Excessive? The imposition of heavy fines for vehicle disposal, together with the provision of free vehicle dumping areas as an alterna- tive means of disposing of vehicles, would ensure that improper disposal (abandon- ment) of a vehicle is the highest cost alternative open to vehicle owners, thereby making abandonment the excessive cost alternative. @ Junked Car on Vehicle Owner’s Property The definition of an abandoned auto as a public nuisance and the requirement to re- port and/or dispose of these vehicles or face heavy penalties would ensure the re- turn of these vehicles to the economic flow. 6) Vehicle Abandoned on Other Private Property The definition of an abandoned vehicle as a public nuisance and the requirement that such vehicles be reported by property owners would ensure that abandoned ve- hicles would be located and could be col- lected. The number of vehicles abandoned on private property would decline signifi- cantly with the imposition of heavy fines for abandonment. @ Vehicles Abandoned Property The imposition of heavy fines for vehicle abandonments will significantly reduce the number of vehicles abandoned on public property. @ Vehicle Retrieval by Police or Agent The development of Police/Industry Agreements together with the increasing value off junked vehicles due to improved scrap processing techniques and increasing demand for processed scrap will result in the retrieval of a larger percentage ofa reduced number of abandoned vehicles. on Public 26 (D Trace Vehicle Ownership The imposition of fines for abandonment will reduce the number of vehicle abandon- ments. The implementation of Federal Highway Safety Standard 4.4.2 will pro- vide an integrated and accessible informa- tion retrieval system for tracing vehicle ownership, and reduced titling require- ments will permit earlier disposal of vehicles. Sale of Impounded Vehicles Reduced titling requirements will ensure greater ease of vehicle disposal and the implementation of police/industry agree- ments, together with the increasing value of junked vehicles, will result in higher values of impounded vehicles and less ve- hicles which will require impounding. @ Junk Dealer Accept? The combination of the increasing value of junked vehicles and police/industry agreements will ensure the flow of junked vehicles back into the economic cycle. Junk Vehicle Inventory Screening requirements would hide un- sightly collections of junked cars from public view and the increasing demand for scrap will result in a reduction of the junked car inventory. ® Demand for Hulks? The combination of increased quality scrap produced by the shredding method and the exxpanding use of electric furnaces and the continuous casting process will result in an expanding demand for vehicle hulks by scrap processing. 69 Require Burning? Shredding vehicle hulks eliminates the necessity of burning the hulks as a neces- sary scrap preprocessing step. ® Scrap Yard Inventory As with junk yards, the scrap processor’s facility will be hidden from public View by requiring the screening or shielding of such facilities. Demand for Processed Scrap? The demand for processed scrap will in- crease due to: better quality processed scrap produced by the shredding method; increased use of electric furnaces in steel and casting production; expanding use of the continuous casting process by the steel industry. ® Scrap Acceptable to Users? The shredding process creates processed scrap technically superior to that produced by other methods and ensures that this scrap meetes user requirements. Each of the 15 points of difficulty indi- cated in Charts A1 and A2, which depict the current situation, will, as has been shown, be favorably effected by the imple- mentation of the conclusions and recom- mendations presented herein. Finally, we wish to present dynamically the interrelationships between all problem areas and all conclusions and recommen- dations: Dynamic Relationships. A matrix of problems and the recommendations and conclusions relating to each is presented as Exhibit IX. The interrelationships which will be affected by the conclusions drawn and recommendations made are indicated by X’s. Note that all components of the matrix relate either directly or indirectly to all other components. For example, re- viewing Problem 2 as shown in Exhibit IX, Excessive Cost of Disposal, it is clear that a number of matrix elements affect the cost of disposal: The development of a proper method of disposal to inform the populace of how to rid themselves of an unwanted vehicle—ignorance of the alter- natives open to a vehicle owner can and does lead to the selection of improper or costly vehicle disposal alternatives. The provision of free vehicle dumping areas pro~ vides an alternative to abandonment, costly to the taxpayer, and to other forms of disposal. The establishment of a fine to penalize vehicle abandoners assigns a high cost to abandonment and makes proper 27 disposal a lesser cost and, therefore, a de- sirable alternative. The definition of an abandoned vehicle as a public nuisance and the establishment of heavy penalties for improper disposal makes the abandon- ment of a vehicle on one’s own property a costly alternative, and, therefore, makes proper disposal a comparatively lesser cost alternative. Police/Industry Agreements provide both a method whereby more ve- hicles can be collected for less cost and, in effect, a central information clearinghouse for vehicle locations. Integrated, and auto- mated, Department of Motor Vehicle records provide a basis for quicker and more accurate checks of titling records, faster location of owners of abandoned ve- hicles, and easier title clearance; these factors combine to reduce the cost of lo- cating abandoners and reduce the time and costs incurred when holding im- pounded vehicles. The increasing demand for scrap resulting from the expanding use of both electric furnaces and continuous casting and from the higher quality of shredded scrap results in a higher price for processed scrap due to an upward shift in the demand curve which leads to a higher value for junked cars since the hulks have an increased value. This in turn will result in more junked cars being collected and/or bought by junk dealers, thereby reducing the number of potentially abandoned vehicles or, stated differently, providing a more attractive least cost al- ternative for vehicle disposal. Thus we can see that the problem of excessive costs is diminished considerably by the interaction of numerous conclusions and recommenda- tions. The same kind of analysis can be per- formed for each horizontal and vertical column of the matrix and was performed during the completion of this study. 88 Problems Conclusions/ Recommendations 1. Know Proper Disposal Methods ? Cost of Disposal Excessive P" Vehicle Abandoned on Owner's Property Vehicle Abandoned on Other Private Property Vehicle Abandoned on Public Property Vehicle Collection Trace Vehicle Ownership Sale of Impounded Vehicles Junk Dealer Accept ? Junk Yard Inventory Demand for Stripped Hulks ? I-d N Burning Required ? Scrap Yard Inventory Demand for Processed Scrap Scrap Acceptable to Users X X X X EXHIBIT IX. Matrix of Problems/Conclusions/Recommendations. Legend A. Develop Proper Disposal Method 3. Free Dumping Areas C, Fine for Abandoning [)_ Public Nuisance E. Police/Industry Agreements F. Screening Requirements 6. Integrated DMV Records H. Reduced Titling Requirements I, Increasing Scrap Demand ]_ Higher Dollar Value of Scrap K. Higher Dollar Value of Hulks L Better Quality Scrap M,Interim Controlled Burning N_ Shredding Process 0. Increasing Continuous Casting P. Increasing Electric Pumaces Appendix A. County Data The information presented in this Ap- pendix was obtained primarily from county officials and county land use plans. Where data was obtained from other sources, that source is indicated. Allegany County Allegany County has six dumps and two landfill disposal sites, the latter of which are sanitary landfills. These are run co- operatively by the City of Cumberland, the County and State Health Department. These landfills are worked-out strip mine sites. All disposal operations, public and private, must use approved sanitary land- fill or incinerator methods of disposal. There are 16 licensed junk yard oper- ators of significant size in the county. Half of these are near the Pennsylvania and West Virginia lines. There are also some small part-time operators who salvage from five to ten automobiles per month. The total county inventory of junked vehicles is approximately 6,500 vehicles. The Alle- gany County Comprehensive Master Plan (1965) specifically treats automobile grave- yards and auto wrecking yards. The Plan proposes to control automobile graveyards. There are regulations pertaining to auto graveyards and junk yards in the new County Zoning Ordinance: the yards must be out of public sight and enclosed or screened. It is also suggested that they be limited to the industrial districts. The ma- jority of the county, which is zoned agri- cultural, can be used for auto wrecking yards with special approval. There are an estimated 150 cars per year abandoned in Allegany County. 29 Anne Arundel County There are nine refuse disposal sites in the county—two are city sanitary landfills (Annapolis), and seven are private dumps. There are nineteen large junk yards and approximately a hundred smaller junk yards (averaging four or five vehicles each) containing a total county junk yard inven- tory of 3,000 vehicles. There are an esti- mated 25 to 50 abandonments per year. Anne Arundel County held a public hearing on a proposed bill on Junk and Salvage Yards on Monday, October 7, 1968. The Bill deals with licensing, loca- tion requirements, operation, enforcement, and allowable exceptions to these provi- sions. Baltimore City There are two privately operated dumps and two city operated sanitary landfills. There are 36 licensed junk yards in Balti- more, and 2,800 to 3,000 abandoned auto- mobiles are handled annually by the Police Department. Abandonments are increasing at about 10 percent per year. These ve- hicles are estimated to be only 40 percent of the total abandonment. The present impounding yard is 2.4 acres and is severely overtaxed. One cause for the congestion is the necessity for keep- ing the cars until the titles clear. A new yard of 15-20 acres is scheduled to be put in use shortly. Last summer an antiburning ordinance was put into effect in the city. This will affect the junk yards operations adversely, since local scrap processors currently re- quire burned vehicle hulks. Baltimore County Baltimore County has four county sites which are sanitary landfills. There are 32 vehicle junk yards by count, although it is estimated that there are 50 or more. There are 36,640 vehicles in junk yards by count; it is estimated that there are ac- tually 50,000 to 60,000. Police department records show 410 cars abandoned from July 1, 1967 to June 1, 1968. Calvert County Calvert County leases land for four dumps. Maintenance of these dumps is provided on a contract basis with the property owner. There are no solid waste dumps and no junk yards as such in the county. Garages, auto agencies, etc., make arrangements for junk vehicle disposal. There are four yards operated as junk yards which include an estimated total of 400 cars. The estimated abandonment rate is 20 cars per year. Caroline County There is one sanitary landfill in the planning stage and four existing public dumps. Twelve junk yards of a total of 15 or 16 are licensed. There is a total in- ventory of approximately 1,000 vehicles in these junk yards. There was a recent public hearing on a junk ordinance which had an effective date of October 1. This ordinance required screening of junk yards within 6 months of the effective date. The annual abandonment rate is esti- mated at 100 vehicles. Carroll County There are three city dumps and four county sanitary landfills in Carroll County. There are 31 vehicle junk yards with an inventory of approximately 45,000 vehicles. It is estimated that about 800 vehicles are 30 abandoned annually in the county. Many abandoned cars away from the highways have been observed from the air. Cecil County There are three city dumps and four county dumps in Cecil County. These are fairly evenly spread throughout the county. There are 24 junk yards holding 2,540 vehicles in the county. These are primarily in the northern half of the county. There are an estimated 1,000 cars aban- doned in the county per year. Charles County There is one county dump in Charles County. There are four large and 20 small junk yards in the county, whose inventory totals 4,000 junk automobiles. The County Comprehensive Plan notes a “widespread incidence of junked and abandoned cars throughout the county.” There are an esti- mated 1,000 cars per year abandoned in Charles County. Many of these abandoned cars are from Washington, DC. Dorchester County There is an estimated total of six city and two county dumps. The county does not own dumps but maintains them. The dumps are fairly well distributed in the county. There is one licensed junk dealer in the county. There are also about 10 junk yards holding 25 or more cars and 20 to 25 smaller yards holding 15 cars or fewer. The junk yards are fairly well spread through- out the county. Estimates of county in- ventory ofjunked cars vary from 700 to 3,000 vehicles. Estimates of number of ve- hicles abandoned annually vary from 100 to 600. The county’s Report on Refuse Collec- tion and Disposal cites abandoned cars as an increasing problem. It also discounts the use of landfills as depositories for the vehicles and it recommends an interim measure of storing vehicles at future land- fill sites to await further handling and dis- posal. The report also recommends inter- county and possible interstate cooperation in this area. According to this report, handling of abandoned vehicles “has be- come a burden of the government.” Frederick County Frederick County has two city dumps (one of which is under litigation by oppo- nents) and one county dump. There are also at least six private dumps—two of which are inside the Frederick city limits—engaged in open burning. There are thirteen vehicle junk yards holding 25 junk autos or more with a total county inventory of 7,055 junk vehicles. 250 ve- hicles are abandoned annually. Garrett County There are four dumps under county con- trol and operated at county expense. There are old auto bodies in one dump near Oakland. There are six municipal dumps, one of which uses open burning. It is planned to use abandoned strip mines as landfills in two municipalities. There are two private dumps in the county. Addi- tional county sanitary landfills are planned. There is no zoning in the county. A..junk yard ordinance exists, but it is difficult to enforce. There are three or four operating junk yards and a minimum of ten auto graveyards containing 2,000 junked autos, plus at least 1,000 vehicles scattered throughout the county. The estimated annual abandonment is 100 to 200 cars. H arford County Harford County has three city dumps and seven county dumps. These are dis- tributed throughout the county. There are 19 junk yards and the junk yards’ inven- 31 tory is 15,000 vehicles. There are an esti- mated 3,000 vehicles abandoned annually. Most of the junk yards are along Route 40 in the southern part of the county. Howard County There are two county landfills in How- ard County and ten vehicle junk yards with a total inventory of 750 vehicles. Seventy-five vehicles are abandoned in the county per year. The Howard County General Plan recommends the initiation of rehabilitation program areas along Route 1. The junk yards are in the vicinity of the major routes through the county, i.e., Routes 1 and 40. Kent County There are five county dumps and one city dump in Kent County, and one vehicle junk yard in the center of Chestertown. N 0 estimate of annual vehicle abandonment was available. Montgomery County There is one county site in Montgomery County including an incinerator and a san- itary land fill. There are three junk yards located near the center of the county. The total county inventory of junk cars is esti- mated at 800. The annual abandonment estimate for the county is 1,800 cars. Prince Georges County There are two city and two county dumps and four city operated sanitary landfills in Prince Georges County. The dumps are located principally in the north- ern part of the county. Potential sanitary landfill sites are adequate for future devel- opment according to a Solid Waste Dis- posal Study. There is an estimated minimum of 100 junk yards in the county—spread through- out the county, although generally away from Washington. An auto wrecker esti- mates that there are 25,000 cars in junk yards in the county. The Department of Licenses and Permits estimated 6,000 cars are abandoned every year. Queen Anne’s There are six county dumps dispersed throughout the county. The county’s Comprehensive Master Plan shows a total of 14 auto graveyards and junk yards. Telephone conversations With county personnel yielded a figure of six junk yards plus a number, perhaps 50, of service stations which serve as junk yards. The Master Plan notes that the auto graveyards “are scattered generally through the county, but mostly along the railroad lines or main highways.” The Plan allows zoning “General Industry Areas” for such industries as junk and scrap in several places throughout the county. There are 2,420 acres proposed to be zoned for this purpose. St. Mary’s County There are 11 county dumps in St. Mary’s County, and 200 acres of deep ra- vines used for dumping cars; these are not entirely satisfactory, as they provide breeding areas for snakes, rodents, and insects. There are 21 vehicle junk yards in the county—owned by garages—with an esti- mated 1,000 to 1,500 junked car inventory. There are many complaints about the junk yards. Some have vehicles piled three high, creating an eyesore and a hazard. There are 500 cars abandoned per year in the county. Somerset County Somerset County has one city dump and six county dumps. There are 13 vehicle junk yards with 20 or more autos. The estimated total county inventory of vehicles in junk yards is 3,000. An estimated 200 cars are abandoned per year in Somerset County. Talbot County Talbot County has three dumps on rec- ord. The City of Easton operates a sani- tary landfill and accepts refuse from ad- joining county areas. There are four vehicle junk yards on record with a record inventory of 500 vehicles. The official count for annual abandon- ment of vehicles is 100, although one esti- mator suggested 200 was closer to an accurate figure. Washington County There are seven city sites, mostly land- fills, and three county dumps in Washing- ton County. Information on these dumps is included in a report entitled Refuse Col- lection and Disposal in Washington County, Maryland. The junk yard inventory is 4,890 cars. This information comes from a report which was the result of a class project of the Conservation of National Resources Class of the Hagerstown Junior College in 1968. This report gives the following informa- tion: There is a major scrap processor (Maryland Pipe and Metal) in Hagerstown. It has a shear that can process 110 to 125 burned cars a day. Since open burning is now illegal, the company is considering building an incinerator. The firm tries to stockpile vehicles, as supply rate is uneven, and draws junked cars from a 50-mile radius. There are good markets: - Motor blocks go to foundaries in Pennsylvania - Copper goes to Middle Atlantic state refineries . No. 2 bundled scrap goes to steel mills in Baltimore and Pittsburgh or are exported through the port of Balti- more Autos come to Hagerstown from West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. There is continuing buildup of single aban- doned cars and multi-car concentrations on private property. A junk dealer in Hagerstown estimated that the annual abandonment rate in the county was 350-400 cars. A recent city police survey in Hagerstown showed 200 vehicles in alleys, on corner lots, etc. Wicomico County There are two city sites, including an incinerator and eight county dumps in the county. There are six junk yards—mostly in the eastern part of the county. The total county junk yard inventory is approxi- mately 1,800 cars. An estimated 100 cars are abandoned annually in Wicomico County. Worcester County Worcester County has three city and five county dumps. There are five vehicle junk yards with an estimated total inventory of 1,500 junked cars. The Comprehensive Master Plan in- cludes suggestions for a comprehensive zoning ordinance which will control or eliminate automobile graveyards. There are 49 acres devoted to auto graveyards and junk yards in the county. Five hundred cars are abandoned each year in Worcester County. Appendix B. Cars Entering the Scrap Cycle Before analyzing the alternative solu- tions to the problems created by the in- creasing number of junked cars introduced into the scrap cycle annually, a data base (consisting of actual and estimated num- bers of junked cars in the Nation, Mary- land, and its political subdivisions) was collected. Using these data, a statistical model was developed which correlated well with historical scrappage of vehicles. This model was based on the sales of ve- hicles in previous years. To forecast the future number of ve- hicles entering the scrap cycle, the sales of vehicles in Maryland and its political subdivisions were forecast; using this data, the predictive model was applied, resulting in a projection of future junked cars in the State. 33 Statistical Model for Predicting Number of Cars Entering the Scrap Cycle Annually The authors (MTI) developed a mathe- matical predictive model that very closely predicts the number of scrap automobiles nationally, in the State of Maryland, and, with somewhat less accuracy, for each separate county in the State of Maryland. It appears that the predictive method de- veloped may be highly useful to scrap dealers who are considering making capital investments in such items as shredders and other disposal equipment. While the statistical methods used are relatively simple, the important fact is that the method used appears to provide useful answers. The statistical methods are discussed in some detail in this pre- sentation; however, a simplified method of using these statistics is also presented. The simplified method requires only that the user determine the number of new cars registered in the jurisdiction in the geographical area in question over the past 15 to 20 years. Each of these numbers is then multiplied by a factor that is tab- ulated, and the results are summed to give the best prediction for the number of cars to enter the scrap cycle in that geo- graphic area during the following years. MTI gratefully acknowledges the assist- ance of Mr. Wilfred H. Shields, Jr., many other officials of the State of Maryland, the Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, the National Automobile Manufacturers As- sociation, and other persons who were kind enough to assist in providing data for this study. The Problem. The problem consists of finding a method of predicting, for any given year, the number of automobiles likely to be scrapped during that year. There were many data available that one might consider could be used to make such a prediction. These data were as follows: (1) The number of cars entering the scrap 0 cycle annually (available from the Amer- 0 ican Automobile Manufacturers Associa- tion). (2) The number of factory car sales (available from the American Automobile Manufacturers Association). (3) The num- ber of automobiles exported per year and the number imported per year (available from the US. Department of Commerce). (4) The number of automobiles registered in the State of Maryland for each year (available from the Department of M'otor Vehicles, State of Maryland). (5) The number of new cars sold in the State of Maryland per year (available from the Maryland Automobile Dealers Associa- tion). (6) The number of new automobiles sold in each county per year (available from the Maryland Automobile Dealers Association). (7) The number of cars reg- istered in each county per year (available 34 from the Department of M'otor Vehicles, State of M'aryland). No data were available from the Auto Dismantlers of the State of Maryland re- garding the number of cars actually enter- ing the scrap cycle annually. Other factors that we thought might in- fluence the scrap cycle included the effect of production slowdown during World War II, variations in the economic cycle, number of used cars imported into a State, automobile taxation policy, the value of scrap, and other variables that might in- fluence individuals either to dispose of cars prematurely or to retain them for an ab- normally long period. Technical Approach. Before attempt- ing a multivariant analysis involving all of the possible influences on the number of cars entering the scrap cycle annually, we decided to determine if simple methods could provide estimates accurate to better than 5 or 10 percent; as we believed that such accuracy would be sufficient. To de- termine whether a simple analysis might provide meaningful data to the above ac- curacy, we did the following. We hypothesized a probability density function of the survival of new automo- biles: t2 2 ._ f(t)=7T—ye o S t s + so where: yzmean life in years ‘ t=time in years since manufacture. It is to be noted that this expression has the same form as the normal probability function, and it is a convenient approxima- tion since the normal function is tabulated. Using data consisting of the number of new cars introduced into the United States each year, and operating on these numbers by the assumed standard distribution, we listed the probable number of cars pro- duced in any given year that might be scrapped in any other year. We did this for several distributions—using values for y of 6.4, 7.6 and 8 years. We determined the number of cars that were predicted to be scrapped year-by-year based solely on the number of new cars produced during previous years. We compared the predictive results for the three values y (mean life) with the number of cars actually entering the scra cycle. ' The result on a nationwide basis en- couraged us to apply the same method to the State of Maryland. Here a difficulty arose because data were not available from any source regarding the actual num- ber of cars scrapped in any given year. To determine the best estimate of the number of cars actually scrapped in any given year, we took the number of cars registered during the previous year, added this number to the number of new cars registered during the year in question, and subtracted from this sum the number of cars registered during the given year. This determination is, of course, not strictly accurate, as it makes the tacit assumption that operating used cars do not enter or leave the State. We then compared the calculated num- ber, of vehicles scrapped by year with the number predicted by our statistical formu- lation. The results were sufficiently en- couraging to cause us to follow the same procedure in three representative counties of Maryland. To facilitate calculations of the fraction of cars produced in a given year that would be scrapped in another year, we used the following formulation: 2 i t2 Pi =—" e _7T’2dt 7721/ i-I where: P=the probability of a car lasting exactly i years t=time in years since manufacture y=mean life in years. 35 Using nationwide data, a computer pro- gram was written to determine the num- ber of cars scrapped in the last 10 scrap years for y equal to 7.2, 7.6, and 8 years. It was found that a mean life (y) of8 years yielded the best fit to the actual scrappage data on a nationwide basis for the past 10 scrap years. However, a mean life of 7.6 years pro- vides a much better fit for the past 5 scrap years. The data seem to be suggesting that people in recent times tend to retain their automobile for, perhaps, half a year less than they did a decade ago. Three technical points about our formu- lation might be argued: (1) The choice of the distribution. It might well be argued that another distribution would be more appropriate, and, indeed, another distribu- tion could be determined directly by using the following formulation: i=N SN: 2 P(N—i)Mi i=1 where: P(N—i)=the probability of a car lasting exactly N minus i years Mi=the number of cars manufactured in the year i. We know SN and 11/12' for some 23 years. Therefore, we could form a set of 23 simul- taneous linear equations and solve for the P(N—i). In the alternate, we would make the reasonable assumption that no car enters the scrap cycle beyond an age of 20 years, form three different sets of 20 simultane- ous linear equations, and solve for PS us- ing what would then amount essentially to three different sets of data. We did not do so because it is apparent that World War II had a major effect on the scrap cycle of automobiles, and we believe that only inthe present decade has the effect of World War II, and, possibly the Korean War, ceased to have significant effects on the number of cars scrapped. In other words, we are interested in recent history as opposed to ancient history—which was TABLE 1 NATIONWIDE SCRAPPAGE FIGURES—ACTUAL VERSUS PREDICTED Predicted number scrapped Actual no. Scrap year d scrappe y = 7.2 Difference y = 7.6 Difference y = 8 Difference 1957 ................. 3,700,000 4,065,591 —365,591 3,923,291 —223,291 3,663,792 +36,208 1958 ................. 3,600,000 4,381 ,959 — 781,959 4,238,788 — 638,788 3,952,650 — 352,650 1959 ................. 4,600,000 4,517,438 + 82,562 4,383,504 + 216,496 4,082,545 + 517,455 1960 ................. 4,200,000 4,761,155 —561,155 4,635,061 —435,061 4,303,860 — 103,860 1961 ................. 4,400,000 5,050,895 — 650,895 4,931 ,748 — 531 ,748 4,579,541 — 179,541 1962 ................. 4,700,000 5,209,577 — 509,577 5,098,936 — 398,936 4,731,304 — 31,304 1963 ................. 5,300,000 5,456,171 —156,171 5,354,190 ~54,190 4,972,430 +327,570 1964 ................. 5,500,000 5,747,278 — 247,278 5,648,006 -— 148,006 5,244,667 + 255,333 1965 ................. 6,000,000 6,024,826 — 24,826 5,930,526 — 69,474 5,507,985 + 492,015 1966 ................. 6,300,000 6,430,631 ~130,631 6,335,270 -35,270 5,889,590 +410,410 1967 ................. 6,600,000 6,751,584 — 151,584 6,655,888 — 55,888 6,194,419 + 405,581 Total ...... 29,700,000 30,410,490 — 710,490 29,923,880 — 362,828 27,809,091 + 1,890,909 certainly affected by major national events. (2) The formulation used tacitly assumes that no cars produced in a given year will be scrapped during that year. This assumption is clearly invalid, as a certain number of cars produced in a given year will certainly encounter severe acci- dents and be scrapped during the very year in which they are introduced into the cycle. However, the purpose of developing this model was to make predictions for the future, and, for that reason, the use- fulness of the model would be greatly in- hibited if it would be necessary to con- sider say, on a month-to-month basis, the new cars introduced into the cycle during any given scrap year. The usefulness of any predictive model is, of course, greatly compromised if it does not permit one to peer into the future. (3) Additionally, we should note that, by evaluating the def- inite integral in increments of exactly 1 year, we make the tacit assumption that all cars in a given scrap year are scrapped at the beginning of the scrap year, and that all cars produced in a preceding year are introduced into the cycle at midyear. The net effect is that these tacit assump- tions tend to wipe out the error made by considering that no cars produced during a given year are scrapped in that year. In any event, as will be shown, the method that we have developed works in 36 predicting, on a nationwide, State, and county basis, the number of cars which will likely be scrapped in each of the last 5 years. The distribution used in this project is equivalent to one half of the normal dis- tribution. If it is desired to evaluate the fraction of cars scrapped for values of mean life (y) and time (t) other than those shown in this report, a table of areas of the normal curve can be used. The usual table of areas in one half of a normal—curve can be used by entering with t/\/ZT- y and 2 multiplying the table value by two. It could well be argued that the normal distribution results in an unreal prediction regarding relatively new cars. For example, using the normal distribution and a mean life of 8 years, the distribution assumes that some 8 percent of the cars produced during a given year will be scrapped dur- ing the following year—a figure clearly too high. However, the fact that the normal distribution fits the data better than any other distribution tried, suggests that the very existence of a number of new cars may force other older cars to be retired— perhaps prematurely. Use of the normal distribution tends to take into account this forcing function that may cause the public to retire used cars at an accelerated rate because of the existence of new cars. Despite the fact that the normal distribu- not been estimated. Certainly, the lag be- tion so closely predicts the actual scrap- tween the time a hulk enters the cycle page of the past 5 years, we have tried until it is reduced to scrap depends heav- other distributions, specifically the Poisson fly on the economics of the local situation. and the Gamma. Neither of these distribu- In areas with shredders, there is ample tions provides as good a data fit as does the evidence that the hulk inventory is not normal distribution. increasing as rapidly as it is for areas Using the probability function that was without shredders. used for this project (if the cars have a Results. The results of our nationwide mean life of 7.6 years), a car would have prediction are given in Table 1 for values a 50 percent probability of surviving be- of y of 7.2, 7.6, and 8 years. It will be yond 6.5 years. noted at once that the data for a value of It is noted that we have been discussing 7.6 years match within 2 percent the act- the number of cars entering the scrap ual number of cars scrapped during the cycle annually. The number actually re- last 5 years. Table 2 depicts the same duced to scrap and sold to steel mills has data for the State of Maryland for a value TABLE 2 MARYLAND SCRAPPAGE FIGURES—ACTUAL VERSUS PREDICTED Best estimate of Predicted number scrapped Scrap year actual no. scrapped y = 7.2 Difference y = 7 .6 Difference 1957 ..................................................... 60,200 58,704 + 1,496 56,590 + 3,610 10,470 64,154 —-53,684 61,976 —51,506 1959 ..................................................... 50,964 67,494 — 16,530 65,371 — 14,407 1960 ..................................................... 85,455 71,911 + 13,544 69,846 + 15,609 1961 ..................................................... 54,038 77,301 — 23,263 75,289 — 21,151 1962 ..................................................... 62,826 81,872 — 19,046 79,895 — 17,069 1963 ..................................................... 86,358 87,624 ~ 1,256 85,685 + 673 1964 ..................................................... 92,510 94,919 — 2,409 92,904 — 394 1965 ..................................................... 129,861 102,698 + 27,163 100,603 + 29,258 1966 ..................................................... 115,559 111,734 +3,825 109,525 +6,034 1967 ....................................................................... 119,982 .................. 117,656 .................. Total .......................................... 748,241 818,411 — 70,160 797,684 +49,343 TABLE 3 GARRETT COUNTY SCRAPPAGE FIGURES—ACTUAL VERSUS PREDICTED Best estimate of Predicted number scrapped Scrap year actual no. scrapped y = 7 .2 Difference y = 7.6 Difference 1957 ..................................................... 351 321 +30 310 +40 1958 ..................................................... 277 347 — 70 335 — 58 1959 ..................................................... 20 353 — 333 343 — 323 1960 ..................................................... 407 361 +45 351 + 56 1961 ..................................................... 546 374 + 172 366 + 180 1962 ............................................... . ..... 214 378 ~164 371 —157 . 1963 ..................................................... 234 387 — 153 380 — 146 1964 ..................................................... 230 403 - 173 398 — 168 1965 ..................................................... 397 421 —24 416 — 19 1966 ..................................................... 653 447 + 206 442 + 211 1967 ..................................................... 786 470 +316 465 +321 Total .......................................... 4,115 4,262 — 148 4,177 — 63 37 TABLE 4 QUEEN ANNE’s COUNTY SCRAPPAGE FIGURES—ACTUAL VERSUS PREDICTED Best estimate of Predicted number scrapped Scrap year actual no. scrapped y = 7.2 Difference y = 7.6 Difference 1957 ..................................................... 372 284 + 88 310 +62 1958 ..................................................... 210 308 —98 335 — 125 1959 ..................................................... 266 317 —51 343 —77 1960 ..................................................... 275 333 — 58 351 ~76 1961 ..................................................... 310 352 —42 366 —56 1962 ..................................................... 240 362 — 122 371 — 131 1963 ..................................................... 307 376 —69 380 —71 1964 ..................................................... 405 398 + 7 398 + 7 1965 ..................................................... 270 414 — 144 416 ~146 1966 ..................................................... 431 436 —5 442 — 11 1967 ..................................................... 413 456 —43 465 —52 Total .......................................... 3,499 4,036 ~537 4,177 —676 of 7.2 years and for a value of 7.6 years. The actual number of cars scrapped in the State of Maryland was not available from industry sources. We, therefore, made the best estimate of the number scrapped in any one of the past years by adding to the registrations of the previous year the new cars sold in the State of Maryland during the given year. Clearly, these calculations are based on the as- sumption that there is no net influx or egress of operable used cars during the year in question. This appeared to be the case for the State of Maryland, because a value of 7.6 years very closely predicts the number of cars calculated to have been scrapped in the past 5 years. Tables 3, 4, and 5 present the same sort of data for three representative counties of the State of Maryland: Garrett, Queen Anne, and Prince George’s. Simplified Method of Using the Statis- tics. MTI has programmed this predic- tive model on a digital computer, and we are in a position to provide predictive services for those who wish to obtain them from us. Our computer program is such that it is capable of taking into ac- count local historical variances to provide a highly accurate estimate of scrap auto- mobile generation in future years. How- ever, we believed it desirable to provide TABLE 5 PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY SCRAPPAGE FIGURES—ACTUAL VERSUS PREDICTED Best estimate of Predicted number scrapped Scrap year actual no. scrapped y = 7 .2 Difference y = 7.6 Difi‘erence 1957 ..................................................... 5,303 6,125 — 822 5,880 —577 1958 ..................................................... 4,558 6,846 —2,288 6,585 -2,027 1959 ..................................................... 2,794 7,428 ——4,634 7,158 —4,364 1960 ..................................................... 6,634 8,224 -1,590 7,945 — 1,311 1961 ..................................................... 10,087 9,239 + 848 8,947 + 1,140 1962 ..................................................... 8,547 10,218 — 1,671 9,910 — 1,363 1963 ..................................................... 9,273 11,460 -—2,187 11,128 — 1,855 1964 ..................................................... 11,295 13,007 — 1,712 12,639 — 1,344 1965 ..................................................... 13,310 14,858 —— 1,548 14,444 — 1,134 1966 ................. 17,734 16,965 + 769 16,498 + 1,236 1967 ..................................................... 16,853 18,971 -2,118 18,547 — 1,694 Total .......................................... 106,388 123,341 — 16,953 119,681 — 13,293 38 an approximate method that can be used by anyone with access to an adding ma- chine (Table 6). This table is based on a value ofy of 7.6 years. To use Table 6, proceed as follows: (1) Enter on the top the scrap year for which a prediction is to be made. Enter in column 1 the years, beginning at the top with the year pre- ceding the scrap year. Enter in column 2 the number of new cars registered in the geographical area in question, beginning at the top of the table with the new cars introduced the year immediately prior to the year in question. (2) Multiply each of the numbers in column 2 by the factor given in column 3 and enter the results in column 4. The sum of the numbers in col- umn 4 is the number of cars predicted to enter the scrap cycle in the year written on the top of the page. To determine the probable number of new cars to be en- tered for ears that have not yet occurred. plot the number of new cars introduced into the cycle against time as shown in Figure 1. Extend the curve to future years and pick off the probable number of cars that will be introduced in the cycle in future years. TABLE 6 REFERENCE TABLE FOR CALCULATING THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES ENTERING SCRAP CYCLE IN A GIVEN YEAR A B AxB=C Fraction of Product equals Sales year No. new cars vehicles produced the no. vehicles introduced in sales year and produced in scrapped in 19“n” “sales year & scrapped in 19n” 19“n—1” A(n—l) .084 C(n—l) 19“n—2” A(n—2) .083 C(n— 2) 19“n—3” A(n—3) .081 C(n—3) 19“n—4” I .078 I 19“n—5” I .075 I 19“n—6” | .071 I 19“n— 7” I .066 I 19“n—8” I .061 | 19“n—9” I .056 I l9“n-—10” | .051 | 19“n—11” l .046 | 19“n— 12” I .040 I 19“n— 13" I .035 | 19“n— 14” l .031 | 19“n— 15” I .026 | 19“n— 16” I .022 I 19“n—17” I .019 I 19“n— 18” l .015 | 19“n—19” I .013 I 19“n—20” A(n—20) .010 C(n—20) Total no. vehicles scrapped in 19“n”= EC Vehicle Sales in Maryland-A Projection Introduction. Subsequent to checking the model against actual scrappage data, a forecast of future car sales in Maryland and its political subdivisions was made. The primary purpose of this projection was to provide a basis to which the model described above could be aplied in de- termining the future number and distri- bution of junked cars in Maryland. The Technical Approach. Prior to projecting new car sales for Maryland and its political subdivisions, historical sales data was collected for all the counties of Maryland, the city of Baltimore, and the State of Maryland. Next, forecasts of fu- ture auto sales made by other organiza- tions were examined. Prior to developing a sophisticated model for projecting fu- ture sales, several straightforward tech- niques were employed to determine whether or not projections made on these bases would provide future sales estimates in line with general expectations concern- ing the new car market. The linear least squares method for de- veloping trend lines was selected to pro- ject future car sales since: (1) The result- ant data correlated with projections made by other organizations. (2) The method is straightforward and avoids the hazards of compounding errors present in a more sophisticated model while implicitely in- corporating factors that create demand for new automobiles (such as greater per capita income, population growth, increas- ing mobility and leisure time) since past increases in motor vehicle sales have re- sulted from the growth trend present in these variables. 40 A least squares regression equation of the form ‘ _ 2(X—X) (Y— Y) FY: 2(X—X)2 (X - X) where: Y: the actual number of vehicles sold in year X Y: the average (mean) number of vehicles sold in the years considered X :an actual year in the sample X =the median year in the sample used. The resultant trend Curve upon solu- tion of the above equation is of the form Y: (10 + aX where: Y: the number of cars sold in year X X=the year for which the projection is made a0 = a calculated constant a1 =the annual incremental increase in ve- hicle sales. Using this formulation, projections for vehicle sales in Maryland and its political subdivisions presented on the following pages were developed. Actual car sales for 1947 through 1967 provided that base data for these projections. The resultant pro- jections are presented in Exhibit IV in the text. Projection of J unked Cars Entering the Scrap Cycle Annually From 1968 Through 1979 By applying the predictive model de- scribed earlier to the new car sales forecasts above, projections of the number of junked cars entering the scrap cycle from 1968 through 1979 were made for the State and counties of Maryland and the city of Bal- timore. The projections, by year, are pre- sented in Exhibit III in the text. The projected number of vehicles to be scrapped in Maryland in the year 1979 is 193,543, an increase of nearly 80,000 over the estimated 115,559 vehicles scrapped in 1967. Appendix C. Long-Range Forecasts Any year now, we will break through the 10,000,000- car-year barrier. By the late 1970’s, we will show no particular elation over a 13,000,000-year. By 1975, we expect to have more than 118 million motor vehicles, and the total should exceed 130 mil- lion by 1980. The Nation will need well over 8 mil- lion automobiles and more than 1.5 million trucks and buses in each of the next few years. By 1976, we will need over 10 million automobiles plus 2 mil- lion trucks and buses each year. By 1980, we’ll have a total motor vehicle market in excess of 13 million vehicles a year. In 1985, when the US. population will be about 265 million persons, some 144 million motor vehicles will be on the move, traveling 1.5 trillion miles a year. This compares with today’s 100 million vehicles traveling 960 billion miles annually. The trucking industry in 1980 will show 24 million trucks, 3 million new trucks per year, intercity freight revenues of $24 billion, and 738 billion inter- city ton-miles of freight service. Passenger car sales outside the United States and Canada of 13,500,000 units a year by 1976 are fore- seen—a number that would have been astounding just a few years ago. Such sales would represent a 48 percent increase over the number of passenger cars sold in 1967, and a growth rate higher than that expected for the auto industry in the United States and Canada over the same period. 41 LEE A. IACOCCA Executive Vice President North American Automotive Operations Ford Motor Company Press release (10-14-68) E. M. COPE Chief, Highway Statistics Divison US. Department of Transporta- ' tion (9-1 1 —68) Steelways (9-68) American Trucking Association Transportation and Trucking in 1980 (8-68) ROBERT STEVENSON Executve Vice President Overseas Automotive and Tractor Operations Ford Motor Company Press release (4—2—68) PERCENT OWNERSHIP IN 1975 Age of household head Household income (in 1967 dollars) Total Under 35—44 45—54 55—64 65 and 35 over Under $3,000 ....................................... 7.7 1.3 0.6 1.0 1.4 3.4 $3,000 to $5,000 .................................... 11.2 3.0 1.4 1.6 2.0 3.2 $5,000 to $7,500 .................................... 20.2 7.9 3.5 3.2 3.1 2.5 $7,500 to $10,000 .................................. 22.6 8.9 4.6 4.4 3.5 1.2 $10,000 to $15,000 ................................. 24.8 7.7 6.3 6.3 3.4 1.1 $15,000 and over .................................. 13.5 1.9 3.7 4.7 3.2 * Total .......................................... 100.0 30.7 20.1 21.2 16.6 11.4 *Percentage insignificant. It is estimated that in the midseventies, 81 percent of the nation’s households will own at least one car, and over a third of these, two or more. This will add up to about 80 million family cars on the road in 1975. The number of automobiles owned by the nation’s families has increased at an average annual rate of over 3.5 percent thus far in the 1960’s, but the pace is expected to decelerate to about 3.0 percent between now and the mid- 1970’s. Source: The Conference Board Record, March 1968. Foreign-car sales in the United States will more than double present volume to reach 14 percent of the market by 1975. Import car sales would reach a mil- lion by 1970 and go on to 1.6 million by 1975, com- pared with the peak of 773,200 in 1967. Statistical Department Automobile Manufacturers Association April 22, 1968 Motor vehicle registrations now stand at 94 million, but are expected to increase 38 percent during the next 13 years, reaching 130 million by 1980. During 20 years after that, they are projected to 182 mil- lion, another 40 percent increase. Travel projections are even more spectacular with vehicle miles increasing 45 percent by 1980, and an- other 49 percent between 1980 and 2000. By the beginning of the next decade, we look for new car sales to reach the neighborhood of 10 mil- lion units a year. We expect to see new car sales of 13 million before 1980. The majority of travel in the 42 M. S. MCLAUGHLIN Vice President Ford Motor Company Detroit Daily Press (1-17—68) J. O. MATTSON President Automotive Safety Foundation Press release (11—13—67) ROBERT ANDERSON Vice President Chrysler Corporation The Evening Star (8-25—67) cities will be by car, and the majority of goods will be delivered by truck by 1980, when auto and truck sales will total 15.3 million units. Vehicle registration in the last 2 decades has almost tripled, increasing from slightly over 34 million in 1947 to today’s 94 million. By 1975, our vehicle pop- ulation will be nearly 120 million. The industry continues to look forward to a 10-mil- lion car year by 1975. The share of new car sales to families owning two or more automobiles increased from 31 percent in 1960 to 43 percent in 1965, and is expected to reach 54 percent by 1970. The basic auto market in 1970 will run to approxi- mately 9,500,000 new cars (including imports). That’s only 200,000 more than the 9,300,000 new cars actu- ally sold in the United States in 1965. In the early 1970’s, unit demand will quicken largely because all those extra cars sold in the mid-1960’s will begin to wear out. The market in 1975 will amount to 11,500,000 new cars. Because sales were drab in the late 1950’s and the first 2 years of the 1960’s, the basic scrappage rate, which is now 6 million, will increase slowly over the next few years to 6.7 million in 1970. Later on, be— cause the mid-1960’s were big new-car years, scrap- page will increase more quickly to 8.2 million in 1975. First time purchase of cars by households are projected to total 1,200,000 in 1970 and 1,350,000 in 1975. Two-car demand should add 1,100,000 autos to the market in 1970 and 1,400,000 in 1975. Despite fluctuations, we expect that U.S. demand will reach a level of almost 12 million cars by 1976. Factors that will bring about the increased demand are: (1) The car-buying population (people age 18 and older) will increase by 22 million or 17.5 percent 43 LOWELL K. BRIDWELL Federal Highway Administrator U.S. Department of Transporta- tion Press release (6—26—67) VIRGIL E. BOYD President Chrysler Corporation Press release (6—14—67) Fortune (6—1-67) ARJAY MILLER President Ford Motor Company Press release (5-18-67) in the next 10 years. (2) A greater percentage in- crease is expected in the number of families earning $10,000 and over. From 12.2 million families in 1966, the number is expected to reach 24.2 million by 1976. Despite the current sales decline, the automotive in- dustry will have a 10-million car year by 1970 and a 12-million car year by 1975. Truck sales should hit 1.8 million by 1970 and 2 million by the mid-1970’s. A 10-million-car year can’t be far off, and a 12 mil- lion-year is in sight Within a decade. JOHN J. RICCARDO Group Vice President Chrysler Corporation Detroit News (4—11-67) L. B. SMITH President A. O. Smith Corporation Automotive News (3—20—67) Cars in use New cars Cars Jan. 1 registered scrapped (million) year during year (million) ' (million) 1963 ...................................... 59.66 7.56 5.32 1964 ...................................... 61.90 8.07 5.71 1965 ...................................... 64.26 9.31 E*6.00 1966E ................................... 67.58 9.20 6.25 1967E ................................... 70.53 8.00 5.75 1968E ................................... 72.78 9.25 6.25 1969E ................................... 75.78 10.50 7.00 1970E ................................... 79.28 12.50 8.00 *E, estimated. Source: Robert W. Baird and Company. In 1965, we had record automobile sales of 9.3 mil- lion. With projections of substantially higher in- comes and larger number of households, it would not be surprising if new car purchases exceed 13 million in 1975. Purchases of parts and accessories should also show a very sharp rise. Total purchases of autos and parts are projected to increase more than 70 percent by 1975 . The same powerful forces that have created the steadily growing demand for cars over the past 5 years will continue to operate in the years ahead. These forces include the steady growth of the popu- lation and the addition each year of millions of po- 44 ALEXANDER B. TROWBRIDGE Acting Secretary of Commerce U.S. Department of Commerce Press release (2—6—67) LYNN TOWNSEND Chairman Chrysler Corporation Press release (12—16—66) tential new customers, the rise in personal income, and the increasing reliance upon the automobile for personal transportation. In the early 1970’s, we ex- pect these forces to create a yearly demand ranging between 9 and 12 million new cars. U.S. car sales are projected to increase at a com- pound rate of 3.4 percent a year—to normal levels of about 10 million car sales a year by 1970, and 11.5 million by 1975. Dollar sales of new cars, at con- stant car prices, will increase at a compound rate of 4.6 percent a year. In comparable terms, Ford pro- jects growth in truck sales of more than 5 percent a year. Unit car sales abroad will grow at a compound rate of 6 percent a year for the next 5 years taper- ing to about 4.5 percent in the 5 years thereafter. By the end of 1965 there were 75 million passenger cars on our streets, and the number is increasing by close to 3 million vehicles each year. This means the car population will total 84 million passenger cars by the end of the 1960’s. Replacement of cars already on the road is now in excess of 6 million a year, and should amount to about 6.9 million scrapped in 1969. By the end of the decade, nearly 7 million new cars will be sold for replacement. New customers entering the market and families with one car add- ing a second (annual sales of 9 million cars) becomes a new base for projection. There are 80 million cars and trucks on American roads today and 116 million expected within 10 years. The market value for automotive replacements parts for cars, trucks, buses, and trailers at retail in 1965 was $9 billion. Estimates place the value at $11.5 bil- lion by 1970 and $14.7 billion by 1975. ’ The U.S. Economics Corporation estimates that 85 percent of 1970 auto models will have automatic transmissions, compared with 81 percent in 1965; 70 percent will have power steering, compared with 60 percent last year. For power brakes, the figures are 73 percent in 1965, compared with 83 percent in 1970. Total cars will have risen from 61.3 million in 1965 to 74.2 million by 1970. 45 HENRY FORD, 11 Chairman Ford Motor Company Press release (12—2-66) ROY ABERNETHY President American Motors Corp. Detroit News (11—27—66) ARJAY MILLER President Ford Motor Company Detroit News (11—27—66) Printers’ Ink (10—14—66) MOTOR VEHICLE PRODUCTION (in thousands) 1970 1975 1980 Passenger cars ..................... 9,400 10,600 12,200 Trucks .................................. 1,510 1 ,960 2,340 Buses ................................... 35 40 45 Total ........................... 10,945 12,600 14,485 Source: Battelle Memorial Institute, “Michigan Manpower Study, Phase I.” The expected deceleration in the 1967 auto market fits into the long-term outlook. Reasonably optimistic assumptions for 1970 indicate a market for about 10 million units, or only 7 percent above 9.3 million units in 1965, including imports. Factors affecting the growth in car ownership and the pattern of replacement are: A modest recession in 1967, followed by a return .to prosperity in 1968 to 1970. A rise in the percent of households owning cars (from 80.6 percent at the beginning of 1966 to almost 84 percent by the beginning of 1971). Rapid growth in the number of upper-middle and upper income families boosting multiple car ownership. A slow scrappage rate over the next 5 years, however, a marked gain should again occur in the early 1970’s. There is little prospect of any substantial rise above a new car market of 9 or 9.5 million for the next few years. Replacement demand required 6 million units, rising toward 7. Over 1 million additional cars are needed to provide transportation for the growing number of households, an additional million will go to satisfy the needs of increasingly richer house- holds. This will provide a basic demand for new cars of 9.5 million by 1970. Averaging the up years with the down industry sales are projected to increase at a trend rate of 3.4 per- cent a year. This would mean normal levels of about 10 million cars by 1970, and about 11.5 million by 1975. Sales (including imports) in 1966 were projected at 9 million cars, second highest in history. Unit growth outside the United States for the coming 5 years was projected at 6 percent a 46 SOCIETY NATIONAL BANK OF CLEVELAND Steel (8—15—66) DANIEL B. SUITS Professor of Economics University of Michigan Challenge, May—June 1966 HENRY FORD, II,'Chairman ARJAY MILLER, President J. EDWARD LUNDY, Vice President, Finance Ford Motor Company Press release (5-25—66) year, tapering to 4 percent in the 5 years thereafter. By 1975, they projected that more than a third of the families will have two or more cars, compared to a quarter of all families today. Worldwide, about 170 million cars and trucks are now in use, and well over 200 million will be in use by 1970. 1965 1975 Motor vehicle registrations (millions): Passenger cars .......................................... 75 97 Trucks and buses ....................................... 15 19 Total ................................................ 90 116 Ratio of persons per motor vehicle: All persons ................................................ 2.2 1.9 Persons 15—74 years old ............................. 1.4 1.3 Vehicle miles (billions) ..................................... 870 1,165 Motor fuel consumption (billions of gallons) ...... 70 93 Motor vehicle demand 1966—1975 (millions): Passenger cars: For replacement .................................. 68 For increase in registrations ............... 22 Total .......................................... 90 Trucks and buses, total .............................. 14 Source: A Look Through The Windshield, E. M. Cope, Chief, Highway Statistics Division, Office of Planning, Bureau of Public Roads, Address to the North American Gasoline Tax Conference, Denver, Colorado, August 30, 1965. Well over 13 million vehicles will be sold in 1975 in the United States. This would compare with about 10.9 million sold in 1965. He said 1975 sales in Can- ada are expected to top 1 million units compared to 800,000 in 1965. Overseas sales are expected to be upwards of 16 million units in 1975, compared to about 10.8 million units in 1965. FREDERIC G. DONNER Chairman General Motors Corp. Press release (5—20—66) By 1970 By 1975 U.S. population (million) .................................. 213. 230. Number of families (million) ............................ 54. 63. New drivers—age 16 (million) .......................... 4. 4.3 Intercity freight-ton miles (trillion) ................. 2.1 2.4 Cars in use (million) ......................................... 86. 99. Cars will travel (billion miles) .......................... 790. 902. Trucks and buses in use (million) ..................... 19.4 23.6 Car production (million) ................................... 10.5 12.5 Car scrappage (million) .................................... ‘8.4 10.0 Non-U.S. car output (million) ..... 14.5 19.0 U.S. truck output (million) ............................... 1.9 2.3 Source: Wards Automotive Reports, July 25, 1966. 47 Appendix D. Prices Paid by a Massachusetts Shredder Operator Clean burned autobodies with frames, springs, rear ends, and front ends $14.00/net ton. attached. Motors, transmissions, and fuel tanks must be removed. Clean unburned autobodies with frames, springs, rear ends, and front ends $14.00/net ton. attached. Motors transmissions, fuel tanks, seats, cushions and tires must be removed. (Glass, headliners, doorpanels, and floormats may remain in the body.) Clean burned autobodies with or without frames ................................................ $11.00/net ton. Motors, transmissions, and fuel tanks must be removed. Cleaned unburned autobodies with or without frames ........................................ $11.00/net ton. Motors, transmissions, fuel tanks, seats, cushions and tires must be removed. (Glass, headliners, doorpanels, and floormats may remain in the body.) Porcelain: washing machines. Hot water heaters with jackets, stoves, and $13.00/net ton. refrigerators. All sealed units must be removed. Mixed sheet iron ................................................................................................. $13.00/net ton. Must be free of cable, BX cable, balls and rolls of wire and straps, terneplate, new galvanized, silicon and tin coated materials. Gas tanks, paint cans, and closed containers are not acceptable. Prepared no. 2 steel ............................................................................................ $19.00/net ton. Truck undercarriages, shafting, bars, large pipe and gears, ordnance material, and all closed containers must be excluded. Unprepared no. 2 steel—maximum length 12 ft ................................................... $15.00/net ton. May include whole car frames, front and rear ends, and oversized no. 2 scrap. Appendix E. Excerpt From: Plunts for Screening Junkyards, Gravelpirsond Dumps Arnoldra, Harvard University, November 1965 “Make America Beautiful” is a phrase which, fortunately, is being given much at- tention now. Three million dollars have just been appropriated by Congress for con- trol of outdoor advertising and a like amount has been appropriated for “con- trolling junkyards along the highways.” This is the very thing for which many a civic-minded group has been fighting dur- ing the past decade. It would not be amiss to take a hard look at some of our town dumps, and state-owned gravel pits also, with the idea of planting trees and shrubs to screen them from public View. Public-spirited groups could well be ac- tive in planting, for it would add materi- ally to the appearance of the countryside, especially as viewed by the passing motor- ist. Along the major highways around Boston’s perimeter, several dumps, which are conspicuously unshielded, come to mind. This is a condition too often repeated in many communities throughout the country. ,, The sites of these depositories have un- doubtedly been selected because the land is poor or unwanted. Also, it is impractical to expect that, if a highly ornamental planting were made in such places, it would be maintained. The realistic ap- proach is to admit that these areas are 49 necessary, that they cannot be moved at this point, and that no individual or group will give the time or money to mow lawns, or care for extensive flower beds and or- nate plantings, year in and year out. However, there might be those inter- ested enough to make an initial planting of rugged, fast-growing trees and shrubs; that is, plants which, once established, have a good record for taking care of themselves without much additional at- tention. True, such plants might not be the best ornamentals available, but the chances are that the soil would not be the best either. This bulletin is being written with the hope that some action, by some group, somewhere, may be taken in hiding these places from public view with plant- ings of comparatively inexpensive screens of “low maintenance” trees and shrubs. These plants should be given the best possible attention at planting time with good soil, water, and mulching. It is par- ticularly necessary that the plants be checked and watered carefully during the first 2 years of the planting, even period- ically, where needed. Arrangements and funds for doing this should be the respon- sibility of the planning organization, and funds should be provided for this at the start of the project. Many a geod, well- conceived planting has failed because this was not done at the start. Of the plants suggested in the following lists, the fastest growing trees are the pop- lars, willows, elms, and the Douglas-fir, in that order. Of the shrubs, the fastest growing are the Forsythia, Japanese Tree Lilac, Sweet Mock-orange and Japanese Rose. In addition, and probably the fast- est growing of all the shrubs suggested here for making a quick screen, is the new Rhamnus frangula “Columnaris”, the Tall- hedge Buckthorn. Using plants 2-3 feet high, a 12-foot hedge can result in five years in good soil. Plants should be placed 3—4 feet apart to make a solid screen. They bear berries (red, turning black) throughout the summer and are most at- tractive to birds. The ability of this plant to grow well and fast, its freedom from serious pests, its narrow and very dense habit (not much over 4 feet wide), its glossy foliage, and the ease with which it is transplanted, all combine to make it an ideal, quick-growing screen, well suited to shield dumps and gravel pits from the public View. SCREENING TREES FOR DRY, SANDY SOILS Acer negundo Ailanthus altissima Betula populifolia Framinus pennsylvanica lanceolata M aclura pomifera *Pinus banksiana Populas alba Sassafras albidum Sophora japonica Ulmus pumila * = Evergreen E = Easy to move Hardiness H t. Z one Box-elder 60’ 2 E Tree of Heaven 60’ 4 E Gray Birch 30’ 3-4 B Green Ash 60’ 2 E Osage-orange 60’ 5 Jack Pine 7 5’ 2 B White Poplar 90’ 3 E Sassafras 60’ 4 B Japanese Pagoda Tree 75’ 4 Siberian Elm 75' 4 E B = Must be moved carefully with a ball of soil SCREENING SHRUBS FOR DRY AND SANDY SOILS Acer ginnala Berberis thunbergii Caragana arborescens Comptonia peregrina Elaeagnus angustifolia H amamelis virginiana *Juniperus communis *Juniperus virginiana Kolkwitzia amabilis Ligustrum amurense Lucium halimifolium Myrica pennsylvanica Physocarpus opulifolius Prunus maritima Rhamnus frangula Rhus aromatica Rhus copallina Rhus glabra Rhus typhina Rosa rugosa Viburnum lentago * = Evergreen E = Easy to move Hardiness Ht. Zone Amur Maple 20’ 2 Japanese Barberry 7’ 4 E Siberian Pea-tree 18’ 2 E Sweet Fern 4’ 2 B Russian Olive 20’ 2 B Common Witch-hazel 15’ 4 E Common Juniper 3-30’ 2 B Red-cedar 10-90' 2 B Beauty-bush 10’ 4 E Amur Privet 15’ 3 E Common Matrimonyvine 5’ 4 E Bayberry 9' 2 B Eastern Ninebark 9’ 2 E Beach Plum 6’ 3 B Alder Buckthorn - 18’ 2 E Fragrant Sumac 3’ 3 Shining Sumac 30’ 4 B Smooth Sumac 9—15’ 2 B Staghorn Sumac 30’ 3 B Rugosa Rose 6’ 2 E Nannyberry 30’ 2 B = Must be moved carefully with a ball of soil 50 SCREENING TREES FOR NORMAL SOILS Acer platanoides Catalpa speciosa Cercidiphyllum japom'cum *Juniperus chinensis Moms alba *Picea abies *Picea pungens *Pinus resinosa *Pinus strobus Populus m’gra ‘Italica’ *Pseudotsaga menziesii Quercus borealz’s Quercus palustm’s Salix alba ‘Tristis’ Salim babylom'ca Salim X blanda Salix X elegantissima *Thuja occidentalis Tilia cordata *Thuja occidental'is U Imus parm'folia Viburnum pmnifolium Viburnum sieboldii * = Evergreen E = Easy to move Norway Maple Northern Catalpa Katsura Tree Chinese Juniper White Mulberry Norway Spruce Colorado Spruce Red Pine Eastern White Pine Lombardy Poplar Douglas-fir Red Oak Pin Oak Golden Weeping Willow Babylon Weeping Willow Wisconsin or N iobe Weeping Willow Thurlow Weeping Willow American Arbor-vitae Little-leaf Linden Canada Hemlock Chinese Elm Blackhaw Siebold Viburnum Hardiness Ht. 90’ 90’ 60-100' 60’ 45’ 150' 100’ 75’ 100—150’ 90' 100-300’ 75’ 75’ 75' 30’ 40’ 40’ 60' 90’ 90’ 50’ 15’ 30’ B = Must be moved carefully with a ball of soil SCREENING SHRUBS FOR NORMAL SOILS Camus mas Forsythia X intermedia Lom'cera maackii podocarpa Philadelphus coronam’us Rhamnus frangula ‘Columnaris’ Rosa multifiora Rosa setigera Spiraea X vanhouttei Syringa amurensis japom'ca Sym'nga X chine'nsis Syringa josikaea Syringa X prestoniae Syringa vulgaris Taxus cuspidata * = Evergreen E = Easy to move Cornelian Cherry Border Forsythia Amur Honeysuckle var. Sweet Mock-orange Tallhedge Buckthorn Jananese Rose Prairie Rose Vanhoutte Spiraea Japanese Tree Lilac Chinese Lilac Hungarian Lilac Preston Lilac Common Lilac Japanese Yew 51 N O 3 m *i‘ mNmNMMApspw wmwwww w HM Awmwwmh Amm## mm m WE HEM Hardiness Ht. 24' 20’ 50' B = Must be moved carefully with a ball of soil N O 3 <5 Amwwmhhpmmefimp wammmmmmwwwwmw Appendix F. Technological Developments in the Scrap Industry The following is the text of a presenta- tion by I. Proler, Proler Steel Corporation, the largest firm in the scrap shredding business, delivered in October 1964 to the ISIS-sponsored meetings of the National Conference on Auto Salvage. I am here to discuss with you the bal- ing, shearing, and shredding methods of preparing the scrapped automobile for steel mill or foundry consumption, and the ultimate rolling of it into finished steel plates and shapes for fabrication into con- sumer items. First, I will go back 25 to 30 years when the only method of salvaging scrap from an abandoned or a scrapped automobile was to chop up or torch the body into pieces small enough to be baled in a small hydraulic baler. This end product was known as a No. 2 bundle. The understructure of the auto- mobile was cut by acetylene torch or small alligator shear into 5- by 11/2-ft. pieces or smaller, known in the trade as No. 2 heavy melting steel. Both of these items were consumed in open hearth furnaces. The No. 2 bundles were approximately 30 by 24 by 24 in. or smaller. However, they contained the contaminants of paint, wood, nonferrous metal attachments, and so forth. The understructure contained 'copper gasoline tubing as well as the cop- per wiring attachments. 52 While No. 2 bundles and No. 2 heavy melting steel were consumed by the steel mills when steel demand was high, in most cases, they had to be diluted with hot metal from the mill’s blast furnace to keep the residual copper and other nonferrous contaminants to a minimum, and to meet the ultimate specifications of the finished steel product. As the years progressed, the hydraulic balers became larger, and the alligator shears, in some cases, were replaced by the larger hydraulic guillotine shears. Now the the balers were able to consume an entire automobile, with or without the under- structure. The hydraulic shears were able to take an entire car, compress it and shear it into a scrap item known in the trade today as automobile slabs, or sheared auto scrap. These methods, while they increased the number of automobiles that could be proc- essed, still did not eliminate the contam- inants while the steelmakers were restricted to higher and more rigid specifications for their finished products. This scrap could only find a home when it was attractively priced and when steel production reached a point when it was practical to consume the scrap in a bath with the necessary hot metal, generated by the blast furnace, to produce an ingot which could then be rolled into a satisfactory steel product. During this period, Proler Steel Cor- poration operated the largest baling press in the world in Houston, Texas. This giant could consume and hydraulically compress two automobiles at one time, in 11/2 to 2 minutes. By this method, I might add, a tremendous number of automobiles went into finished bales. Yet, there were many times when these bales had to be accumu- lated and held in inventory until steel mill buyers found this item attractive for their mill, or steel production was high enough to absorb this product, or perhaps until it could be exported to friendly foreign nations. (At this point, a film was shown which was narrated by Mr. Proler.) In this first scene, a grapple picks up the automobile from an accumulation of auto- mobiles in the scrap processor’s yard. The entire auto minus the radiator, the motor, and the tires will be dropped into a hy- draulic press and will be compressed into a No. 2 bundle. This scene shows an automobile being lifted by a crane into a large hydraulic guillotine shear. This auto, with the under- structure, will be compressed and then sheared into a product known an automo- bile slabs or sheared auto scrap, as I men- tioned before. These shears can, I imagine, shear perhaps 20 or 25 cars an hour. You will note in the shearing device that the contaminants are torn loose and fall to the ground as the finished shear product is moved down the conveyor and loaded into cars. The next scene shows the Prolerizer plant in Kansas City, Missouri, where whole automobiles are moved in from the rural and surrounding areas by trailer trucks, by wreckers’ trucks, and by indi- vidual owners. The cars come in from an area 250 to 300 miles from the plant. At the Proler plant in Houston, cars are shipped in by railroad from 500 to 600 miles away. Some cars are flattened and stacked on flat-bed trailers, 25 to 30 to a load. Some autos are burned before they come in, some are not. The auto is loaded onto the conveyor of the Prolerizer to begin its preparation as Prolerized steel. The scrap moves on a 200- ft conveyor that is fed by two, sometimes ' three, cranes. In'this process, automobiles, 53 washing machines, refrigerators, and sim- ilar articles are moved through a furnace to eliminate lead, solder, and other con- taminants. The Prolerizer is a gigantic mill that consumes and reduces these items into small bits. After the first step has been completed, the refining process begins. Some contaminants still remain. In the first magnetic separation, some are re- moved because the ferrous material ad- heres to the magnet. It is then carried away for further processing. Rubber from the doors, the porcelain, the dirt, and the undercoating all are poi- son to steel mills. We are eliminating these materials in the Prolerizing process. This unwanted material moves by conveyor into a hopper for use as landfill. The nonferrous scrap produced by this method is recovered. The finished product is high-quality scrap. The contaminants and the nonfer- rous material has been eliminated, and the end product is a clean and dense scrap widely consumed by domestic and foreign steel mills and foundries. In the latter part of 1956 and through- out 1957, the research and development- engineering department of the Proler Steel Corporation worked to devise a method whereby contaminants could be eliminated from wrecked or abandoned automobiles and converted into a product for steel mills and foundries. It had to be a product of high quality and low enough in residual elements so that the consumers could use it steadily in their furnaces to make an ingot or finished product within the speci- fications required by metallurgists and their customers and which could be fab- ricated into automobiles, household appli- ances, construction materials, and other items. It was our feeling that if we could re- turn the auto, the refrigerator, and the stove back to the steel that it was before it was made into those products, we could have a good, clean, high-quality grade of scrap. We have done this at Proler. Al- though we operated the largest baling press in the world at the time, we made it obsolete with the development of our Prolerizer plant. This new type scrap has been copy- righted under the name of Prolerized steel scrap, and this method is covered by US. Patent No. 2,943,930 issued June 5, 1960. On August 29, 1961, a reissue patent, No. 25,034, was issued that strengthens the ex- istent patent process and the product made by the process. Prolerized scrap is a homogeneous type heavy metal scrap, chemically pure and physically dense. This material will weigh approximately 80 to 90 lbs. per cubic ft., and we have had some material that Pro- lerized as high as 105 lbs. per cubic ft. This material can and is being moved by electromagnets, conveyors, and grapples. It is small and dense enough to be stored in a hopper. It can and is being consumed in all types of cast iron and steelmaking facilities. I would like to quote, if I may, from Mr. R. L. Gray, past chairman of the board of Armco Steel Corporation, who, after mak- ing an inspection of our plant in Houston, stated, “The Prolerized process to me rep- resents the greatest contribution to the steel industry ever made by the suppliers of scrap metal.” At the present time, there are four Prol- erizer plants operating in the United States. Besides the plant in Houston, we operate the Prolerized Steel Corporation with our associates, I. J. Cohen and Com- pany in Kansas City. A plant is operated in Los Angeles in association with Hugo Neu Company. Our newest plant, the Prolerized Chicago Corporation, began 54 operation in the latter part of 1963 in con- junction and association with the M. S. Kaplan Company. These plants can consume and process two autos per minute, or 800 to 1,000 autos a day. Two or three additional plants of this type are now in the planning stage, and will be erected in the eastern part of the country. One or two more will be put up in the midwest and there will be a plant in the San Francisco Bay area in the near future. Prolerized steel has been tested and melted by most of the major steelmakers in the country. Mills such as Armco, La- Clede Steel, Northwestern Steel and Wire, and numerous other consumers through- out the country, as well as steelmakers in Europe and the Far East, commonly refer to this item as a “steelmaker’s dream” be- cause it is so versatile in their steelmaking procedures. All of the Prolerizer plants that have been constructed have met with all of the air pollution, smoke, and dust require- ments of the metropolitan communities in which they operate. This has been accom- plished by the construction of special and elaborate equipment to curb possible pol- lution conditions. The Department of Air Pollution of Chicago stated, “Our observation leads us to the conclusion that the Prolerizer has provided a significant contribution to the , alleviation of a major problem of air pollu- tion which confronts Chicago and other major cities. All potential sources of air pollution in the Prolerizer organization are controlled by passing the exhaust gasses through an elaborate type of control de- vice. This insures to the greatest possible extent that no gasses or other air pollu- tion is projected into the air during the Prolerizer operation.” Prolerized scrap is not made by a single machine, but a series of machines and de- vices including air pollution control equip- ment, constituting a fully integrated plant. The cost of an installation of this type is upwards of $2 million, according to the location. Prior to the development of this process, auto wreckers and scrap operators could only move scrap automobiles when- ever the market was economically sound. With the advent of the Prolerizer, a con- stant market is available for the end prod- uct. Consequently, a fair price is paid to the auto wreckers, or individuals who scrap abandoned automobiles. While these plants are located in metro- politan areas, the price paid for cars draws them from a 250 to 300 mile radius of the plant. Some rail shipments are moved within a 500 to 600 mile radius of the plant. I might add that seldom has a scrap op- erator been acclaimed by the auto wreck- ing industry for his part in auto salvaging. The confirmed feeling of the wreckers to- ward the Prolerizer coming into their area is one of gratitude, for they benefit as well as the community as a whole. We have developed a way of continu- ously disposing of the older vehicles that have been a risk and a problem to the en- tire community. By providing a steady market for the cars and by disintegrating the vehicle into choice scrap, we have greatly assisted the wrecker, as well as per- formed a community service. The old dumps are being cleaned. Old automobiles that usually provide rodent harborage as well as constitute a fire hazard have been eliminated. In closing, I would like to state that the symptoms of the problem that we face have been diagnosed by ourselves and members of the Institute. We feel that we have the necessary tools and knowhow to cure this malady. Through the ingenuity of this industry, and the construction of future Prolerizer plants through the coun- try, I firmly believe that this cancer that has plagued the communities of this coun- try will definitely be cured. Appendix G. Used-Tire Reuse One of the most serious problems result- ing from the increasing number of vehicles traveling our roadways is the accumula- ‘tion of used tires for which no satisfactory method of reuse or disposal has been im- plemented. The demand for used rubber is ‘not sufficient to consume more than a frac- tion of the used tire inventory. Disposal of tires at sanitary land fill sites has not been successful since the tires rise to the surface due to air pockets. Because of the difficul- ties associated with disposal of tires, most dumps are charging very high prices per ton to accept them. Recent research conducted by the Coal Research Center of the US. Bureau of Mines in Pittsburgh, using an idea origin- ally conceived by scientists of the Fire- stone Tire & Rubber Company, has shown promising results as a potential solution to the problem of accumulating used tires. Large quantities of chemicals, oil liquids, gas, and tar have been obtained from dis- 56 carded tires by heating them in a closed vessel. Tires are fed into the reactor and, as they are heated, they break down. High Btu gas for heat and power is obtained and the liquids are distilled into valuable chemicals. A series of tests at 500 °C produced 140 gal of liquid oils and 1,500 cubic ft of gas per ton of tires. The gas is comparable in heating value to natural gas. The chem- icals obtained from the tires are similar to those produced from coal carbonization (the heating of coal without air), includ- ing benzene, toluene, xylene, and naphthas. These tests indicate that the solution to the problem of discarded tires may be solved in the future. Firestone is currently looking at the economic feasibility of proc- essing tires in this manner. Until this process is proven economically feasible, continuing investigation is re- quired to determine the feasibility of other methods for breaking tires. Appendix H. . [Gilbertson, W. E., R. J. Black, L. E. Crane, and P. L. Davis] Solid waste handling in Metropolitan areas. Public Health Service Publication No. 1554. Washington, US. Govern- ment Printing Office, 1966. 41 p. . Maryland State Department of Health, Environmental Health Serv- ices, Division of Solid Wastes. Solid waste disposal in Maryland: a five- year, ten-point program. Aug. 1966. . Baltimore City Health Department. Air Polution—open burning ordi- nance No. 1062. June 1967. . Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, Inc. 1968 yearbook. 1968. . National Conference on Auto Salvage sponsored by Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel. Proceedings of the Na- tional Conference on Auto Salvage. Oct. 1964. . Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, Inc. Green/screen. . US. Department of Commerce, Busi- ness and Defense Services Adminis- tration. Iron and steel scrap con- sumption problems. Mar. 1966. 57 Bibliography 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. US. Bureau of Mines. Automobile dis- posal, a national problem; case studies of factors that influence the accumulation of automobile scrap. 1967. . Hudson, L. D., and Crawford, Murphy and Tilly, Inc. Definition of major problems of waste pollution control in Illinois auto salvage industry. Mar. 1968. State of California. Vehicle code. 1967. Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus Laboratories. The removal and utilization of junked automobiles in eastern Kentucky. Mar. 1967. Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel, Inc. Specifications for Iron and steel scrap. Jan. 1968. Department of Motor Vehicles, State Maryland. General motor vehicle laws. 1967. V Storey, W. S. Natural resources . . . man-made. Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel. Jan. 1966. Lownie, H. W., Jr. Two directions for scrap. Battelle Memorial Institute. Jan. 1965. 0.5. GOVEIIMENT PRINTING OFFICI : “To OF—ITI-ul 378-884 0 — 70 (Face p. 58) No. 1 EXHIBIT Ill. STATE AND COUNTY DATA—CURRENT AND PROJECTED COUNTIES State of City of - Maryland Baltimore Alle— Anne Balti- Calvert Caroline Carroll Cecil Charles Dor- Frederick Garrett Harford Howard Kent Mont- Prince Queen Saint Somerset Talbot , Washing— Wicomico Wor— g‘any Arundel more chester gomery Georges Anne’s Mary’s ton cester Estimated number of auto 686—717 36 16 119 32 4 12-16 32—‘50 24 24 30—35 13 3—4 19 10 1 3 100 56 21 13 4 18 6 5 dismantlers. Estimated vehicles in dis- 151,990— 15,000 6,500 3,000 50,000— 400 1,000 4,500 2,540 4,000 700 7,100 2,000 15,000 750 100 800 25,000 500 1,000— 300 500— 8,000 1,800 1,500 mantlers’ yards. 162,790 60,000 1,500 800 Scrap Processors—type of (2 Shredders (2Shredders (1 Shredder equipment. planned) planned) planned) Shears— 8 Shears — 5 Shear— 1 Shears— 1 Shears — 1 Balers—6 Balers~3 Baler—1 Baler—1 Baler—1 Vehicles abandoned an- 22,685— 7,500 150 25—50 410 20 100 800 1,000 1,000 100 250 100—200 3,000 75 100 1,800 4,000 10-50 500 200 100-200 350—400 100 500 nually (estimated). 23,180 Registered vehicles to 371,000 47,000 149,000 309,000 9,000 14,000 40,000 27,000 22,000 18,000 47,000 12,000 57,000 33,000 10,000 282,000 312,000 11,000 20,000 9,000 16,000 59,000 37,000 16,000 nearest thousand Public 126 2 2 10 3 3 1 8 5 1 5 3 4 10 2 3 1 6 12 10 7 0 12 8 8 dumps Private 12 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 dumps Solid waste disposal 1968 . . estimates—in tons by 2,709,444— 669,045- 65,481— 199,545- 425,502— 14,089- 15,337— 46,654— 42,369— 28,952— 22,864— 64,430— 16,104— 73,790— 37,872— 11,665- 328,120— 434,788— 12,636— 32,426— 14,534- 17,133— 78,278— 38,960— 18,870— county (minimum and 3,386,805 836,062 81,851 249,532 531,878 17,611 19,172 58,318 53,509 36,190 28,580 80,537 20,622 92,956 47,340 14,582 410,150 543,485 15,795 40,533 18,168 21,416 97,847 48,883 23,588 maximum). Forecast of junked autos 1968 124,187 28,276 2,128 8,411 21,830 597 572 , 1,866 1,319 1,289 916 2,231 478 2,683 1,664 470 21,240 20,350 469 1,015 482 780 2,778 1,778 832 1969 130,625 28,747 2,188 8,928 23,156 624 581 1,942 1,370 1,361 943 2,329 487 2,797 1,781 480 22,676 21,940 482 1,061 483 803 2,888 1,834 848 1970 136,955 29,179 2,243 9,439 24,474 650 589 2,015 1,418 1,431 969 2,422 496 2,907 1,898 489 24,111 23,525 493 1,104 483 824 2,995 1,887 862 1971 143,155 29,572 2,294 9,947 25,773 676 597 2,086 1,466 1,502 995 2,514 504 3,014 2,011 498 25,499 25,077 504 1,147 482 844 3,098 1,937 875 1972 149,482 30,040 2,351 10,463 27,092 702 605 2,159 1,515 1,572 1,021 2,610 512 3,117 2,126 507 26,913 26,640 516 1,191 482 866 3,206 1,990 889 1973 155,899 30,552 2,412 10,984 28,429 729 615 2,236 1,565 1,645 1,048 2,707 521 3,231 2,259 517 28,350 28,209 528 1,236 483 889 3,316 2,046 905 1974 162,209 31,020 2,469 11,500 29,745 756 624 2,310 1,614 1,715 1,074 2,801 529 3,342 2,367 526 29,771 29,768 540 1,280. 483 910 3,422 2,098 919 1975 168,507 31,448 2,523 12,008 31,033 782 632 2,382 1,661 1,785 1,100 2,894 537 3,448 2,481 535 31,166 31,305 551 1,323 483 931 3,524 2,150 932 1976 174,557 31,865 2,579 12,514 32,313 808 640 2,453 1,709 1,854 1,126 2,987 546 3,554 2,594 545 32,547 . 32,831 563 1,367 483 952 3,626 2,203 946 1977 180,816 32,346 2,636 13,029 33,614 834 649 2,525 1,758 1,925 1,153 3,082 554 3,662 2,717 555 33,965 - 34,380 575 1,411 484 975 3,733 2,257 961 1978 187,077 32,845 2,692 13,549 34,917 861 657 2,598 1,808 1,996 1,180 3,173 563 3,773 2,886 565 35,386 35,933 587 1,455 484 996 3,839 2,310 976 1979 193,543 33,408 2,755 14,077 36,251 888 667 2,672 1,862 2,069 1,209 3,268 573- 3,882 3,043 576 36,821 37,495 600 1,500 486 1,019 3,949 2,367 992 59 4'53? 1- 33% 378-884 0 - 70 (Face p. 58) No. 2 EXHIBIT IV. NEW CAR SALES—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED COUNTIES State of City of Maryland Baltimore Allegany Anne Baltimore Calvert Caroline Carroll Cecil Charles Dorchester Frederick Garrett Harford Howard Kent Mont- Prince Queen Saint Somerset Talbot Washing- Wicomico Worcester Actual: Arundel gomery Georges Anne Mary’s ton 1948 47,230 19,778 1,131 2,177 6,455 267 470 962 537 421 522 1,089 321 1,254 546 278 3,983 2,211 301 398 482 493 1,463 961 600 1949 61,568 24,697 1,596 3,163 8,367 331 544 1,347 835 602 700 1,534 444 1 ,684 721 431 4,861 3,419 410 676 516 648 1,821 1,300 741 1950 84,233 32,482 2,265 4,272 12,271 431 713 1,645 999 745 876 1,918 507 2,100 944 434 11 ,666 8,358 446 914 654 750 2,393 1,686 951 1951 76,874 26,071 1,761 3,703 10,559 404 591 1,481 950 729 736 1,564 516 2,919 806 442 10,008 7,985 388 767 586 , 638 2,023 1,509 801 1952 65,063 21,751 1,349 3,345 8,834 343 445 1,1 11 926 645 717 1,297 422 1,624 694 402 8,018 7,692 350 646 434 518 1,647 1,188 612 1953 86,145 28,707 1,899 4,371 12,477 441 601 1,468 1,151 880 924 1,743 513 I 1,988 839 544 11,099 9,753 468 789 611 720 2,372 1,652 883 1954 82,594 33,034 2,037 ‘ 5,439 15,193 482 606 1,583 1,302 983 907 1,816 501 2,258 796 513 14,161 12,229 481 816 607 737 2,625 1,704 704 1955 116,897 37,362 2,175 6,508 17,910 524 612 1,699 1 ,454 1,087 890 1,889 489 2,528 1,107 481 17,223 14,706 495 864 604 754 2,878 1 ,757 926 1956 99,621 31,152 1,974 5,957 16,153 458 566 1,625 1,255 918 809 1,573 494 2,128 1,055 440 13,988 12,145 361 836 452 623 2,210 1,575 727 1957 97,425 29,356 2,015 5,612 15,772 456 520 1,525 1,147 975 770 1,877 490 2,116 989 449 13,388 11,357 461 734 465 691 2,279 1,613 743 1958 79,469 22,084 1,515 4,949 13,343 449 353 1,268 891 720 614 1,496 312 1,597 865 330 12,801 10,463 312 587 320 553 1 ,802 1,244 541 1959 97,276 24,810 1,827 6,209 17,069 531 I 451 1,443 1,035 981 765 1,718 350 2,009 1,217 407 16,295 13,645 41 1 845 382 692 2,033 1,492 659 1960 114,339 27,036 2,209 7,016 20,804 566 547 1,588 1,234 1,099 850 1,969 440 2,353 1,434 512 20,067 16,916 476 946 449 794 2,370 1,725 822 1961 110,319 24,964 1,921 6,979 19,241 497 461 1 ,487 1 ,051 1,190 887 1,863 360 2,214 1,434 428 20,182 17,301 391 916 449 739 2,284 1,554 726 1962 129,511 27,748 2,245 8,601 24,029 664 621 1,721 1 ,312 1,540 932 2,230 430 2,826 1,684 424 22,886 21,164 472 1,088 465 802 2,890 1,808 895 1963 151,690 31,961 2,527 10,593 27,621 717 608 2,141 1,605 1,557 1,050 2,631 534 3,467 2,176 478 27,357 25,441 561 1,111 521 880 3,321 2,031 909 1964 163,080 31,748 2,739 11,484 28,512 789 627 2,478 1,619 1,799 1,085 2,917 572 3,836 2,472 569 29,290 29,989 526 1,156 517 901 3,367 2,150 966 1965 183,604 34,147 2,968 12,941 33,641 874 736 2,738 2,065 1,940 1,247 3,276 674 1,489 N 2,663 577 33,856 34,053 607 1,422 567 989 4,084 2,447 1,153 1966 180,911 31,858 2,179 14,226 33,314 912 790 2,709 1,667 1,828 1,191 3,349 654 4,715 2,767 597 31,970 34,261 610 1,582 594 1,029 i 4,002 2,472 1,105 1967 172,839 30,290 2,518 13,206 30,961 655 649 2,564 1,553 1,797 1,106 3,006 519 4,477 2,584 549 30,916 33,884 580 1,462 502 998 3,683 2,012 851 Projected: ‘ 1968 177,345 33,244 2,649 12,404 32,733 823 658 2,496 1,753 1,881 1,155 3,033 561 3,613 2,620 562 32,953 34,055 577 1,389 501 974 3,698 2,257 973 1969 183,760 33,713 2,707 12,965 34,073 850 667 2,569 1,804 1 ,954 1,182 3,128 570 3,722 2,730 572 34,402 34,637 589 1,434 501 996 3,805 2,312 988 1970 190,175 34,183 2,766 13,527 35,413 877 675 2,643 1,854 2,026 1,209 3,223 578 3,831 2,840 582 35,851 36,218 601 1,478 501 1,018 3,912 2,366 1,002 1971 196,590 34,652 2,825 14,088 36,753 904 684 2,717 1,905 2,099 1,236 3,318 587 3,940 2,950 592 37,300 37,800 613 1 ,523 501 1,040 4,019 2,421 1,017 1972 203,005 35,121 2,884 14,650 38,093 932 692 2,791 1 ,956 . 2,171 1,263 3,413 596 4,049 3,060 602 38,749 39,382 625 1,567 501 1,062 4,127 2,476 1,031 1973 209,420 35,591 2,942 15,211 39,433 959 700 2,864 2,007 2,243 1 ,290 3,508 604 4,157 3,170 612 40,197 40,963 637 i 1 ,612 501 1,084 4,234 2,530 1,046 1974 215,835 36,060 3,001 15,772 40,773 986 709 2,938 2,058 2,316 1,317 3,603 613 4,266 3,280 622 41,646 42,545 649 1,656 501 1,106 4,341 2,585 1,060 1975 222,250 36,529 3,060 16,334 42,113 1,013 717 3,012 2,108 2,388 1,344 3,698 621 4,375 3,390 632 43,095 44,126 661 1,701 501 1,128 4,448 2,639 1,075 1976 228,665 36,998 3,1 18 16,895 43,453 1,040 726 3,085 2,159 2,461 1,371 3,793 630 4,484 3 3,500 642 44,544 45,708 673 1 ,745 501 1,150 4,555 2,694 1,089 1977 235,080 37,468 3,177 17,457 44,793 1,067 734 3,159 2,210 2,533 1 ,398 3,889 639 4,593 3,610 652 45,993 47,290 686 1 ,790 501 1,172 4,663 2,749 1,104 1978 241,495 37,937 3,236 18,018 46,133 1,094 742 3,233 2,261 2,605 1,425 3,984 647 4,701 3,720 662 47,441 48,871 698 1,834 501 1,193 4,770 2,803 1,118 60 378-884 0 — 70 (Face p. 58) N0. 3 I ACTIVITY EggEND .—————‘ ( PROBLEM ) \___——-—J YES VEHICLE CLAIMED? : " : EXHIBIT V. A1 —Vehicle Disposal Current Flow MOTOR VEHICLES )‘7 v VEHICLE To I ( BE DISCARDED ) To . NEW OWNER : 7 AS A MEANS OF A JUNK YARD I > ( INVENTORY ) . To EE‘QXER m mo W DISMANTLER DISPOSAL v METHOD? ’— —-N T“ '——> ( ESTER? ) ,___...__. SCRAP PROCESSOR I ABANDON < 7 —-—— v CONTACT OWNER I TO PUBLIC '—-> ( DUMP ) DUMP ABANDONED VEHICLE r——-—-——\ OWNER‘S PROPERTY \_._—.1 ( ON VEHICLE (D ON CT HE R PR NATE PROPERTY T ON COMPLAINT T PUBLIC $3 3%?" PROPERTY OWNER COLLECTION TRACE FOUND ? or VEHICLE F—u’: VEHICLE BY POLICE OWNERSHIP HOLD VEHICLE CONTINUE CHECK L—_——J O I SELL AT PUBLIC AUCTION ) I TO NEW OWNER nun-.4 As A MEANS OF I TO AUTO DIS MANTLER u I TO SCRAP PROCESSOR »__.I A /——A INVENTORY ( JUNK YARD ) h \ / v A AA SCRAP YARD ) INVE NTORY v SE . 1 m It . , an wwwmm .th 378-884 0 - 70 (Face p. 58) No. 4 r STRIPPED VEHICLE HUIJCS \————I EXHIBIT VI. A ,é—A IUNK ( VEHICLE ) W r————\ IU NK A BANDONED DEALE R VEHICLE ACCE PT 9 ‘ ‘————d m FA r——-——\ AES‘H-ETICALLY JUNK VEHICLE A INVENTORY HUNACCEPTABLE ) &—-——-——-‘ \——7~— I DIRECT SALE CUSTOMER HULKS DEMAND FOR HULKS REQUIRE BURNING FOR FUTURE A c 3 SAII STRIPPED VEHICLE ) A2— Vehicle Dismantling/Processing Current Flow LEGEND 1 ACTIVITY r—‘———‘—\ ( PROBLEM ) \_—————‘ r---——\ AES’I'HICALLY ( UNACCEP'I‘ABLE s_—_¢ I TRANS PORT ( ACCEPTED BY USER AA RAW MATERIAIS INVENTORY ) T STEEL AND CASTING PRODUCTION A: MANUFACTURED (PRODUCT W v 62 378-884 0 - 70 (Face p. 53) No. 5 VEHICLE TO BE DISCARDED KNOW PROPER DISPOSAL DISPOSAL EXCESSIVE EXHIBIT VII. Incorporating Recommendations) A A—A MOTOR VEHICLES v VEHICLE DUMPING AREAS ABANDON VEHICLE ? ( PROPERTY IS DISPOSAL POSSIBLE ? ABANDONED VEHICLE A PUBLIC NUISANCE MUST BE REPORTED AND/OR DISPOSED FINE UP TO $100.00 ON VEHICLE OWNER'S T I TO NEW OWNER B1 —Vehicle Disposal (Projected Flow, Conclusons and 4.4.2. INTEGRATED DMV RECORDS UNDER HIGHWAY SAFETY STANDARD UP TO $200.00 I GOVERNMENT I TO AUTO DISMANTLER ‘_' * AS A MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION OWNED I COLLECTION TO POINT FREE DISPOSAL AREA ‘— A JUNK YARD INVE NTORY INCREASING INCREASING DEMAND FOR SCRAP DEMAND DUE TO I LA :gMP H SCRAP YARD h PROCESSOR POLICE/ INDUSTRY AGREE ME ms I INFORM POLICE ( INVE NTORY I I VEHICLE TRACE VEHICLE- OWNERSHIP HARGE PLUS F INE RETRIEVAL BY POLICE R AGENT DISCOVERY SR OR COMPLAINT TO POLICE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY ‘74 OWNER COSTS OLICE/ INDUSTRY FINE VEHICLE ABANDONERS AGREE ME NTS I ACTIVITY CONCLUSION OR RECOMMEND- I . ‘ ( PROBLEM ) ‘_#4 5 ( ENTITY v I SE LL VE HICLES TO COOPERATING TD AUTO DISMANTLER A JUNK YARD ( INVE NTORY ) ‘Tfi v TO SCRAP PROCESSOR» I ILA SCRAP YARD INVENTORY I v 63 378-884 0 - 70 (Face p. 58) No. 6 IUNK ( VEHICLE ) V—7 VEHICLE IUNK ( INVENTORY ) DEMAND EXHIBIT VIII. Incorporating Conclusions and Recommendations) POLICE/ INDUSTRY AGREEMENTS INCREASING VALUE OI" VEHICLES REQUIRE SCREENING I FOR S YES I STRIP VE HICLE FOR FUTURE SALE —’I FOR DIRECT SALE STRIPPED VE H IC LE HULKS W ‘— PARTS INVE N-TORY ) INCREASING DEMAND CAUSED BY EXPANSION OF CONTINUOUS CASTING AND ELECTRIC FURNACES REQUIRE BURNING 82— Vehicle Dismantling/ Processing (Projected Flow, INTERIM CONTROLLED SHREDDERS PRODUCE BETTER QUALITY SCRAP GROWTH OF CONTINUOUS CASTING PROCESS CAUSES INCREASING DEMAND FOR SCRAP EXPANDING USE or ELECTRIC FURNACES INCREASES DEMAND FOR SCRAP ACTIVITY CONCLUSION OR RECOMMENDATION LEGEND ”—— ( PROBLEM ) I DEMAND FOR PROCESSED SCRAP? SCRAP YARD I ‘ INVENTORY ) TRANS PORT TO SCRAP PROCESSORS SH RE DDERS REQUIRE NO , _ REQUIRE SCREENING I PROCESS SCRAP SHRE DDING CREA'I'ES TE C H NICALLY A9CEP‘IABLE 'ro USERS 2’ MATERIALS INVENTORY W I STEEL AND CASTING PRODUCTION g MA NUFACTURE PRODUCTS D, V7 v ACCEPTABLE SCRAP lInc. IERKELEV Illfliisl I CDEBHSBSLS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICE _ PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE PUBLICATION NO. 2027