New Mexico's Airand VVater-----

the endangered essentials.- Harvey Mudd II

A Federal air pollution control official statedrecently, "There is no clean air left in the UnitedStates." ew Mexico is no exception: smog, thatnoxious pric e of progress, has arrived in ew Mex­ico, as anyone who has been here long enough toremember how it was before can testify-days soclear that Mt. Taylor could be seen from Albu­qu erque and San Antonio Mountain was sharp andclear from Tesuque Hill, Those days are rare now.And the day is coming when the Sandia Crest willbarely be visible from downtown Albuquerque­the day will come unless New Mexicans take an un­equivocal stand about what they value in the Landof Enchantment.

New Mexico's surface water is among the clean­est in the continental Unit ed States. It is still pos­sible to find streams that carry no man-mad e con­tamin ation in the Pecos or the Gila Forests. Eventhe upper Rio Grande is relatively clean. Th ere isno guarantee, however, that such situation will notchange under the pressures of increased populationand industrial development. It must not be allowedto change.Air

A qui ck look at the air and water situation asit stands now : air in New Mexico is contaminatedby 1,597,336 tons of pollution annually. Of this fig­ure, transportation , the ubiquitous automobile, ac­counts for fully 50%; industrial processes accountfor 31% ; this includes oil and gas production inthe southeast counties, copper smelting in the Dem­ing-Silver City area, and sawmills in most mountain­ous areas, most conspicuously in the Espanola andAlamogordo areas. Power generation accounts forapproximately 10% of the statewide total , some164,741 tons per year at the present rat es of ac­tivity. Th ere is one significant source of pow er gen­eration pollution in the state- the Arizona PublicService Company/New Mexico Public Service Com­pany facility near Farmington. Th ese coal burningplants generate some 290 tons of fly ash per day­although only 100/0 of the state's air pollution totalcomes from the Farmington facility, fully 64% ofall the particulates (airborne solid wastes ) of thestate are generated by this one activity. Th e fly ashis spread by prevailing westerlies into the upperRio Grande Valley where it becomes the majorfactor in reducing visual range and the generalqu ality of the views. Th e blue haze that is so prev­alent from Albuquerque to Taos is attributable tothe fly ash. It has been tracked by air into theseareas; a satellite photograph shows the plumestretched from Farmington all the way to San Luis ,Colorado. Monitoring devices set up at Los Alamosby the Arizona Public Service Company detected

Arizona Pub lic Serv ice Co./New Mexico Pub lic Service Co.p/ont nea r Farm ington,N . M.

Photograph by Jon Samuelson

the fly ash. How ever, industry spokesmen havemade no statement concerning the quantities whichwere found. In addition to the fly ash, sulphur di­oxides and oxides of nitrogen are pollutants fromthe Four Comers power plant. Th e remaining 9%of the state's air pollution is contributed by miscel­laneous burning proc esses; public dump burningis a major contributor.

WaterTh e Health & Social Services Department indi­

cates that some 200 miles of New Mexico streamsare degraded due to inad equate or improperly operat­ed municipal sewage plants. It is .estimated that some280 industrial and business operations contributeto the contamination of streams. The most notableexample of a water polluter is the MolybdenumCorporation of America 's mine and processing plantat Questa. Consisting of a slurry of fine sand andsmall quantities of cyanide, the mill was te is trans­ported by pipe from the mill site in the Red RiverCanyon to settling ponds west of Questa. Th e siltsettles out and the decanted waters, including dis­solved chemicals , are allowed to enter the Red River.However, because of the abrasive qualities of theslurry, the transport pip es break, frequently spill­ing large quantities of waste into the Red Riverand eventua lly the Rio Grand e.

Bureau of Land ' Management officials believethat these breaks may affect fish populations inthe Red River. Moly Corp officials sta te that thedecanted water is pure enough to drink: the factremain s, however, that the decant pond, namedTurquoise Lak e in an attempt to tum it into a rec­reation area, will not support trout. The MolyCorp has requested permission to dump decant wa-

NMA July-August 1970 9

ter into the wild river sec tion of the Hio Grande;the Bureau of Land Management, which administersthe Wild Rivers Act , has at both the sta te andWashington levels turned down the request. Itis technically feasible for the Moly Corp to reuse thedecanted wat er at a capital cost of only one to twoper cent of the present capita l investm ent.

Agricultural run off con tain ing che mical fertiliz­ers and pesticides is becoming ano the r major sourceof sur face wat er pollution.

ew Mexico's ground wa ter supp lies are notin good condition . Of 330 public water supplies inthe sta te, 124 fa iled to meet United Stat es PublicHealth Service standards for chemical con ten t; near­ly a half of the tot al of 330 failed to meet biologicalstan dards . In creased use of gro und wa ters will in­evitably result in the lower ing of wat er tables, andthe spoilage, through the intrusion of brackish wa­ters, of many small privat e wells.

Of greater significance in discussing NewMexico's wat er is the ma tter of tot al supply. Thesta te has 2.5 mill ion acre feet ava ilable annually.E nvironmenta l Services Di vision of [ew MexicoHealth and Social Services estimates that at presentrates of agricultural use, this quantity will supporta population of 1.5 milli on people, only 500,000 morethan the present population. Long-ran ge sta te plan­ning should be begu n with reference to that figure.

The sate llite cities which are planned for theanta Fe area have given little or no attention

to the qu estion of over-all state wat er supply. Thewater resources of New Mexico ar e finit e, a factwhi ch may work to the stat e's ad vantage in se t­ting the limits of its population.

Anothe r pollution problem which will requirefarsighted planning is that of solid was tes. The 3mill ion daily pounds of refuse genera ted now re­quire some 200 acres per year in sanita ry land-filloperations. That figure, it is estima ted, will increaseto 500 acres per yea r by the yea r 2000. As long asthis disposal meth od is used , land-fill operationsmust be steered into appropria te areas, areas thathave no bett er social potential.

Ultim ately, however, the method must beabandoned in favor of a system which requires re­use of the raw material contained in our solid waste.The American one-use-only approach to materialsis profoundly wasteful and, at the same time, en­vironmenta lly destruct ive. The world's supply ofunrepl enishabl e raw ma teria l, iron , virgin forest,hydrocarbon fuels, etc.- is diminishing rapidly asour demand for mat erial goods expands . And , atthe oth er end of a product' s life, the vast quantityof American junk imposes severe economic and psy­chological stresses on our society . The only wayout of this double bind is to recycle.

The Air Standards

The quality of ew Mexico's environme nt isand will be controlled by the degree of public con­cern . The standards promulgated by the state's D e-

partment of H ealth & Social Services, and the lawsenacted by the legislature reflec t that degree ofconce rn.

New Mexico's air quality standards and reg­ulations, whi ch went into effect 26 February, 1970,are relati vely good as a result of a rather substan­tial amoun t of citizen's conce rn and expe rtise thatwas demonstrated at the public hearings last Sep ­temb er and October. On the positive side, ewMexico emissions' reg ulations are strict, but noteconomica lly prohibitive, wh en dealing with theemissions from aspha lt plants ( except portableplants ), gypsum plants, cement plants an d coa l­bu rning power plants . The fly ash emissions from theFo ur Corners power plants will, therefore, have tobe controlled 99% by 1 January, 1972, in the caseof Units 1, 2, 3 and 6, and by January, 1974, in thecase of Units 4 and 5, which are now operating at97% . This will reduce the present fly ash pollutionto ab out one-fifth of th e present problem. This isone of the best fly ash emission ( particulates) stand­ards in the nation. There is no sulphur-dioxide (SO~)

emission reg ulation in the sta te. The reg ulation forhydrogen-sulphide emissions from pap er pulp millsis the most stringent in the nation; even with thisstan da rd, how ever , odors would be detectabl e twomiles from a plant. There are no emission regul a­tions for per lite plants or for coppe r smelte rs, a ma­jor source of sulp hur-dioxide emiss ions.

The regul at ion conce rning sawmill wood was teburners is ade qua te . It will require some improve­ment of incinerator performan ce on all presently op~

cra ting units. Any unit operating after January 1,1975, will be required to operate at mu ch higherstanda rds (measure d in tenus of smoke density ).The eventua l goa l is to phase out this was teful meth­od of disposing of the sawmill by-products. Openburning of trash is now prohibited in New Mexicoexcept in the case of communities under 5,000 inpopulation with no public refuse collection service .Ce rta in forestry and agricultu ra l uses of fire, alongwi th the fireplace and the barbeque, are also ex­cep ted.

New Mexico also defin ed ambient air-qua litystandards (a measure of the overall quality of ourair) in the case of particulat es and SO~ . Ambientair standards simply set limits, for particular pol­lut ants, beyond whi ch the air will be consideredpolluted. These limits can be used to justify tight­en ing of emission regulations. Onl y emission regu­lati ons can be used to control pollutants issuing froma specific source. lew Mexico ambient air standardsfor particul ates are scandalous considering the exist­ing relatively high quality of our air. It allows anannual geometric mean of 60 micrograms per cubicmeter whi ch, if achieved, reduces visibility to amere 15 miles. ew Mexico's natural backgroundparticulat e levels probably run around 27 micro­grams per cubic meter; the existing standard al­lows, then, significant deterioration of existing airquality. The sulphur-dioxide standard is equally bad.

1 0 NMA July-August 1970

Please send these post cards today!

Th e env ironmenta l issues that confro nt ewMexico, the Unit ed States, and ultimately, th ehum an race, are, in the final analysis, far broad ­er than questions of specific contaminants andthe regulat ions for their con trol. Th e ultimateconcerns must be centered around an under­standing of man's relat ionship with the planetEarth and his right to a clean, healthy, and eco­logically balanced environment. It is now neces­sary to ask fund amental qu estion s concerningthe rights of man on thi s Ea rth and about ourattitudes toward population growth and indus­trial expansion. New Mexico Architecture sug­gests that its read ers put some of these qu es­tions to the two candida tes for Governor. Apost ca rd is provided for these ques tions. It ishoped that Mr. Bruce King and Mr. Pete Dom­enici will make a public answer to these qu es­tions.

At .03 part s per million, ew Mexico has actua llyaccepted a standa rd Icss stringe nt than those pro ­posed by the cities of St. Loui s and Kansas City .At .03 part s per million, adve rse cffccts to plantlife and hum an health have been noted .

Th e air qu alit y standa rds and regulations callbe streng thened at subsequen t hcarings before theHealth Board. Th e ambient air quali ty standardsfor particulates must be strengthened if we arc toprotect our views, a basic right of our citize ns andan imp ortant resource for the tourist ind ustry. Afigure of around 35 micrograms pcr cubic meterwould be more appropriate for New Mexico. Th esulphur-dioxid e ambi ent air standa rd must be low­ered to .015 parts per million to provide minimalhealth protection.

Sulphur-dioxide, incide ntally, combined withair-borne wa ter vapor becomes sulphuric acid(H~SO·' ) and thereb y a major maintenance problemfor man y bu ilding mater-ials: JP S04 is corrosive tomost materials, includinghuman lungs. Th e ambientsulphur-dioxide level in theSan Juan Basin is alrea dyexceeding the sta te stand­ard because of the powerplants. New Mexico Citi­zens for Clean Air andWater, a cit izen's groupwhich particip ated mostactively in the standards'hearing, also recomm endsthat visibility standa rds beset that will define the airas polluted when the abso­lut e visua l range is reduc­ed to a certa in point ­perh aps 100 miles. Emis­sion regulations must beincluded for sulphur-diox­ide and oxides of nitrogen ;and the regulations mustbe expanded to cover industri es not now included ,such as the copper smelters in the south.

\ V OHK FOH T H E FUTUHE.

The Air Law

Th e 1970 legislature mad e some promisingamendments to the Air Quality Control Act. Th eNew Mexico law now has some teeth in it, whichits "lobbied to death" predecessor lacked . Some im­provements arc found in the definitions: visibilityis now specifica lly included as a component of thepublic welfare which must be pro tec ted. Th e word"will" was replaced by "may" in the sec tion whichdescribed polluted air as air which " . . . will, withreasonab le pr obability, damage health, etc . .." Thisis a significant improvement from the legal pointof view, in that less ironclad evide nce is needed by

the Health Department or the citi zen in establishinga reason to act aga inst a pollut er. The langua ge ofthe new law, "may . . . damage health" allows actionbefore there has occurred damage to the citizensof the sta te. Th e old language, "will damage" essen­tially allowed industry to avoid being called a pol­luter until there was already irreversable deteriora­tion in the air and in the health of the citizen: Th eold "don't move until there is a crisis" syndrome.

Anoth er positi ve point was the consolida tionof the provision for mandat ory public hearings, withrights of citizen participation, for all regulat ionchanges and requests by industr y for permis sion tooperate below air quality regulations under a vari­ance . Atte mpts to include noxious odors in thedefinitions were defeat ed by catt le interests whofeare d for the sanctity of their feed lots.

Th e 1970 bill mad e some improvements ill theenfo rcemen t and penalty section of the ac t. Th e tools

now ava ilable to th eHealth and Social Ser vicesDepartment and to thecitizens include the usc ofa court injun ction aga insta polluter, a pro vision forcivi l penalti es of up to$1,000 per da y of viola­tion, a petty misdemeanorpro vision for such lesserenvi ronmenta l infract ionsas illegal open burningand remo val of an auto­mobil e smog control de­vice. Th e previous act on­ly pro vided for injun ctiverelief. Th e weakn ess hereis in the low "up to $1,000per day" fine . It is inade­qu at e for large polluterssuch as the utilities. Anearly version of the billcontained a fine of up to$5,000 per da y, a level

found in many states, until a final vote of the bill ,when a floor amendment introdu ced by Alfonso Mon­toya caused it to be reduced to $1,000 per day. Fu­ture sessions of the legislature must eleva te the up­per limits of the fine structu re so as to be a mean­ingful penalt y for the large offende r.

Anothe r job for the next legislati ve session isto establish the permit system in the sta te . A per­mit system allows some control over a new industrybefore it becomes a pollution problem. Under thi ssystem, the industry has to satisfy the Health andSocia l Services Department that its methods of pol ­lut ion contro l are adequa te to prevent harmfulemissions before it can pro ceed with construc tionof the plant . In the long run, this will save the in­du stry money-by avoiding legal battles with Healthand Social Services if their methods prove unsati s-

NMA July-August 1970 11

factory, and by avoiding costly remodeling to meetair quality requirements. The permit system alsogives HSS greater control over all sources in thesta te. The permit system was lost in the last sessionbecause the Health and Social ervices Departm entdid not feel itself financi ally or otherwise equippedto administer the program. Adequate funding is acontinuing problem-it is a fight which will occurat each session. In the last session, a record $250,000for pollution control was appropriated; however theover-all HSS budget was cut drastically, which re­duces the effectiveness of the appropriation.

Water Standards and LawNew Mexico's water quality standa rds are ade­

quate, but could use streng thening. They lack anystandard for turbidity (water clarity ), one of thepollution effects of the Moly Corp 's spills. Increasedturbidity in the Red River may have a detrim entaleffect on fish feedin g ability, on the overall life qu al­ity of the stream, and, of course, on the touri stindustry of the area which must count on good fish­ing as an asset. The "emission regulations" in deal­ing with water are measured in chemical oxygen de­mand (COD) and biological oxygen demand (BOD).The COD standard of 50 parts per million is now be­ing violated by the municipal sewage plants in theCity of Albuquerque.

Publi c hearings are now manda tory in any pro­ceeding in which the city would requ est permissionto continue operatio n under a variance.

In the last session of the legislature much ofwhat was done to improve the Water Quality Con­trol Act was identi cal to what was done for the airlaw; the establishment, for example, of a fine ofup to $1,000 per day in civil penalties. In the caseof water, this fine is even more obviously inade­quate than in the case of air. Difficult to disposeof pollutants can be held in holding tanks by anirresponsible industry, and then the accumulationof many days or weeks is "accidentally" dischargedinto the stream in one shot, at the low cost of only$1,000. The permit system must be incorporated inthe water law as well as into the air law. One for­ward step made in the last legislative session was

the addition of a "private citizen" to the seven­member Water Quality Control Board (VarianceBoard ). Citizen participation in environmental de­cisions is essential since most government agenciesare either too politi cally confined or too tied to pri­vate industry to provide the kind of active disin­terested input into the decision-making process. Gov­ernor Cargo has appointed a University of ew Mex­ico biologist who is also retained as a consultant byNew Mexico Public Service Company. This is hard­ly what the conservationi st had in mind when heasked that a private citizen be included on the board.

THERE Is ABSOL UT ELY No H EASON FOR NEW M EX­

ICO'S Am A ND W ATER To D ETEIUOR ATE F URTHER.

We start out relatively clean, and, with vigilanceand foresight, we can stay that way. The existingproblems, such as the power plants and the saw­mills, are neither so serious nor entrenched that theycannot be at least parti ally correc ted. The job ofprot ecting our exceptional environment falls as muchto the private citizen as it does to state and Fed­eral agencies; for, in essence, government only cando what the citizen demand s that it do. Those whoare involved in the ~velopment of the state, ar­chitects, developers, builders, have a special respon­sibility, for their effec t on the future quality of ourenvironment will be more marked than the aver­age citizen. We must be awa re that today's haste,carelessness, excessive concern for profits and cost,or simple ignorance, become, invariably, tomorrow'senvironmental problem. Economic development atthe cost of beauty and health of ew Mexico's nat­ural environment, is not good economy- the cost tothe public health, to the psychological well-being ofthe human part of the economy, and the damageto our life support system, are factors which ourplanners and developers must consider. Foresight,care and environmental awareness must be a partof the developm ent of the Land of Enchantment.

- Harvey Mudd II

Primary Source of Data:Environmental Services Division, New MexicoDepartment of Health and Social Services De­partment.

12 NMA July-August 1970

The Sangre de Cristo

Mountains

they were always

clearly visible . .. once !

This view was taken in 1968. Theca ver photograph was token just 8yea rs previo usly - from the sa mespat, at the sa me t ime of the da yand year. Photog rapher : Bill Regan.

Area of CoverPhotograph

t 11 1

What you can do!

Laundry Soap.

HEA VY DUTY LAUNDRY DETERGENTS

Household CleAners R Ated on P hosphAte

The following list of household cleanersrated for their phosphate content was preparedby the Pollution Prob e group of the Universityof Toronto, Canada, and publi shed by ECOBulletin, Emmaus, Pa., 18049, which will pro­vide additional copies on request.

Pollution Probe urged consumers to use soapor low-phosphate cleaners. High phosphateproducts have a higher pollution potential.

The cleanin g agents were analyzed in aUniversity of Toronto laboratory. Estimated er­ror is plus or minus 10 per cent of the figureshown, e.g., if the figure is 40 per cent the ac­tual value could lie anywhere between 36 and44 per cent. All liqu id dish detergents testedhad less than 1 per cent phosphate.

Ins tant ~'e ls __.. . _Lu x __ __ _ .. _ Iesa t hanMa p le Leaf Soap Fl a kes __ Iess t h a nIvor y S now .... ... ....._ 1. 8. than

34.0 _ _ Proctor & Gamble7.5 _ _.. Boyl e Mid way1.0_ Wi t co Chemical Co .

1.0 __ Bestline Prod .. Inc.1.0 _ Co n-Stan Industries

Dr ef t _ _ __ _Zero .. __ _.._._.._ _ __Explore L iquid __.._ _ .le.. t hanBes tl in e Liquid Co ncentrate

less t hanNutri-Cl ean OLC ..._.._._... __ .1... t han

Miscellaneous

Reprint from the Den ver Post April 5, 1970

While not among the products tested byPollution Prob e group of the University of To­ronto , the Shaklee Products Co., Hayward, Cali­fornia , has provid ed us with an analysis of thephosphate content of its laundry detergentBasic-L. A study prepared by "an independentgovernm ent licensed research laboratory" deter­mined the phosphate content to be "less than0.1 parts per million."

Dishwasher Compounds

Coming Soon in NMA .. ..Billboards and junkyard s. A look at where­

we-are on implementing the ew Mexico High­way Beautification Act of 1966.

Light Duty Com pounds (Laun d ry a nd ot her u ses }

Ca lzo n (water co ndi t io ner) _ . 75.5 .. ..... Ca lgo nA mw a y Wa ter Soften er __. _._.. 73.5 __ ._ Amwa y Cor p.So lvense .._. .._ _.._ 23.0 ._.._ Ru..e l Che rn. Co .Snowy Bleach __ 22. 5 .._ Harold Scha fe r Ltd .Sp ic and Sp a n _._ __ _..__ 21.0 _ Proctor & GambleMr . Clea n __..__.._ ._ _ __._.._ 6.5 .._ Proctor & GambleAjax All-P u rp os e _.__ __ 6.5 Colgate Palmoli veArm & H ammer Sal Sod a __ __ 1.0 .._ Chu r ch & DwightFl eec y _._. _ .._._.Ies . t h a n 1.0 .__ Bristol My ersJ a ve x Bleach . ..._ _ .1.... t h a n 1.0 .._._.__ Bristol My ersWhistle _ _. I"'ufthan ·· . 1.0 .._..__ . Bristol Mye rs.T et SOI'ay _ Ie.. than . 1.0 Econ omics Labs .Les toi l _ 1 t h a n 1.0 . _.._._ .. N oxem aDow n y __ ..... .._ _. 1 t ha n 1.0 _._ Proctor & Ga m bleDutc h Bleach .__ Ie.. t ha n 1.0 _ _ _.... Pu re x Corp.La waone Borax _._ _._ less than 1.0 __ Br istol My ersPines ol . ... ..__.lesa t ha n 1.0 _ _.._ ...._._ Cynamid

All __._._ ._.____ 45.0 _ _ Lever Bros.Fi n ish _ _.. .._ __._._..__.._ 43.0 _ _..__ Ec on omics Labs.Calgonlte ._ _ _ _ 42.0 CalgonCascade _._ .. 36. 5 _ P roctor & GambleAmway A utom atic Dish washer

Compound __._ _._ .._ _ .._ 34.0 .. A m wa y Corp .Swish _ ..__. __._ 29 .0 __ Cu r ley Co rp.

9.0_ _..__..__ Purex Corp.1.0 __.._.. Le ver Bro • .1.0 _._... Canada P ac k er .1.0 ._._ P roc to r & Ga mble

Per Cent ManufacturerPhosphate52.5 ._ . _.._ Amway Corp.49 .0 ._ .._.. __ Colgate Pa lm olive47.0 ._.. .._ _.._.. Sep- Ko Chem icals44.5 _ ... _ P roctor & Gamble44.5 P roctor & Gamble43.5 __. .__ ._....... P roctor & Gam ble41. 5 _ _ Le ve r Br OIl .39.0 _. .._.. Le ve r Br OIl .37.5 __,,,,_ ,,,__,__ ,,,_,_ Colg ate P almoli ve37.00 .... ..__.. .. ._.._.. Lever BrOIl .36 .5 _._.. ..... _._ .._ Am way Corp .36.5 .._.. ..__ Co lgate Palmolive36 .5 _.__..__ _ Colg ate Palmolive36 .0 .._ _ Colgate P a lmol ive36. 0 .._ __ Le ver BrOIl.35 .0 __.. .. . Proc t or & Gamble31.5 . ._ Proctor & Ga mb le32.5 ..... _..... .... Le ver Bros .32.0 _. .. Lever BrOIl.27.0 .. Lever Bros .27 .0 .._ .... _.. BesUine Products. In c.26. 0 W it co Chemical Co.25.0 _............. !\Ial co P rod uc ts , Inc.10.5 . _........ .. Le ver Bros.8.0 __. _........ AB H et ios

Product

Am wa y Trizyme ...Bio-A d _ _ __Peri . _Cheer _ _ _.__ _Oxvd ol _.__ _Tide X K _ .Dri ve _ . ._All ._._ ._ __.. .AB C _ _ _..__ .Sunl igh t __ .Amwa y S Ail _ _Fab _...__._. _A rctic Po wer . _A jax 2 ._ _..__.._.....•Omo _._ __ ..Du z _.. _.. .. _Bold _ _._ __ _Surf .._ _ ._Breeze . _A m az e _. .B... tIine B-7 _ . .•E xp lor e .._._ __.__.Meleo Lau ndry Det ergen tWi .k _._ _.._T end Ma sk in tvatt

(S wed is h)

NMA Ju ly-August 1970 13

NEW MEXICO

IS SWITCHING

TO THE MATCHLESS

ELECTRIC

For further informa tion on on a ll e lectr ic design for your nextbu ilding , contact:

Engineering Sales Department,Pub lic Service Compa ny, Albuquerque

HEAT

dorm itory , Las VegasPh ilippe Reg ister, Architect

OF

ECONOMIES

medical center, Santa FeRobert Plett enberg, Arch itect

library, Albuquerq ueJo hn Reed, Arch itect

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW MEXICO

EIEPERFECT FOR ...

• APARTMENT• SCHOOL• MOTEL

CONSTRUCTION

Fire-safe . Low-Maintenance Roofsand Floors by •..:..;",,"_~~ _

THE~LD~o~~~~II~GEL~~.~U.C-r..~NE<;'?,i

ALWAYS SPECIFY

SI ESICSLABS

14 NMA July-August 1970