Full text of "The Vegetable Ink Printing Act : hearing before the Information, Justice, Transportation, and Agriculture Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, second session on H.R. 1595 to require that all federal lithographic printing be performed using ink made from vegetable oil, and for other purposes, May 26, 1994"

THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT

Y 4.G74/7;V 52

The Vegetable Ink Printing Act, 103...

^ HEARING

BEFORE THE

INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION,
AND AGRICULTURE SUBCOMMITTEE

OF TIIE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION
ON

H.R. 1595

TO REQUIRE THAT ALL FEDERAL LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTING BE PER-
FORMED USING INK MADE FROM VEGETABLE OIL, AND I^OR OTHER
PURPOSES

MAY 26. 1994

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations

^PR /4

1995

U.S. GOVERNME^fT PRINTING OPJ-IDO
8.'5-S15CC WASHINGTON : 1995 """" -'ICij

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Oflicc
Superintendenl of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-046865-5

' ^ THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT

Y 4,G74/7;V 5

The Vegetable Ink Printing Acti 103...

HEAKING

BEFORE THE

INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION,
AND AGRICULTURE SUBCOMMITTEE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION
ON

H.R. 1595

TO REQUIRE THAT ALL FEDERAL LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTING BE PER-
FORMED USING INK MADE FROM VEGETABLE OIL, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES

MAY 26, 1994

Printed for the use of the Committee on Grovemment Operations

APR /4

t995

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFUCK

85-815 CC WASHINGTON : 1995

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing OITicc
Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-046865-5

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

JOHN CONYERS,
CARDISS COLLINS, Illinois
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
MIKE SYNAR, Oklahoma
STEPHEN L. NEAL, North Carolina
TOM LANTOS, California
MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN M. SPRATT. JR., South Carolina
GARY A. CONDIT. California
COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota
KAREN L. THURMAN, Florida
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
FLOYD H. FLAKE, New York
JAMES A. HAYES, Louisiana
CRAIG A. WASHINGTON, Texas
BARBARA-ROSE COLLINS, Michigan
CORRINE BROWN, Florida
MARJORIE MARGOLIES-MEZVINSKY,

Pennsylvania
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
GENE GREEN, Texas
BART STUPAK, Michigan

Jr., Michigan, Chairman

WILLIAM F. CLINGER, Jr., Pennsylvania

AL MCCANDLESS, California

J. DENNIS HASTERT, Illinois

JON L. KYL, Arizona

CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut

STEVEN SCHIFF, New Mexico

CHRISTOPHER COX, California

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

DICK ZIMMER, New Jersey

WILLIAM H. ZELIFF, Jr., New Hampshire

JOHN M. McHUGH, New York

STEPHEN HORN, California

DEBORAH PRYCE, Ohio

JOHN L. MICA, Florida

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
(Independent)

Julian Epstein, Staff Director

Matthew R. Fletcher, Minority Staff Director

Information, Justice, Transportation and Agriculture Subcommittee

GARY A. CONDIT, California, Chairman

MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
KAREN L. THURMAN, Florida
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
BART STUPAK, Michigan

JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
STEPHEN HORN, California

Ex Officio

WILLIAM F. CLINGER, Jr., Pennsylvania

Robert GELLMAN, Chief Connsel

Aurora Ogg, Clerk

Diane M. Major, Minority Professional Staff

(II)

CONTENTS

Page

Hearing held on May 26, 1994 1

Text of H.R. 1595 2

Statement of:

Condit, Hon. Gary A., a Representative in Congress from the State of
California, and chairman, Information, Justice, Transportation, and

Agriculture Subcommittee: Opening statement 1

Diearich, Larry, president, American Soybean Association, Elkton, SD 25

DiMario, Michael F., Public Printer, Government Printing Office, accom-

Banied by George Collins, manager. Quality Control and Technical
evelopment 16

Durbin, Hon. Richard J., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Illinois 13

Patterson, Jo, soy ink coordinator. National Soy Ink Information Center,

Des Moines, LA 34

Wellstone, Hon. Paul, a Senator in Congress from the State of Minnesota 7

Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:

Diedrich, Larry, president, American Soybean Association, Elkton, SD:

Prepared statement 28

DiMario, Michael F., Public Printer, Government Printing Office: Pre-
pared statement 19

Durbin, Hon. Richard J., a Representative in Congress from the State

of Illinois: Prepared statement 14

Patterson, Jo, soy ink coordinator. National Soy Ink Information Center,

Des Moines, LA: Prepared statement 36

Wellstone, Hon. Paul, a Senator in Congress from the State of Minnesota:

Prepared statement 10

APPENDIX
Material submitted for the hearing record 43

(III)

THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT

THURSDAY, MAY 26, 1994

House of Representatives,
Information, Justice, Transportation,

AND Agriculture Subcommittee
OF THE Committee on Government Operations,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m., in room
2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Gary A. Condit (chair-
man of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Gary A. Condit, Karen L. Thurman,
and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

Also present: Representative Collin C. Peterson,

Staff present: Robert Gellman, chief counsel; Aurora Ogg, clerk;
and Diane M. Major, minority professional staff, Committee on
Government Operations.

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN CONDIT

Mr. Condit. We will begin the hearing and the other members
will join us. They are casting their journal vote and they will be
over shortly.

Today we are holding a hearing on the Vegetable Ink Printing
Act of 1993. The purpose of the legislation is to require that vegeta-
ble ink be used in Federal printing. There are two similar bills,
H.R. 1595 and S. 716, which have already passed the Senate.

Lithographic inks are used in over 95 percent of Federal printing
of documents or publications. Increasing the use of vegetable ink
may diminish reliance on nonrenewable sources, increase support
for domestic agricultural products, and be environmentally friend-
ly-
Today we are joined by Senator Paul Wellstone from the State

of Minnesota; our colleague, Mr. Durbin, who is the principle spon-
sor of the House bill; and Mr. Collin Peterson, who will be here as
well. We will also receive testimony from the Government Printing
Office, the American Soybean Association, and the Iowa Soybean
Association.

So without further delay, we will ask Senator Wellstone to make
his comments. I know he has a busy schedule and they are debat-
ing the health care bill on the other side and he has some impor-
tant amendments that he would like to be involved in.

So, Senator Wellstone, the floor is yours. Thank you for coming
this morning and for your patience.

[The bill, H.R. 1595 follows:!

(1)

103d congress
1st Session

H.R.1595

To require that all Federal lithographic printing be performed using ink
made from vegetable oil, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 1, 1993

Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Leach, Mr. Penny, and Mr. Bereuter) intro-
duced the following bill; which was referred jointly to the Committees on
House Administration and Government Operations

A BILL

To require that all Federal lithographic printing be per-
formed using ink made from vegetable oil, and for other
purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-

2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the "Vegetable Ink Printing

5 Act of 1993".

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

7 The Congress finds that —

1 (1) more than 95 percent of Federal printing

2 involving documents or publications is performed

3 using lithographic inks;

4 (2) various types of oil, including petroleum and

5 vegetable oil, are used in lithographic ink;

6 (3) increasing the amount of vegetable oil used

7 in a lithographic ink would —

8 (A) help reduce the Nation's use of

9 nonrenewable energy resources;

10 (B) result in the use of products that are

1 1 less damaging to the environment;

12 (C) result in a reduction of volatile oi^nic

13 compound emissions; and

14 (D) increase the use of renewable agricul-

15 tural products.

16 (4) the technology exists to use vegetable oil in

17 lithographic ink and, in some applications, to use

18 hthographic ink that uses no petroleum distillates in

19 the hquid portion of the ink;

20 (5) some lithographic inks have contained vege-

21 table oils for many years; other lithographic inks

22 have more recently begun to use vegetable oil;

23 (6) according to the Grovemment Printing

24 Office, using vegetable-based ink appears to add lit-

25 tie if any additional cost to Grovemment printing;

>HR 1S96 IH

1 (7) use of vegetable-based ink in Federal Gov-

2 emment printing should further develop —

3 (A) the commercial viability of vegetable-

4 based ink, which could result in demand, for

5 domestic use alone, for 2,500,000,000 pounds

6 of vegetable crops or 500,000,000 pounds of

7 vegetable oil; and

8 (B) a product that could help the United

9 States retain or enlarge its share of the world

10 market for vegetable ink.

1 1 SEC. 3. FEDERAL PRINTING REQUIREMENTS.

12 (a) Definition. — In this section, "Federal agency"

13 means —

14 (1) an executive department, military depart-

15 ment, Government corporation, Govemment-con-

16 trolled corporation, or other establishment in the ex-

17 ecutive branch of the Grovemment (including the Ex-

18 ecutive Office of the President), or any independent

19 regulatory agency; and

20 (2) an establishment or component of the legis-

21 lative or judicial branch of the Government.

22 (b) Vegetable-Based Inks. —

23 (1) In general. — Notwithstanding any other

24 law, beginning on the date that is 180 days after the

25 date of enactment of this Act, all lithographic print-

•HR 1S86 ra

1 ing performed or procured by a Federal agency that

2 uses oil in its ink shall use the maximum amount of

3 vegetable oil that is technologically feasible and re-

4 suits in printing costs that are cost-competitive with

5 printing using petroleum-based inks.

6 (2) Minimum percentages. — Except as pro-

7 vided in paragraph (3), in no event shall a Federal

8 agency use any ink that contains less than the fol-

9 lowing percentages of vegetable oil in its ink used for

10 lithographic printing:

11 (A) In the case of news inks, 40 percent.

12 (B) In the case of sheet-fed inks, 20 per-

13 cent.

14 (C) In the case of forms inks, 20 percent.

15 (D) In the case of heat-set inks, 10 per-

16 cent.

17 (3) Suspension of effectiveness of para-

18 GRAPH (2). — (A) At any time at which a Federal

19 agency determines that the cost of printing with veg-

20 etable-based ink is significantly greater than the cost

21 of printing with petroleum -based ink, the Federal

22 £igency may perform or procure lithographic printing

23 using ink that contains less than the percentages of

24 vegetable oil in its ink than those specified in para-

25 graph (2) until such time as the cost of printing

•HR 150S IH

1 with vegetable-based ink is not significantly greater

2 than the cost of printing with petroleum-based ink.

3 (B) A determination made under subparagraph

4 (A) shall be reviewed —

5 (i) at least once every quarter, for the per-

6 formance or procurement of printing of mate-

7 rials that are printed on a regular basis; and

8 (ii) prior to performing or procuring the

9 printing of particular material of significant

10 size that is printed once or is printed at inter-

1 1 vals of 6 months or more.

•HR 1596 IH

STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL WELLSTONE, A SENATOR IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

Mr. Wellstone. I first want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, Con-
gressman Peterson and other colleagues, for inviting me here to
talk about a bill which I care about fiercely. This bill does two very
important things: It promotes the country's rural economy and pro-
tects our environment. These are important goals which are very
important to me and, I think, all of us.

As many of you know, Senator Bond from Missouri and I drafted
Senate bill 716, the Vegetable Ink Printing Act bill, and it passed
the Senate without objection in November. It had very broad based
support.

I would like to thank and congratulate my colleague, Mr. Durbin,
for introducing this bill in the House last year and for working very
hard on its progress and development.

Mr. Chairman, I really appreciate your interest and the commit-
tee's interest and I applaud your leadership in furthering this legis-
lation. I think it is a very, very, important piece of legislation.

Mr. Chairman, last year when I became chairman of the Small
Business Committee Subcommittee on Rural Economy and Family
Farming, I pledged that I would not just be a chair of a subcommit-
tee and do nothing but try to be very, very proactive. And I was
especially interested in the increased utilization of traditional and
new agricultural commodities; that is, a way which we could think
about new and innovative uses for new and old crops.

I am convinced that American agricultural innovation is vital. It
promotes sustainable development in rural America, it provides
economic opportunities and good jobs, and it supports and protects
our environment and our countryside.

And I think as we look to a niture renewable energy base, agri-
culture is a key component. Many also share this vision and we see
many signs that farmers and other agriculturists and rural entre-
preneurs are beginning to respond to this challenge by presenting
some new innovations.

Vegetable ink is one of these promising and innovative develop-
ments. Use of vegetable inks in printing accomplishes three goals:
One, it provides another market for farmers' crops; two, it relies on
a renewable and, thus, sustainable resource base; and, three, it is
better for our environment. Vegetable ink, by all accounts, rep-
resents a cleaner technology than the petroleum-based products it
is beginning to replace in the market place.

The increased demand for domestic vegetable oils as an ingredi-
ent of these inks encourages and facilitates further research into
and development of more new uses for vegetable oils and other do-
mestic farm products. Again, I highlight the importance of that.
Farmers themselves have made a direct and serious investment in
both the development and promotion of vegetable inks. This, I
think, is very encouraging.

Mr. Chairman, requiring the Federal Government to use more
vegetable-based ink in its printing operations will not, of course,
save the American family farmer. No one pretends that it will do
so. In many cases, these new use markets will be niche markets,
but this is not a drawback.

As we all know, farmers are happy for all the new markets for
their products that they can find, and new product sectors always
have the potential to spin off other new products or to lead to other
new technological innovations. And that is the way I view this
piece of legislation.

Use of vegetable inks is another compelling way we can help our
environment and it is a natural step toward widespread use of
cleaner, greener products. Vegetable ink derived from renewable
agricultural products will help reduce dangerous volatile organic
compounds, the toxic VOC emissions. Vegetable ink usage will also
facilitate paper recycling and may even reduce heavy metals con-
tent in the ink.

Requiring the Federal Government to use vegetable inks is an
important step and an essential continuation of our goals to pro-
mote clean, green, and environmentally friendly business. This step
is a very important step toward using taxpayer dollars in a con-
scientious way which would also send a signal to the marketplace
that the Federal Government is willing to use its purchasing power
to pursue goals that we all share, in this case, helping out rural
America and the environment.

With the Vegetable Ink Act, we here in the Congress do not aim
to begin a trend, and I want to emphasize this, of micromanaging
the Federal Government procurement process. But this bill follows
a simple principle: When the cost to the taxpayers is equal or com-
parable, then preference should be given to products and services
that further other goals in addition to filling the immediate pro-
curement need. We do that with buy America provisions and we do
that with buy green guidelines.

Mr. Chairman, I know the testimony presented here this morn-
ing will support my belief that vegetable inks are practical and
cost-competitive and that there is room for expanded use of vegeta-
ble inks in government printing. In fact, there seems to be growing
enthusiasm in some agencies for using vegetable inks in their
printing.

GPO has told us that increasing vegetable ink usage will have
a negligible impact on the cost of their printing jobs and that the
standards proposed in this bill would pose no serious practical dif-
ficulties. In fact, the Department of Agriculture has already begun
to do what this bill would require. They announced last year that
they would use vegetable-based ink for their in-house printing.

In drafting the Senate bill my staff, along with the staff from
other offices on both the Senate and the House sides, has worked
carefully not only with proponents of this policy but with the peo-
ple that are affected by it, including the industries.

We worked with the Printing Industries of America and the Na-
tional Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers, just to name two.
Their contributions are reflected in the standards section of the
bill, and both the printers and the ink manufacturers have ex-
pressed to me the workability of these standards. This is evidence
that there were and are many printers and ink manufacturers who
firmly supported what we did in the Senate and some who even felt
that we did not go far enough.

Among others, the Senate bill was endorsed by the American
Soybean Association, who I see are here today; Ralph Nader's pub-

lie government purchasing project; the Consumer Federation of
America, a very interesting kind of a coalition; Communicating for
Agriculture; and, the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that with this bill we can take a step
forward toward helping rural America and the environment and I
thank you for the opportunity to talk about this subject today.

And I wanted to add that right now 26 States and one-third of
U.S. newspapers use ink in their operations. If vegetable ink is
technically feasible and cost-effective for the rest of tne country, it
ought to be for the Federal Government.

And I think we are now at that point. Things have really
changed dramatically. Mr. Chairman, tnis is a great opportunity
and I just cannot thank you enough for moving this forward. I
think it is just the sort of good news that people in rural America
are looking for and we should be creative and we should keep mov-
ing forward policies that really can help people. This bill is very
much in that spirit.

[The prepared statement of Mr, Wellstone follows:]

U.S. SENATOR PAUL WELLSTONE

CHAIRMAN

RURAL ECONOMY AND FAMILY FARMING

U. S. SENATE SMALL BUSINESS SUBCOMMIHEE

CONTACT Ponioo Mckuiney c?OJ> _^?4 ^641

Statement of U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.)

HR. 1595, the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993

May 26, 1994

Mr Chairman. Thank you for this opportunity to talk about a bill which promotes ruial
America's economy and also protects our environment. This piece of legislation and all of its
objectives are very important to me. As many of you know, Senator Bond and I drafted S.
716, the Vegetable Ink Printing Act bill, which passed the Senate without objection last
November.

First. I'd like to thank and congratulate rny colleague Mr Durbin for introducing this bill in the
House last yeai, and for working hard on its pi ogress and development.

And Mr. Chairman, I greatly appreciate your interest, and the Committee's interest, in this bill,
and I applaud your leadership in supporting and furthering this very important and beneficial
legislation.

Mr. Chairman, last year, when I became Chairman of the Senate Small Business Committee's
Subcommittee on Rural Economy and Family Farming, I pledged I would pursue strategies
aimed at revitalizing lural communities. One way to do this is through increased utilization of
traditional and new agricultural commodities - that is, through new and innovative uses of old
and new crops.

I am convinced that American agricultural innovatiori is vital. It promotes sustainable
development in rural America, provides growing economic opportunities and good jobs, and
just as important, protects our precious environment and countryside. Agriculture is and must
be a key component of our present and future renewable resource base. Many also share
this vision. We see many signs that farmers, other agriculturalists and rural entrepreneurs are
beginning to respond to this challenge and are developing many of the innovations in this
area.

Vegetable ink is one of these promising and innovative developments. Use of vegetable inks
in printing accomplishes these goals: One, it provides another market for our farmer's crops.
Two, it relies on a renewable, and thus sustainable, resource base. And three, it is better for
our environment.

Vegetable ink, by all accounts, represents a cleaner technology than the petroleum based
products it is beginning to replace in the marketplace. The increased demand for domestic
vegetable oils as an ingredient of these inks encourages and facilitates further research into,
and development of, more new uses for vegetable oils and other domestic farm products.
Farmers themselves have made a direct and serious investment in both the development and
promotion of vegetable inks. This is encouraging.

(Over)

Requiring the federal government to use more vegetable-based ink in its printing operations
will not, of course, save the American family farmer. In many cases, these new use markets
will be niche markets. But this is not a drawback. As we all know, our farmers are happy for
all the new markets for their products they can find. New product sectors always have the
potential to spin off other new products or to lead to other new technological innovations.

Use of vegetable inks is another compelling way we can help our environment, and is a
natural step towards wide-spread usage of cleaner, greener products. Vegetable ink, derived
from renewable agricultural products, will help reduce dangerous volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) emissions. Vegetable ink usage will also facilitate paper recycling, and may even
help reduce heavy-metals content in ink.

Requiring the federal government to use vegetable inks is an important step, and an essential
continuation of our goals to promote clean, green, and environmentally friendly business. But
this step, this very important step, toward using taxpayer dollars in a conscientious way would
also send a signal to the marketplace: that the federal government is willing to use its
purchasing power to pursue goals that we all share - in this case helping out rural America
and the environment.

With the Vegetable Ink Act, we here in Congress do not aim to begin a trend of
micromanaging the federal government procurement process. But this bill follows a simple
principle: when the cost to taxpayers is equal or comparable, then preference should be
given to products and services that further other goals in addition to filling the immediate
procurement need. We do that with "Buy America" provisions, and we do that with "Buy
Green" guidelines.

Mr. Chairman, I know the testimony presented here this morning will support my belief both
that vegetable inks are practical and cost-competitive, and that there is room for expanded
use of vegetable inks in government printing. In fact, there seems to be growing enthusiasm
in some agencies for using vegetable inks in their printing. GPO has told us that increasing
vegetable ink usage will have negligible impact on the cost of their printing jobs and that the
standards proposed in this bill would pose no serious practical difficulties. In fact, the
Department of Agriculture has already begun to do what this bill would require: they
announced earlier this year that they would use vegetable-based inks for their in-house
printing.

In drafting the Senate bill, my staff, along with staff from other offices on both the Senate and
House sides, worked carefully not only with proponents of this policy, but with people from the
affected industries, as well. We worked with the Printing Industries of America (PIA) and the
National Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers (NAPIM), just to name two. Their
contributions are reflected in the standards section of the bill, and both the printers and the
ink manufacturers have expressed to me the workability of those standards. This is evidence
that there were and are many printers and ink manufacturers who firmly supported what we
did in the Senate, and some who even felt we did not go far enough.

Among others, the Senate bill was endorsed by the American Soybean Association, who I see
are here today, Ralph Nader's Public Government Purchasing Project, the Consumer
Federation of America, Communicating for Agriculture and the Minnesota Soybean Growers
Association.

Mr. Chairman, I believe with this bill we can take a step forward to help rural America and the
environment. I thank you for this opportunity to appear and to discuss this subject with you.

Mr. CoNDiT. Thank you, Senator Wellstone. We appreciate you
being here and your leadership in this area. It is our full intentions
to mark something up and we intend to mark a bill up when we
come back from break. So we appreciate your being here. I know
you have to leave.

Would anyone like to make a comment or question Senator
Wellstone?

Mr. Peterson. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CoNDiT. Mr. Peterson.

Mr. Peterson. Well, I don't want to question him. I want to com-
mend the Senator for the work that he has done and I want to
thank you for letting me come back to the committee even though
I am not officially a member any more. I am glad to be back and
to be a cosponsor of this.

I also want to commend Representative Durbin for his work, and
one of the reasons that I wanted to be here today is that I can fi-
nally, with the movement of this, and I commend your leadership,
I can get my cousin off my back, who is the president of the Min-
nesota Soybean Growers Association. And he has been bugging the
heck out of me about why this bill isn't moving.

So it is good news that we are going to have a hearing and move
ahead. And this is, as the Senator said, just the right thing to do.
And with what we are hearing, you know, every day from our
friends down at appropriations and the budget committee that we
are going to have less money for the farm bill, so these are the kind
of things that we absolutely have to do to improve the situation for
farmers. So thank you all for your leadership.

Mr. Wellstone. Thank you. I thank my colleague, and any way
that we can work with you as you go through markup, we want to.
I want to thank again you for your leadership here and I am very,
very excited about what we are all doing.

Mr. Peterson. Thank you.

Mr. CoNDiT. Thank you, Senator. Mrs. Thurman, do you have
any comments?

Mrs. Thurman. I would say that I think this is an exciting piece
of legislation as well, and I actually shared this with Representa-
tive Durbin when I signed onto his piece of legislation. There is a
big promotional program in Florida that is doing very similar kinds
of things like this, even to the point where they are using it in pho-
tography colors, which is just real exciting.

And I also like the idea of getting rid of some of the — it is a land-
fill issue for some of us that the renewable part of it I think is just
wonderful. And I think it puts some emphasis on agriculture to
show the innovative opportunities that agriculture gives to this
country, and so often we don't let people know just how good they
are to this country in the kinds of things they provide us in sci-
entific technology. So you're right on.

Mr. Wellstone. Thank you.

Mr. CoNDiT. Mr. Durbin, we apologize to you. You were here ear-
lier and we were all over casting our journal votes. We apologize
to you. The fioor is yours, sir.

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN, A REPRESENTA-
TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Mr. DURBIN. No, I understand that completely. I was probably
passing you in the elevator. But Senator Wellstone has really given
my statement. I will submit it for the record and I won't repeat it
because I know that time is precious.

Let me tell you, we have 51 sponsors of H.R. 1595, including the
gentlelady from Florida, whom I am glad to count as one of the
early supporters of this effort. And I want to give credit to Con-
gressman Jim Leach from Iowa, who has been a cosponsor to this
bill going back many Congresses now where we have tried to move
it forward.

Let me tell you briefly why this makes sense. First, it is economi-
cally sensible. If we can find a way to use vegetable-based ink it
is going to save us some environmental headaches down the line.

It is also going to increase demand for America's farm products,
particularly soybeans. That, of course, will increase income and re-
duce the need for government help.

It is environmentally sensible as well. I think that has been
shown over and over again because it is biodegradable.

The other thing I want to make clear is that we are not asking
any government agency to use vegetable ink when it doesn't make
sense from a cost viewpoint. There is a specific provision in the bill
which says that we are asking the Federal agencies to use this ink,
the maximum amount of vegetable ink technologically feasible that
results in printing costs that are cost-competitive with printing
using petroleum-based inks. So, we are not asking for special treat-
ment. We are only asking for an opportunity to make certain that
these vegetable inks are part of the solution to the problems that
we face in the environment and, of course, in the farm bill.

We have heard testimony about the fact that some 51 Members
are cosponsoring this legislation. We are also aware of the fact that
GPO is testifying today. That is good news. I have scanned their
testimony and I see, for instance, and this is of personal interest
to us, the only reason why our Congressional Record is not using
soy or vegetable ink at the moment is because, as GPO will testify,
they are using printing presses that are ancient. As they move into
the new type of printing presses, they will be able to consider this
type of ink. I would sure like to see that day occur very quickly.

Secretary Mike Espy has already taken the lead, spending about
$26 million a year on USDA printing with this form of ink. Twen-
ty-six States, including your State of California and my State of Il-
linois, have already moved in this direction. As Senator Wellstone
said, if in the private sector, in effect, 3,000 different newspapers
have made this decision that this is the right way to go, I think
it is time for the Federal Government to join ranks with them.

I thank you for this hearing. I know you are busy, as I arn, and
it means a lot to me that you will consider marking up this bill
very shortly. I would be happy to answer any questions.

[The prepared statement of*^Mr. Durbin follows:]

Pc;_oi c: _ qr _ -,

RICHARD J DURBIN >-ji, )..i...iu.n.um s.

AT lARGE WHIP

ij .;■ ;?» ^j;

COMMIT TCf ON APPftOPRlAriONS ^9(h^4IU^J^ <;". «9J «OSJ

SuacowMittii oo Acaicuitum «nD

tuaai OfvltO'MINt

SutCOWMlTIII ox TiANSPOKIATiON

SulCOMMiTHl ON tHt D-SiniCT 01 ColUMtl*

•00 SI lOuii iTWur %^ -| .:

iDMiAflosviLif II tlol^
!«>■> •>; i»ij

(TonsrtBB of the Bnittd States

ilouse of KfprcBtiitatiOES
Washington, ©£ 20515-1520

TESTIMONY OP

THE HONORABLE RICHARD J. DURBIN

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION AND AGRICULTURE

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT, H.R. 1595

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the Subcommittee for taking the time
to hold this very important hearing today and for allowing me thla opportunity
to testify on the Vegetable Ink Printing Act, H.R. 1595.

I also wish to thank my colleague from Iowa, Representative Jim Leach,
who I have worked with on this and similar legislation since the 102nd
Congress. Fifty-one House Members have cosponsored this measure, including
Representative Thurman, a Member of the Subcommittee, who has been a long time
supporter of vegetable-based ink in Florida.

This legislation is very similar to the Senate measure introduced by
Senators Bond and Wellstone, S. 716. As you know, S. 716 passed the Senate by
unanimous consent last November. I come before the Subcommittee today, Mr.
Chairman, to express my strong support for both measures and to encourage
expeditious consideration of this important legislation.

As Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, my
Subcommittee continues to support research on soybean/vegetable-based ink.
The Subcommittee believes that the environmental benefits from using a readily
degradable ink and the low-rub characteristics of vegetable ink make this
research essential.

The Vegetable Ink Printing Act would set minimum percentages of vegetable
oil that must be used in Ink by Federal agencies and government subcontractors
for lithographic printing. These minimum percentages were arrived at through
extensive meetings with Federal agencies and representatives from both the
printing and ink manufacturers industries. H.R. 1595 would set the
percentages at 40 percent for news ink, 20 percent for sheet-fed ink, 20
percent for forms ink, and 10 percent for heat-set ink. These percentages are
supported by the American Soybean Association and their state affiliates.

This legislation enjoys broad support. In addition to the Ajnerican
Soybean Association, other agricultural interests supporting the measure
Include the National Corn Growers Association, the Corn Refiners Association,
Communicating for Agriculture, and other oilseed organizations. Consumer
groups such as the Consumer Federation of America and Ralph Nader's Government
Printing Project also support H.R. 1595.

rniNTED ON RtCTCLED PAPEH

Mr. Chairman, I welcome Senator WellBtone'e teetlmony this morning. He
has been a vocal proponent of this legislation. Senator Wellstona will
testify as to the Importance of vegetable Ink In promoting environmentally-
friendly rural economic development strategies. Put simply, the promotion of
vegetable Ink for use by the Federal government will undoubtedly account for
greater market potential for soybeans and other oilseeds as well as Increased
processing.

I was also happy to learn that the Government Printing Office (GPO) will
offer testimony today. Last summer, GPO's Acting Public Printer testified
that he could see no practical problems In Implementing the measure and was
prepared to support Congress in an effort to increase the utilization of
vegetable ink in government printing.

Vegetable ink has already achieved some success in government printing.
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) has begun to Implement the bill's
provisions for Its own printing operations. Last August, Secretary Mike Espy
announced that all USDA ordered printing — about $26 million annually —
would employ ink derived from agricultural products. The announcement
expanded the use of vegetable-baaed ink to cover all USDA contract printing.

It may also interest the Subcommittee to know that vegetable-based inks
have been used successfully by many state governments for years. At least 26
states, including my home state of Illinois, use vegetable-based ink for their
printing. Mr. Chairman, as you are probably aware, vegetable-baaed inks are
commonly used in your home state of California, by both public and private
entities, because of their proven environmental benefits.

The Federal government would do well to follow the lead of a majority of
the states and the more than 3,000 American newspapers that use vegetable ink,
including three-fourths of all daily newspapers. The Los Angeles Times ,
Detroit Free Press , St. Petersburg Times , and USA Today have all recognized
the importance of the promotion of environmentally sound vegetable ink, and I
believe it is time for the Federal government to realize its responsibility.

Mr Chairman, I would be happy to assist you and the Subcommittee in any
way possible to advance this common sense approach to government printing. I
thank you again for the opportunity to testify today.

Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Durbin, thank you very much. The Senate bill
was amended to include other renewable resources besides vegeta-
ble oil. What is your opinion about that amendment? Do you have
any problems with it?

Mr. DURBEN. I have no problem with that at all. I think we ought
to really open this up. This is not an exclusive franchise. What we
are talking about here is some new thinking and fresh thinking. I
think vegetable inks will play an important part in this, but I am
open to other suggestions of other products that might do the same
job or do it as well.

Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Peterson, do you have any questions or com-
ments?

Mr. Peterson. I was just going to again commend Representa-
tive Durbin.

Mr. Durbin. Is it your brother we are taking care of here?

Mr. Peterson. Cousin.

Mr. Durbin. Cousin, OK.

Mr. Peterson. Second cousin.

Mr. Durbin. Glad to take care of him. No grief at the family re-
union this summer.

Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Durbin, thank you very much. We appreciate
your leadership in this and we will be back with you next month.

OK, we will take the next panel of Mr. DiMario, Mr. Diedrich,
and Ms. Patterson. If you would, we have a policy of swearing the
witnesses in. I know that this is noncontroversial but if you don't
mind standing so we can be consistent, I will swear you in.

[Witnesses sworn. 1

Mr. CONDIT. Why don't we start with you, Mr. DiMario.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL F. DIMARIO, PUBLIC PRINTER, GOV-
ERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, ACCOMPANIED BY GEORGE
COLLINS, MANAGER, QUALITY CONTROL AND TECHNICAL
DEVELOPMENT

Mr. DiMario. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman and members of the sub-
committee, I am pleased to be here to provide the views of the Gov-
ernment Printing Office on H.R. 1595, the Vegetable Ink Printing
Act of 1993. With me in the audience is Mr. George Collins, man-
ager of GPO's quality control and technical department, which is
responsible for testing and manufacturing inks used by GPO.

In the interest of time, I will summarize my prepared statement,
which I have submitted for the record. I testified on the Senate
companion to H.R. 1595, S. 716, last year before the Senate Com-
mittee on Rules and Administration.

As I stated at that time, GPO has no obiection to this legislation.
GPO is required by title 44 of the United States Code to perform
printing, binding, and distribution services for all branches of the
Federal Government. We are the single largest provider of these
services in the government today.

To perform this work, last year we used a total of 102.6 tons of
ink for in-plant production. Private sector printers working under
contract with GPO used an estimated 1,100 tons of various inks.
Vegetable oil already is in about 22 percent of the ink we use for
in-plant production. This includes linseed oil, which is in the var-

nishes of many inks. Soybean oil is in about 5 percent of the inks
used for in-plant production.

At this time, there is no vegetable oil in the ink used to print
the Congressional Record and the Federal Register due to the
presses we have been using to print these products; however, we
are in the process of acquiring new presses to replace that equip-
ment and they will be able to use vegetable inks to print the
Record and the Register. The first press is scheduled to be deliv-
ered this Saturday, with the second and third presses to be deliv-
ered in 3-month intervals thereafter.

As an aside, let me note that the timetable for the installation
of the new presses may not meet the 180-day timetable to be estab-
lished by H.R. 1595, so perhaps that language in section 3, para-
graph (B)(1) could be changed.

There would be an increase in the amount of vegetable ink used
by GPO as a result of H.R. 1595. For central office printing we
project an increase of approximately 6 to 8 tons annually, based on
the use of the heat-set inks. Unfortunately, developing a similar es-
timate for procured printing is virtually impossible because of the
lack of data concerning the kinds of inks used by contractors.

Nevertheless, GPO will have no problem in accommodating the
requirements of this bill in our printing procurement program
where the vast majority of government printing is performed. We
already have 29 term contracts in place that require the use of veg-
etable inks. We have found that most contractors are capable of
using vegetable inks at no additional charge, and many commercial
contractors are currently using such inks as their standard.

As H.R. 1595 states, the cost of ink typically is a small portion
of the overall cost of a typical printing job. The primary cost compo-
nents are labor, machine time, and paper. The cost of the ink used
to print the Record and the Register is approximately one-tenth of
1 percent of the entire cost. Even in cases where the comparative
cost per pound of some vegetable-based and petroleum-based inks
may be substantial, the impact of that cost differential on the total
cost of printing the job is not likely to be significant.

If this legislation is passed, the requirement to use vegetable
inks in Federal printing would be made a specification of our print-
ing contracts wherever it is "technologically feasible," as stated in
section 3, paragraph (B)(1) of H.R. 1595.

Contractors would submit bids for that specification only. They
would not be required to submit dual bids for petroleum and vege-
table inks. This is the procedure that has been followed for insur-
ing the use of recycled paper in procured printing and it has been
highly successful in terms of achieving maximum coverage in recy-
cled paper utilization.

We have reviewed the Treasury Department's concerns that an
escape clause be provided from the requirements of H.R. 1595 re-
garding the post-printing antitampering security features of gov-
ernment checks and other documents. We support this request,
which would also apply to the printing of U.S. passports that we
perform for the State Department.

As to verification, my statement also notes that a reliable post-
production test for vegetable ink is under development. While the
test will show the presence of vegetable oil in the ink, work is still

underway to develop a reliable method for quantifying the percent-
age of vegetable ink present in the ink.

Thus, in the short term, verification may require additional gov-
ernment effort, and my statement details what some of those meas-
ures could be. We do not believe the cost of these measures would
be significant, however.

There are two other issues worth mentioning. First, we do not
think vegetable ink poses any problems for the archival preserva-
tion of important government documents, an issue of longstanding
issue to the Congress. Second, as you know, a number of proposals
are currently under review in Congress regarding the future of
GPO as the results of the national performance review and the ef-
forts of the joint committee on the organization of Congress. GPO
is fully prepared to assist and cooperate with Congress in whatever
disposition is made of this issue and we support and are working
actively with the administration and Federal agencies to reduce
costs and provide improved printing and related services.

However, this subcommittee should be aware that to the extent
that government printing is decentralized and dispersed through-
out the agencies, as a possible result of any of these measures, it
will be extremely difficult for the government to ensure and enforce
the objectives of vegetable ink utilization under H.R. 1595 and S.
716. GPO's current unified structure and mission can assure maxi-
mum possible coverage for the use of vegetable inks under this leg-
islation, just as we have insured the use of recycled paper in gov-
ernment printing.

Mr. Chairman, we are fully prepared to support and assist Con-
gress in increasing the use of vegetable inks in government print-
ing. This concludes my prepared statement and I would be pleased
to answer any questions the subcommittee may have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. DiMario follows:]

United States Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20401

MICHAEL F. DiMARIO
PUBLIC PRINTER

PREPARED STATEMENT ON H.R. 1595,

THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT OF 1993,

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION,

AND AGRICULTURE,

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

THURSDAY, MAY 26, 1994

ROOM 2247, RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING

10 A.M.

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to be here today to
provide the views of the Government Printing Office (GPO) on H.R. 1595, the
Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993. This bill would require all Federal lithographic
printing to be performed using ink made from vegetable oil. I testified on the
Senate companion to H.R. 1595--S. 716--last year. As I stated at that time, GPO
has no objections to this legislation.

GPO Mission and Services. GPO is required by Title 44 of the U.S. Code to
perform printing, binding, and distribution services for all branches of the Federal
Government. We are the single largest provider of these services in the
Government today.

GPO performs inplant production services at the Central Office plant in
Washington, DC, and at 5 regional plants around the country. Virtually all
Congressional printing is performed at the Central Office plant, including the
Congressional Record. The plant also produces other major publications like the
Federal Register and the Budget of the U.S. Government. A high profile
Government publication printed in the field is the Commerce Business Daily, which
is printed at the Chicago regional printing office.

However, about 75 percent of all the printing requisitioned from GPO is
competitively procured from private sector printers through our Printing
Procurement Program. The Program operates out of the Central Office and from
14 regional procurement offices and 6 satellite procurement offices nationwide.
Approximately 10,000 private sector printers-about a quarter of the nation's
printing industry establishments-participate in GPO's Printing Procurement
Program, with about 3,500 printers working with GPO on a regular basis.

In fiscal 1993, GPO performed printing work valued at $157.6 million in the
Central Office plant. Congressional work represented $80 million of this amount.
Regional plant work was valued at $7.3 million. At the same time, GPO procured
$530 million worth of printing for Federal agencies from commercial printers. The
vast majority of all the printing produced or procured by GPO utilizes the
lithographic process.

GPO Ink Consumption. To perform this work, in fiscal 1993 the Central Office
plant used 44.1 tons of news ink (this ink is used exclusively to print the
Congressional Record and the Federal Register). The plant also used 33.5 tons of
heat-set and 25 tons of sheetfed inks, for a total inplant ink consumption of 102.6
tons. Private sector printers used an estimated 1,100 tons of various inks on work
procured by GPO in fiscal 1993, based on general assumptions about the volume
of paper consumed by procured printing. Information on the specific kinds of inks
used by contractors is not available.

Approximately half of the ink used by the Central Office plant is manufactured by
GPO itself. The remaining half is purchased. We also manufacture inks for use by

other Government printing entities, such as the Senate Service Department, which
for the past few years we have been supplying with vegetable inks at the
Department's specific request. We are currently supplying them with about 800
pounds of ink per month.

Currently, vegetable oil is in about 22 percent of the ink we use for inplant
production, primarily in sheetfed inks. This includes linseed oil which is in the
varnishes of many inks. Soybean oil is in about 5 percent of the inks used for
inplant production, primarily in colored inks.

Congressional Record ax\A Federal Register. There is no vegetable oil in the news
ink currently used for the production of the Congressional Record an6 the Federal
Register. In 1987, the House and Senate Appropriations Committees directed GPO
to conduct an economic and technical feasibility study of printing the Record ant^
the Register with soy oil-based inks. The tests were unsuccessful due to the
incompatibility of the inks available at that time with GPO's aging web
letterpresses used to print these products.

GPO is in the process of acquiring 3 new 64-page web offset presses to replace
those letterpresses. These presses will be able to use vegetable inks in the
production of the Congressional Record an6 the Federal Register. The first press is
scheduled to be delivered later this week. The second and third presses will be
delivered in 3-month intervals thereafter.

As an aside, the timetable for the installation of the new presses may not meet the
180-day timetable to be established by H.R. 1595. Perhaps the timetable language
in section 3, paragraph (b)(1) could be altered where the production of the Record
and the Register are concerned.

Vegetable Inks in Printing Procurement. GPO's Central Office Printing Procurement
Program currently has 29 term contracts in place that require the use of vegetable
inks. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is requiring the utilization of vegetable
inks on all tax package programs. For fiscal 1993, GPO procured 307 tax package
programs for the IRS worth $39.5 million. As I reported to the Senate last year, a
survey we conducted of the top five contractors on our two most-used multiple
award general use contracts found that they were capable of using vegetable inks
at no additional charge, and that many commercial contractors are currently using
such inks as their standard.

Cost of Vegetable Ink. Section 2, paragraph 6 of H.R. 1595 notes that,
"according to the Government Printing Office, using vegetable-based ink appears to
add little if any additional cost to Government printing." This is because the cost
of ink is such a small portion of the overall cost of a typical printing job (the
primary components are labor, machine time, and paper). The cost of the ink used

to print the Congressional Record and the Federal Register, for example, is
approximately one-tenth of one percent of the entire cost. We have also been able
to modify printing contracts, at the request of the requisitioning agency, to require
the use of vegetable ink at no increased cost. Even in cases where the
comparative cost per pound of some vegetable-based and petroleum-based inks
may be substantial, the impact of that cost differential on the total cost of printing
the job is not likely to be significant.

It is important to note that GPO's Printing Procurement Program, where the
majority of vegetable inks would be employed, would not conduct cost
comparisons of petroleum inks and vegetable Inks to determine contract awards.
Instead, the requirement to use vegetable inks in Federal printing would be made a
specification of printing contracts wherever "technologically feasible," as stated in
section 3, paragraph (b)(1) of H.R. 1595. Contractors would submit bids for that
specification only; they would not be required to submit dual bids for petroleum
and vegetable inks. This is the procedure that has been followed for ensuring the
use of recycled paper in procured printing, and it has been highly successful in
terms of achieving maximum coverage in recycled paper utilization.

"Escape Clause." We have reviewed the Treasury Department's concerns that an
"escape clause" be provided from the requirements of H.R. 1595 regarding the
post-printing anti-tampering security features of Government checks and other
documents, as stated in the letter to the Subcommittee dated April 25, 1994. The
requirement to use the maximum amount of vegetable ink that is "technologically
feasible" might be sufficient for this purpose, but we support the
Treasury Department's request which would also apply to the printing of U.S.
passports performed by GPO for the State Department.

Verification. Currently, a reliable post-production test for vegetable ink is under
development. While the test will show the presence of vegetable oil in the ink,
work is still under way to develop a reliable method for quantifying the percentage
of vegetable oil present in the ink. Thus, in the short term verification may require
additional Government effort and costs. We do not believe these costs would be
significant, however.

The solution would be similar to what GPO has done to verify the use of the
required fiber content in recycled paper, for which there also is no post-production
test. For recycled paper, GPO requires documentation and conducts inspections of
mills from whom contractors buy paper. For purposes of vegetable ink verification,
documentation that the required ink has been acquired and will be used on
procured work could be required to be made available for GPO's review. The
Government could also conduct inspections of contractor ink supplies in cases
where the size and importance of the job suggests the need for such inspection.
In cases of complaints that contractors are not using vegetable inks, GPO would

investigate. The same investigative procedure is currently used for connplaints
about the failure to use recycled paper. While we cannot provide an estimate of
the added costs for verification, on the whole the growing use of vegetable inks by
commercial printers suggests that the need for, and cost of, verification would not
be significant.

Increased Consumption of Vegetable Ink. There would be an increase in the
amount of vegetable ink used by GPO as a result of this legislation. For Central
Office printing, we project an increase of approximately 6-8 tons annually, based
on the amount of heatset inks projected to be used and the legislation's
requirement that a minimum of 10 percent of the heatset vehicle be vegetable oil.
If GPO continued to use news inks in the amount currently consumed, the increase
would be greater: on the order of 15-20 tons. However, the new web offset
presses GPO is acquiring are heatset presses and will use heatset ink, where the
minimum required percentage of vegetable oil will be less; also, GPO is likely to use
less ink to print the Congressional Record an6 the Federal Register with the offset
process than is currently used in the letterpress process. Developing a similar
estimate for procured printing is virtually impossible because of the lack of data
concerning the kinds of inks used by contractors.

Vegetable Ink and Document Preservation. As you know, ensuring the archival
stability of Government documents with enduring research and educational value
has been a concern in recent years. Where the archival stability of vegetable ink is
concerned, we do not foresee a problem. Until the discovery of petroleum and
petroleum products in the past century, all printing inks were vegetable-based and
some of these have survived quite well. The real issue in the archival preservation
of documents is the quality of paper used and storage conditions. GPO's view is
that vegetable ink poses no problems for the archival preservation of important
Government documents.

Vegetable Ink and Current Government Printing Proposals. As you also know,
various proposals are currently under review in Congress regarding the future of
GPO, as the result of the National Performance Review and the efforts of the Joint
Committee on the Organization of Congress. GPO is fully prepared to assist and
cooperate with Congress in whatever disposition is made of this issue, and we
support and are working actively with the Administration and Federal agencies to
reduce costs and provide improved printing and related services. However, to the
extent that Government printing is decentralized and dispersed throughout the
agencies as the possible result of any of these measures, it will be extremely
difficult for the Government to ensure and enforce the objectives of vegetable ink
utilization under H.R. 1595 and S. 716. GPO's current unified structure and
mission can assure maximum possible coverage for the use of vegetable inks under
this legislation, just as we have ensured the use of recycled paper in Government
printing.

Mr. Chairman, once again GPO has no objections to this legislation. We are fully
prepared to support and assist Congress in increasing the use of vegetable ink in
Government printing. This concludes my prepared statement and I would be
pleased to answer any questions the Subcommittee may have.

Mr. CONDIT. Thank you, Mr. DiMario. We will get back to you
with some questions. We will take Mr. Diedrich, Is that correct,
sir?

STATEMENT OF LARRY DIEDRICH, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN
SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION, ELKTON, SD

Mr. Diedrich. That's fine. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and
members of the committee. I thank you and commend you once
again for taking this bill and having this hearing here today.

My name is Larry Diedrich and I am a soybean farmer from
Elkton, SD, and president of the American Soybean Association. I
am here today representing both the American Soybean Association
and the National Com Growers Association, who support H.R.
1595.

We believe that the Federal Government should be setting the
standard for all printers by using vegetable oil ink for printing
whenever it is cost-effective. Since soy ink is the leading source of
vegetable ink, we believe that that increased use of vegetable ink
will result in an increased use of our product.

I think it is interesting when we look at history of soybean ink
vegetable oil ink, it was developed by the Newspaper Association
of America in 1985, not in response to environmental concerns, not
in response to rural development, promotion of ag products, but be-
cause of their concern during the petroleum shortages back in the
1970's that they needed to have some sort of alternative.

Since that time, of course, the benefits have changed and we
have begun to recognize several benefits for the ag community and
also the environment. It is interesting also that over 2,000 different
vegetable oil formulations were considered and, after that consider-
ation, soybean oil was chosen because it was the most effective and
abundant of the vegetable oils.

It was first tested in the Cedar Rapids Gazette in Iowa in 1987.
Since that time, as we have heard, over 3,000 newspapers are
using soy ink or veg oil inks, along with numerous other printers
and so on. So it has been very well accepted through the industry.

We are also very pleased that Secretary of Agriculture Mike
Espy announced at our EXPO last July that USDA printings would
be using soy ink or veg ink wherever possible.

The American Soybean Association has recognized the signifi-
cance of this product being made from our commodity and had de-
voted countless farmer dollars in promotion and further develop-
ment of this ink. In fact, in 1989, Monsanto Agriculture Co. devel-
oped a soy seal trademark to indicate the presence of soybean oil
in various agriculture products and assigned ASA the right to this
trademark.

ASA has been very successful in promoting and expanding the
market for soy ink by allowing the use of the soy seal when the
product is being usea in printmg and manufacturing. The use of
the trademark has allowed publishers and printers to know when
they are using a soy ink product and readers to know when they
are reading materials printed with a soy ink.

And because of all the newspapers I receive at home and many
of the bills that I receive, it gives me a little bit of good feeling
about receiving the bills when the fact is that I have a recycled

symbol on one side of it and the soy ink symbol on the other. And
both as a consumer and a producer, that gives me a very good feel-
ing.

The soybean industry established the National Soy Ink Informa-
tion Center, which Jo Patterson is the leader of, in Des Moines, lA,
that serves as a coordinator of the soy ink activities, including re-
search and market promotion.

The center has developed standards for the use of the seal by set-
ting minimum requirements that are very close to the minimum
levels set in your bill. These standards are reviewed periodically
and can be changed by the approval of the ASA board of directors.
The executive director of the soy ink center, as I indicated, will be
commenting on this later.

I would now like to tell the committee some of the reasons ASA
believes that the vegetable oil ink such as soy ink is in the right
direction for the government to be going. We believe they are bene-
ficial to printers and the readers. The fact that soy ink allows pig-
ments to reach their fullest capability, which is an important char-
acteristic in the growing trend toward the use of color newspapers.
Because soy ink provides a more intense color, printers can use less
and it goes further.

Another very popular characteristic is low rub. This factor is ex-
tremely important to readers who dislike the aftereffects of holding
a newspaper printed with a conventional petroleum ink, which I
am sure each of you have found out.

Soy ink has other favorable characteristics that are important to
all citizens that have an interest in our environment. Unlike petro-
leum, soybeans are renewable and a plentiful source of oil. Al-
though soy ink is not completely biodegradable because of the pig-
ments and other chemicals used, in small quantities in ink it is
friendlier to the environment than traditional inks. We believe that
this is an important factor for the Federal Grovernment to consider
due to large volumes of printed paper it uses and recycles daily.

Top researchers in the Western Michigan University recognized,
as the Nation's premiere education institute for paper manufactur-
ing have found, that soy ink is easier to remove from paper pulp
before recycling. This paper does not have to be bleached as much,
resulting in a cleaner paper at a lesser cost. This not only speeds
up the recycling process, but contributes to a better quality recy-
cled paper as a result.

Another key factor in favor of the soy inks, as indicated earlier,
is the reduction in VOCs. Mr. Chairman, we are aware that the
U.S. Treasury Department has brought an issue to the committee's
attention regarding the use of the vegetable oil inks in security doc-
uments such as checks. We want the committee to know that we
have no problem with such documents being exempt from the re-
quirements of legislation as long as we have flexibility later on to
address that issue.

Mr. Chairman, as a soybean farmer, I am proud of the commod-
ity that I grow because it is used in so many different things, in-
cluding making safer and cleaner inks. I hope that you and this
committee will look at the legislation closely and enaorse its pur-
pose in instructing Federal agencies to use vegetable oil ink when
it is available and cost-effective.

I think soybean ink is just one of the many products where we
see agriculture and the environment working together and, to me,
that gives me very much pride as a farmer and all the more reason
to move forward with this legislation.

I thank you very much for your attention today and appreciate
all that you can do. Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Diedrich follows:!

ASA

American Soybean
Association

AMERICAN SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION

STATEMENT BEFORE THE

HOUSE GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INFORMATION

Good Morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I am
Larry Diedrich, a soybean farmer from Elkton, South Dakota and
President of the American Soybean Association (ASA). I am here today
representing of the American Soybean Association and the National Corn
Growers Association who support H.R. 1595, and who appreciate the
Committee's interest in this legislation. We believe that the Federal
government should be setting the standard for all printers by using
vegetable ink for printing when it is cost effective. Since soy ink is the
leading source of vegetable ink, we believe that the increased use of
vegetable ink will result in increased use of our product.

The American Soybean Association has a strong and long term interest
in the issue of using vegetable oil in ink. Soybean oil-based printing ink

Washington Office

•000 CtJMNrCTICUl AVfNUF NW SUITE '10"; WASHINGTON DC 700V. I-HONF 2',?. IT ■•^5- ' '•'•/ '/'.'/

was developed by the Newspaper Association of America in 19Ub.
Because of the volatility of petroleum prices during this period, the
industry was looking for alternatives to the pigment vehicle for printing
inks. After much testing of over 2000 different vegetable oil
formulations, soybean oil was chosen as the most efficient and abundant
source of vegetable oil. In fact, soybean oil exceed all of the National
Newspaper Association's technical specifications. It was first tested by
the Cedar Rapids Gazette in Cedar Rapids, Iowa in 1987. Since that
time, soy ink has been widely used by major newspapers and other
publishers across this country. We were pleased by USDA Secretary
Espy's announcement last July at our annual meeting that the
Department of Agriculture and its subcontractors will be using soy ink for
all printing. USDA had been using soy ink for much for its printing for
several years.

The American Soybean Association has recognized the significant
product being made from their commodity and have devoted countless
farmer dollars to the promotion and further development of this ink.
in fact, in 1989 Monsanto Agriculture Company developed a SoySeal
trademark to indicate the presence of soybean oil in various agriculture

85-815 - 95 - 3

products and assigned ASA the rights to the trademark. ASA has been
very successful in promoting and expanding the market for soy ink by
allowing the use of the SoySeal when the product is used in printing and
manufacturing. The use of the trademark has allowed publishers and
printers to know when they are using a soy ink product and readers to
know when they are reading materials printed with soy ink.

The soybean industry established the National Soy Ink Information
Center in Des Moines, Iowa, that serves as the coordinator of soy ink
activities including research and market promotion. The Soy Ink Center
has developed standards for the use of the seal by setting minimum
requirements that are very close to the minimum levels set in your bill.
These standards are reviewed periodically and can only be changed by
approval of the ASA Board of Directors. The Executive Director of the
Soy Ink Center will present testimony to the Committee later this
morning.

I would now like to tell the committee some of the reasons ASA believes
that a vegetable ink such as soy ink is the right direction our government
should be going with its printing needs. Many of the qualities of soy

ink that we believe are beneficial to printers and readers are technical.
For example, soy ink allows pigments to reach their fullest capability
which is an important characteristic in the growing trend toward the use
of color in newspapers. Because soy ink provides more intense color,
printers can use less and it goes further. Another, very popular
characteristic is "low rub." This factor is extremely important to readers
who dislike the after effects of holding a newspaper printed with a
conventional petroleum ink.

Soy ink has other favorable characteristics that are important
to all citizens who have an interest in our environment. Unlike
petroleum, soybeans are a renewable and plentiful source of oil.
Although soy ink is not completely biodegradable because of pigments
and other chemicals used in small quantities in the ink, it is friendlier to
the environment than traditional inks. We believe that this is an
important factor for the federal government to consider due to the large
volumes of printed paper it uses and recycles daily.

Top researchers at Western Michigan University, recognized as the
nation's premier education institution for paper manufacturing, have

found that soy ink is easier to remove from paper pulp before recycling.
The paper does not have to be bleached as much, resulting in a cleaner
paper at a lesser cost. This not only speeds up the recycling process and
contributes to a better quality recycled paper as a result.

Another key factor in favor of soy inks is the absence of high volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). In conventional inks, the petroleum
evaporates and forms VOCs, however, soy ink does not release any
significant volume of emissions into the air when it dries. Soy ink is well
below the EPA range of limiting VOCs levels while petroleum-based inks
are above the EPA limits.

Mr. Chairman, we are aware the U.S. Treasury Department has brought
an issue to the Committee's attention regarding the use of vegetable inks
on security documents, such as checks. We want the Committee to
know that we have no problem with such documents being exempt from
the requirements of the legislation.

Mr. Chairman, as a soybean farmer I am proud of the commodity that I
grow because it can be used for so many different things, including

making a safer and cleaner ink. I hope that you and this Committee will
look at the legislation closely and endorse its purpose of instructing
federal agencies to use vegetable ink when it is available and cost
effective. The federal government should be setting the standards for
using environmentally safe and American produced products.

Thank you for your attention today. I will be happy to try to answer any
questions that you or others might have.

Mr. CoNDiT, Thank you, Mr. Diedrich. I appreciate you being
here very much today. Ms. Patterson.

STATEMENT OF JO PATTERSON, SOY INK COORDINATOR,
NATIONAL SOY INK INFORMATION CENTER, DES MOINES, lA

Ms. Patterson. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of
the subcommittee. My name is Jo Patterson and I coordinate the
promotional activities of soy ink on behalf of America's 400,000 soy-
bean producers.

In February 1993, the National Soy Ink Information Center was
established in west Des Moines, lA, when the Iowa Soybean Asso-
ciation, for which I work, was awarded a subcontract to manage
the national soy ink program on behalf of the American Soybean
Association.

The purpose of the National Soy Ink Information Center is to not
only coordinate State and national activities, but to serve as an in-
formation source for the printing industry and the general public.
It is in that capacity that I provide this testimony today.

Being a native lowan, it is a special honor for me to appear today
since Congressman Leach is one of the original cosponsors of the
bill. U.S. soybean producers have a keen interest in passage of the
Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993. They have invested millions of
dollars in new uses research searching for ways to utihze the sur-
plus of soybean oil that normally drives down the market prices of
soybean.

Soy ink is a product that has come of age in the 7 short years
since it was first introduced commercially. Thanks in part to the
promotional activities funded by the national soybean checkoff and
26 State checkoff programs before that, soy ink is being used today
by one-third to one-half of the Nation's 9,100 newspapers, including
three-fourths of the 1,700 daily newspapers. In addition, one-fourth
of the 50,000 commercial printers in the United States are using
soy ink on a regular basis.

Likewise, nine States have soy ink legislation in place, including
Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri,
Ohio, and South Dakota. Several other States are pursuing some
type of soy ink legislation.

In addition, an Executive order mandating the use of soy ink has
been signed in Nebraska, and a directive signed by the Governor
encouraging the use of soy ink is in place in South Carolina.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture broke new ground on the na-
tional level when Agriculture Secretary Espy announced last sum-
mer that the Department would do all of its printing, both in-house
and contracted, with soy ink.

With the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993, Congress has an
opportunity to follow suit, showing its support for soybean farmers
and new uses for ag commodities while, at the same time, helping
the environment. Many Members of Congress already print their
congressional newsletters with soy ink.

There are many reasons to print with soy ink, besides the obvi-
ous support for agriculture and the environment. Soy ink has be-
come known for its quality of color, increased mileage, and im-
proved overall printability. In fact, some ink manufacturers have

made soy ink their stock ink, meaning that unless the customer
specifies petroleum ink, the order will be filled using soy ink.

Without a doubt, soy ink has enabled printers and print buyers
to join the "Green Movement." With negligible or low emissions of
pollution-causing vapors, known as volatile organic compounds, soy
ink helps printers comply with the requirements of the Clean Air
Act, which restricts VOC emissions in cities already suffering from
air quality problems.

Soy ink also deinks faster and easier from recyclable paper, ac-
cording to researchers at West ern Michigan University, which
Larry Diedrich just mentioned. That not only speeds up the recy-
cling process, but it contributes to a better quality recycled paper
as well.

Besides its appeal to the environmental community, soy ink also
supports American agriculture. The use of soy ink draws upon our
abundant supplies of soybean oil, a renewable resource.

It is estimated that 44 million pounds of soybean oil are cur-
rently used in ink production, but the potential could be as much
as 457 million pounds if the entire printing industry switched to
soy ink. Congress needs to follow suit with what USDA has already
accomplished and begin printing all of its in-house and contractea
materials with vegetable oil-based printing inks.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for inviting me to speak today on be-
half of America's 400,000 soybean producers.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Patterson follows:]

BEFORE THE

U.6. HOUSE SUBCOMy.ITTEE

INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION, AKD AGRICULTDRE

Testimony oc

H.R. 15 9 5 - THE VEGETABLE INK PRIKTING ACT 07 19 9 3

Kay 26, 1994

Jo Patterson

Soy Ink Coordinator

Kational Soy Ink Information Center

^T-ir:

~; SOY INK

National Soy Ink Information Center

c Io^^a Soybean Asrici^-iion

1025 Ashwonh Roac. No, 310 • West hri Nioines. lA5026^3:-42

Phone 'lis 223-1423 • FAX 515 223-4331

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and niemt>ers of the Subconunittee.
Ky name is Jo Patterson, and I coordinate the promotional
activities of soy ink on behalf of America's 400,000 soybean
producers.

In Februar-y 1993, the National Soy ink Informaricr, Center was
established m West Des Koines, Iowa, when the Iowa Soybean
Association (for which I work) was awarded a subcontract to manage
the national soy ink program on behalf of the American Soybean
Association.

The purpose of the National Soy Ink Information Center is to
not only coordinate state and national acrtivities, but to serve as
an information source for the printing industry and the general
public. It is in that capacity that I provide this testimony
today.

Being a native lowan, it is a special honor for me to appear
today, since Congressman Leach is one of the original co-sponsors
of the bill.

U.S. soybean producers have a keen Interest in passage of the
Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993. They have invested millions of
dollars in new uses research, searching for ways to utilize the
surplus of soybean oil that normally drives down the market price
of soybeans.

Soy ink is a product that has "come of age" in the seven short
years since it was first introduced commercially. Thanks, in pai-t,
to the promotional activities funded by the National Soybean
Checkoff (and 26 state checkoff programs before that) , soy ink is
being used today by one-third to one-half of the nation's 9,100
newspapers, including three-fourths of the 1,700 U.S. daily
newspapers.

In addition, one-fourth of the 50,000 commercial printers in
the United States are using soy ink on a regular basis.

Likewise, nine states have soy ink legislation in place,
including Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Minnesota,
Missouri, Ohio and South Dakota. Several other states are pursuing
some t^'pe of soy ink legislation.

In addition, an executive order mandating the use of soy ink
has been signed in Nebraska, and a directive signed by the governor
encouraging the use of soy ink is in place in South Carolina.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture broke new ground on the
national level when Agriculture Secretary Espy announced last
summer that the department would do all of irs printing (both in-
house and contracted) with soy ink.

With the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993, Congress has an
opportunity to follow suit, showing its support for soybean farmers
and new uses for ag commodities, while at the same time helping the
environment. Many members of Congress already print their
congressional newsletters with soy ink.

- 3

There are many reasons to print with soy ink, besides the
obvious support for agriculture and the envircnsent. Soy mX has
become known for its quality of color, increased mileage, and
improved overall prmtability . In fact, some ink manufacturers
have made soy ink their "stock" ink, meaning that unless the
customer specifies "petroleum ink," the order will be filled using
soy ink.

Without a doubt, soy ink has enabled printers and print buyers
to join the "Green Movement." With negligible or low emissions of
pollution-causing vapors known as volatile organic conpounds
(VOCs) , soy ink helps printers comply with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act, which restricts VOC emissions in cities already
suffering from air quality problems.

Soy ink also de-inks faster and easier fror recyclable paper,
according to researcners at Western Michigan University. That not
only speeds up the recycling process, but it contributes to a
better quality recycled paper as well.

Besides its appeal to the environmental community, soy ink
also supports American agriculture. The use cf soy ink draws upon
our abundant supplies of soybean oil, a renewable resource. It is
estimated that 44 million pounds of soybean oil are currently used
in ink production, but the potential could fc^ as much as 457
million pwDunds if the entire printing industry switched to soy ink.

4 -

Congress needs to follow suit with what USDA has already
accomplished and begin printing all of its in-house and contracted
materials with vegetable oil-based printing inks.

Mr. Chaiman, I thank you for inviting me to spea>: today on
behalf of America's 400,000 soybean producers. I encourage you to
move this bill forward in a timely manner for full House
consideration .

- 5 -

Mr. CoNDiT. Thank you, Ms. Patterson. We appreciate your being
here. I have a couple questions. I would like to make one point real
clear. Does anyone here anticipate any additional cost to the Fed-
eral Government for the use of vegetable ink?

Mr. DiMario. No, sir.

Mr. CONDIT. Mr. DiMario, the Department of Treasury has
raised a concern that the use of vegetable ink may interfere with
security measures for the government checks. Is this a reasonable
concern and do you see any problem if the bill is amended to ad-
dress it? Perhaps each of you can respond if you have information.

Mr. DiMario. I think it is a reasonable concern and we are also
suggesting that as to our production of passports, that it might also
apply.

The security measures that are adopted for those security docu-
ments are usually a coordinated effort to prevent counterfeiting
and usually they bring in the counterfeit experts through the
Treasury, but also with respect to passports you have the CIA and
the FBI and a whole group of people and they establish what the
security measures would be.

The best information to me is that it is a reasonable requirement
and the escape clause as you have it proposed appears to be quite
rational.

Mr. CoNDiT. So you think we have dealt with the problem; have
we taken care of itr

Mr. DiMario. Yes, sir.

Mr. CONDIT. All security measures will be protected?

Mr. DiMario. Yes, sir.

Mr. CONDIT. Any comments to that?

Mr. DiEDRlCH. As I indicated, Mr. Chairman, in my testimony,
we didn't have any problem with that whatsoever. I do understand
there is technology that is very close that will resolve this concern
within the veg oil ink market, so that is why I indicated it would
be nice to be flexible with it so that it can be used in that particu-
lar use down the road.

Ms. Patterson. I would also like to comment that soy ink has
only been on the market commercially for 7 years and it began in
the newspaper industry. Technology is gaining ground every day.
Soy ink has improved si^ificantly since it was introduced, and I
expect it will continue to improve even further.

Mr. CONDIT. Can anyone offer a realistic estimate of the market
for vegetable ink? The estimates range up to 500 million pounds.
Does anyone have a feel for that?

Ms. Patterson. We estimate soy ink usage from soybean oil
could be as much as 44 million pounds.

Mr. Condit. Does anyone else have realistic numbers?

Mr. DiMario. No, sir.

Mr. Condit. Mr. Peterson, do you have any questions or com-
ments?

Mr. Peterson. No.

Mr. Condit. Mrs. Thurman.

Mrs. Thurman. I just have one comment. I've got to say it. I
have to tell you, Mr. Diedrich, when you mentioned the part about
the black on your fingers, my mother told me that a long time ago
when I was in a campaign, she said, "If you can figure out how to

get rid of this black ink that kind of rubs off everybody's hands,
you could run for President."

Mr. DiEDRlCH. Another good family reunion coming up.

Mr. CONDIT, Is there any research and development going on
that would examine the use of vegetable ink? Is there any other
ways in which we use vegetable ink? Is there any research in that
area right now?

Mr. Collins. Yes, sir. The Department of Agriculture has never
stopped so they are doing a lot of work on vegetable ink and soy
ink, and it is an ongoing factor reported at the TAGA meeting,
which is the Technical Association of Graphic Arts, earlier in the
month about the work that was going on and will be going on.

Mr. CONDIT. Can you identify yourself please, sir?

Mr. Collins. I am George Collins. I'm the manager of both

Mr. DiMario. I identified Mr. Collins in my statement as I
opened the statement.

Mr. CoNDiT. OK, we have no other questions. We appreciate your
time. You have been very helpful to us. Our intention is to mark
up a bill when we come back from the work recess and so we may
be in contact with you if we have additional questions.

Thank you very much for your time.

Mr. DiMario. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CoNDiT. I would like to ask that we have several Members
who have provided statements to the committee. I would like to ask
unanimous consent that they be included in the record.

Without objections, that will be done.

[The information is contained in the appendix.]

Mr. CONDIT. No other comments, questions?

[No response.]

Mr. CONDIT. This hearing is adjourned. Thank you very much.

[Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to re-
convene subject to the call of the Chair.]

APPENDIX

Material Submitted for the Hearing Record

testimony by congressman tim johnson on h.r. 1595, the
vegetable ink printing act

before the subcommittee on information, justice,
transportation, and agriculture

May 26, 1994

Mr. Chairman, 1 appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of H.R.
1595, the Vegetable Printing Act. I strongly support this legislation, a similar
version of which passed the Senate last year.

This legislation offers an important opportunity for this country to expand its
markets for agricultural products, while placing no additional burden on our
taxpayers. The bill calls for one simple step forward: all government lithographic
printing be done with vegetable-based ink to the maximum extent technologically
feasible and commercially cost-competitive. No objections to this proposal have
been raised by any organization or one single member of the Senate. An official
from the Government Printing Office has testified that there would no practical
problems with implementing this proposal.

The importance of this potential market for our ag products should not be
underestimated. The Department of Agriculture has already moved forward to
implement the provisions of this bill, and that department alone will bring at least
$26 million of orders per year printed with vegetable ink.

Mr. Chairman, I stand with the members of the American Soybean Association, the
National Corn Growers Association, the Corn Refiners Association,
Communicating for Agricuhure, the Consumer Federation of America, and a
number of other ag organizations to support this bill. I am particularly proud that
one of my constituents, Larry Diedrich of Elkton, South Dakota, is here today to
testify on behalf of the American Soybean Association.

Mr. Chairman, thank you once again for the opportunity to submit this testimony,
and I urge that the subcommittee move expeditiously on this legislation.

(43)

Testimony on H.R. 1595, the "Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993"

Submitted by

Representative James A. Leach

to the

Subcommittee on Information, Justice, Transportation and Agriculture

May 26, 1994

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony for
consideration by your Subcommittee during its consideration of H.R.
1595, the "Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993." I am an original
cosponsor of the bill and am convinced its passage makes both good
economic and good environmental sense.

As you know, H.R. 1595 would require that all printing performed or
procured by the Federal government use ink made from vegetable oil
wherever doing so is technologically feasible and cost competitive.

The use of vegetable -- as opposed to petroleum-based -- newsprint
inks by federal agencies will save the taxpayers money by making
federal printing more environmentally sound, by using less foreign
oil, and by increasing the utilization of renewable resources
produced by our American farmers.

Vegetable ink not only is more environmentally friendly, but
printers have found that vegetable ink provides better color
reproduction, makes for easier press cleanup and is less susceptible
to smearing. Moreover, vegetable ink saves money because it goes
further; in fact, in certain print applications, 10 to 20 percent
less vegetable ink is required to do the same job as petroleum-
based ink.

On the environmental side of the ledger, vegetable ink has been
found to be easier to remove from paper pulp prior to recycling,
causing less damage to the pulp fibers during de-inking. This not
only speeds up the process and makes recycling easier, but it
contributes to better quality recycled paper. In addition,
substantially less pollutants are released into the air by vegetable
ink in the drying process.

Major newspapers using vegetable inks are: L.A. Times , Denver Post ,
Detroit Free Press , Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel , Boston Globe .
Washington Times , St. Petersburg Times , and USA Today . In fact,
over 3,000 U.S. newspapers use vegetable ink, including three
fourths of all daily newspapers.

The expanded use of vegetable ink makes good sense for American
agriculture as well.

If federal farm program payments are to come down without
precipitating a depression in the heartland, it is crucial that new
demand be developed for agricultural products. The use of vegetable
ink to print Federal publications will contribute to the expansion
of the manufacturing base for this ink. As soybean oil use as a
base for ink expands, it is estimated that the demand could approach
the 100 million bushel level, a significant addition to the market.
Such expanded usage would cor.tr ibut<? +■" the TTnitpH States retaining
or enlarging its share of the world market for newsprint ink.

The words of former Public Printer Robert W. Houk perhaps best sum
up the arguments for the increased use of vegetable ink. According
to Mr. Houk, "the use of soybean oil ink could help decrease our
reliance on foreign oil that is used in the petroleum-based inks,
reduce our stack emissions of pollutants, and help over half a
million American farmers who currently grow soybeans."

Mr. Chairman, as you also know, under the leadership of Senators
Bond and Wellstone, the other body has already passed legislation
similar to H.R. 1595.

In conclusion, I would like to thank Jo Patterson of the Iowa
Soybean who has worked tirelessly for the National Soy Ink
Information Center on behalf of this important legislation, and I
would like particularly to thank our colleague from Illinois, Mr.
Durbin, for the leadership his has provided on this measure and on
behalf of American agriculture as a whole.

Again, Mr. Chairman, you and your Subcommittee are to be commended
for holding this hearing on H.R. 1595. I would urge swift and
favorable action on the bill in order that it may be brought to the
Floor for consideration as soon as practicable.

Stiteiieiit by tlie '

Haiorable Doiig Beiieiiter

House Government Operations

Subcommittee on Information, Justice, Transportation, and Agriculture

Vegetable Ink Printing Act

H.R. 1595

May 26, 1994

Mr. CJiairman, as an original sponsor of H.R. 1595, I strongly support
this legislation which seeks to expand tlie use of vegetable-based in>cs for
Federal printing purposes.

The Vegetable Ink Printing Act, H.R. 1595, would req-aire that Federal
lithograpiiic printing be performed using vegetable-based inks Vvhen
technologically feasible and cost-coupetitive. Tlierefore, this legislation
does not mandate the use of tJiese inks but ratlier encourages Federal printers
to utilize vegetable-based inks when appropriate.

Mr. Chairman, by promoting the uf-c of vi.x)etablc-bascd inks for Federal
printing purposes, this lexjislation will rcxiuce oiw nation's dependence on
foreign petroleum-based products, rcxiuce volatile oLx>inic conpoiuxis emissions
which are harmful to the eJwironiiiGnt, and increase tlic dejivind for our nation's
renewable agricultural pra.1ucts.

The United States Dovviiirjiiont ol Agricultuie is already using vegetable-
based inks for its printing pui^xjaes. According to Secretary Espy,
approximately $26 million in annual USliA print iixi wiU Lx^ perfoniied with ink
derived from agricultural pro-iucts. Similarly, iiviny nowsp>ipoi-s including the
nation's largest circulation ncw;-.i.\it-vr, 'Iho Uv Angel cs_TinK:', are nvijor users

of or*e particular type of vegetable ink, soy ink.

Mr. Chairnan, I strongly support this legislation v*iich will, among
other things, open the vast Federal printing market to vegetable-based inks.
This initiative could potentially result in the demand for 2,500,000,000
pounds of vegetable crops or 500,000,000 pounds of vegetable oil in the U.S.
printing market alone. It also helps to ensure that the United States will
retain, or perhaps increase, its share of the world market for vegetable ink.
Clearly, this legislation is good for our agricultural industry, and it is
good for our environment.

I would like to commend my colleagues, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Leach, and Mr. ^

Penny for their work on this legislationi Additionally, I urge my colleagues , i

to support this legislation which is substantially similar to legislation, S. r'

716, passed last November in the Senate by unanimous consent. ^:r

STATEMENT OF
THE HONORABLE GLENN POSHARD

HOUSE GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

ON
INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION, AND AGRICULTURE

H. R. 1595
THE VEGETABLE PRINTING ACT

Thank you for the opportunity to offer my strong support for
the Vegetable Printing Act, H.R. 1595. This legislation will set
miniTnum percentages of vegetable oil that must be used by Federal
agencies and government subcontractors in ink for lithographic
printing. These percentages were established in discussions with
Federal agencies and representatives from printing ink
manufacturers. In addition, Ralph Nader's Government Purchasing
Project and the American Soybean Association also support this
legislation.

H.R. 1595 would allow a Federal agency to use less than the
mandatory minimum percentages of vegetable oil if the cost of
printing with vegetable-based ink is significantly greater than
the cost of printing with petroleum-based ink. The Government
Printing Office has advised that increasing the use of vegetable
inks will have a negligible impact on the cost of its printing
jobs. Vegetable ink provides greater printing mileage (more
materials printed with less ink) which is a cost savings. In
fact, in certain applications, 10%-20% less ink is required to do
the same job as petroleum-based ink.

It is estimated that one-third of the country's more than
9,000 newspapers use vegetable ink, including the Los Angeles
Times , Boston Globe , and USA Today . Magazines such as Time .
Sports Illustrated , and People are beginning to use vegetable
inks. Vegetable ink also has been found to produce better color
reproduction, easier press cleanup, and less ruboff on readers'
hands. Requiring the Federal government to use more vegetable-
based ink in printing operations will send a strong signal to the
marketplace. The signal is that the Federal government is
willing to use its purchasing power to pursue goals that we all
share: reducing government costs, helping the environment, and
helping rural America.

As a member of Congress from a soybean-producing district, I
know the importance of soybeans and soybean products for our
domestic agricultural economy. If farm subsidies are to decrease
without precipitating a depression in the heartland of America,
it is critical that new demand be developed for agricultural
products. While the increased use of vegetable-based inks will
not alone save the family farmer, this step to requiring more
uses for soybeans will be beneficial. All farmers are happy for
any and all new markets for their production. Agriculture is a
key component of our present and future renewable resource base.

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, I believe,
with this legislation, we can take a giant step forward to help
rural America, the environment, and the U.S. taxpayers. Thank
you for the opportunity to present my views. I urge your prompt
consideration of H.R. 1595.

BEFORE THE

HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE

INFORMATION, JUSTICE, TRANSPORTATION AND AGRICULTURE

RE: H.R.1595 - THE "VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT OF 1993"

STATEMENT OF
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PRINTING INK MANUFACTURERS

May 26, 1994 James H. Sutphin

Executive Director
Heights Plaza
777 Terrace Avenue
Hasbrouck Heights, New Jersey 07604
(201) 288-9454

NAPIM

NAPIM is a national trade association representing small, medium, and large printing ink
manufacturers in the U.S. Its 80 members account for nearly 90% of total U.S. sales of printing
inks which amounted to approximately $3. 1 billion in 1993.

The Prinking Ink Industry is composed of 224 companies operating a total of 504
manufacturing facilities in the U.S. of which approximately 315 are operated by NAPIM
members (U.S. Census of Manufacturers, 1987). Nearly two-thirds of the total number of
printing ink manufacturing facilities in the U.S. employ fewer than 20 employees.

BACKGROUND

Vegetable drying oils have long been used in lithographic ink vehicles and continue to be
used. More recently, semi-drying oils, especially soy oil, have come into favor as replacement
for petroleum oils used heretofore, and are most widely used in newsinks as a result. Members
of the printing ink industry have enthusiastically supported increased use of soy oils in their
product lines.

The total usage of vegetable oils in lithographic inks for printing procured by or produced
by the federal government probably did not reach 400,000 pounds in 1992, or about 0.002% of
total vegetable oil supply. Soy oil probably represented more than half of this usage, accounting
for less than 0.002% of total soy oil consumption in the U.S. The Vegetable Ink Printing Act
of 1993 would increase the annual demand to about 1.2 million pounds of vegetable oils by 1997
and would represent a barely discernible increase in total vegetable oil demand. Even though soy
oils would account for most of the increase, their total use in federal printing would not exceed
0.008% of soy oil supplies by that year.

In addition to the objective of increasing the demand for vegetable oils, NAPIM notes that
sponsors of the bill have expressed the hope that the Act would reduce reliance on foreign oil and
bring a reduction in volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions. While such reductions may
be accomplished, they would be so in-significant as to be almost meaningless. In fact, based on
NAPIM's forecast, the projected reduction in petroleum oil demand would be only 0.00006%

of today's crude oil and product imports. By the same token, it is doubtful that H.R. 1595 would
result in an annual reduction of more than 140,000 pounds of VOC emissions within the next five
years.

NAPIM POSITION

NAPIM appreciated the opportunity provided by Senator Wellstone's staff to make several
changes in the draft language of the bill, S.716 to meet technical concerns. S.716 was passed by
the Senate on November 18, 1993. As a result, NAPIM has less serious difficulty with the
technical feasibility of the requirements of this particular bill, H.R. 1595, which is almost
identical to the language in S.716.

We have one important technical change to request in the final language of H.R. 1595 and
S.716. We would like to request that the 10% minimum for heat-set inks in §3(b)(2)(D) of
H.R. 1595 be changed to 7% in the final legislation adopted by the Congress.

The American Soybean Association has recognized the need for the change to a 7% level
for heat-set inks after discussing it with printing ink manufacturers. The Soybean Association
has established a minimum of 7% of total formula weight for heat-set ink in order to qualify for
use of the logo and soy seal trademark program.

This is important to NAPIM because one-half of all lithographic inks are heat-set inks and
coated paper requires the use of heat-set inks.

Nevertheless, members of the printing ink industry do have serious philosophical concerns
about the encroachment of the Congress into technical aspects of industrial manufacturing where
health and safety issues are not involved and where there would be only minimal environmental
benefit, if any. This is especially true in this particular case since the bill will have no significant
impact on vegetable oil demand, not will it result in any significant improvement in the
environment.

NAPIM also questions the fairness of legislation which appears to be designed to create
a market for a specific group of constituents at the possible expense of other sectors of the
economy.

The unnecessary encroachment into technical aspects of industrial manufacturing is of

particular concern to members of the printing ink industry because day-to-day formulation of
proprietary products is necessary to meet specific printing requirements for a wide a variety of
printing conditions and uses. The formulation of printing inks involves a sophisticated blend of
scientific and empirical knowledge to produce a product to be applied at press speeds as high as
2,000 feet per minute and which must dry instantaneously. The applied ink film with a thickness
of about one-fortieth the thickness of a human hair must withstand rubbing and folding; must
adhere to the surface being printed; must often resist exposure to chemicals, and have a variety
of other physical and chemical performance properties to satisfy the requirements of a multitude
of different end uses. NAPIM submits that the unrealistic and unnecessary formulary constraints
which would be introduced by the Act will do little more than reduce performance and discourage
technological advances.

NAPIM would also like to point out to the Committee that the printing ink industry is
already using large quantities of vegetable oils in applications where they are appropriate and
which do not detract from the performance properties of the printing ink. NAPIM further notes
that as formulary knowledge increases, the use of semi-drying oils such as soy oil will continue
to increase in the future. In view of the progress already made, NAPIM believes that it is
unlikely that the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993 would have any additional effect on
vegetable oil demand, it will, however, place unnecessary constraints on the ability of printing
ink suppliers to produce the best possible printing ink products.

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND

Attached as Exhibit I is an excerpt from a report prepared at the request of the NAPIM
Board of Directors on the effect of the Vegetable Ink Printing Act on the potential market for
vegetable oils. It presents data on estimated consumption of vegetable oils in lithographic inks
and evaluates the minimal effect which S.716 will have on vegetable oil demand and on the
environment.

NAPIM would also like to point out to the Committee that the printing ink industry is
already using large quantities of vegetable oils. It presents data on estimated consumption of
vegetable oil demand and on the environment.

rONCT.USION

For the foregoing reasons, the National Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers, on
behalf of the U.S. Prinking Ink Industry, opposes the passage of the Vegetable Ink Printing Act
of 1993.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

Respectfully submitted,

James H. Sutphin
Executive Director

May 26, 1994

THE EFFECT OF THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT

ON THE
POTENTIAL MARKET FOR VEGETABLE OILS

May 1993

* * *

The National Association of Printing Ink Manufacturers

777 Terrace Avenue

Hasbrouck Heights, NJ 07604

57
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXEC! JTTVF SUMMARY i

INTROnurTION 1

DISCI ISSTON - VRGF.TARI.R Ofl. DSAGH 1

Vegetable Oils in Printing Ink
Production of Vegetable Oil Inks

Table I - Estimated Shipments of Soy Lithographic Inks (1992)
Vegetable Oil Consumption

Table II - Estimated Consumption of Vegetable Oils in Lithographic Ink (1992)
Vegetable Oils Used in Ink for Federal Printing
Total Vegetable Oil Supplies

Table III - U.S. Supplies of Vegetable Oils Versus Consumption in Lithographic Inks

DISCUSSION - STGNTFTCA NCE OF THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT 6

Market Imphcations
Environmental Implications
Footnotes

APPENDIX A 9

THE FFFKCT OF THE VFGRTABT.E TNK PRTNTTNC, ACT
ON THE POTFNTTAL MARKET FOR VEGETABLE OILS

EXECTITTVE SUMMARY

There has been a growing interest in Congress to achieve a greater use of vegetable oils in
printing inks. While bills introduced in the 102nd Congress were not enacted. Senators
Bond, Wellstone, Grassley and others recently introduced the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of
1993 (S.716) which will require the use of specific minimum levels of vegetable oils in
lithographic inks used by the Federal government for in-house and contract printing. A
companion bill (H.R_1595) has also been introduced in the House by Representatives Durbin,
Leach, Penny and Boreuter.

Because of some misconceptions concerning the potential impact of vegetable oil inks on the
environment and their potential to increase vegetable oil demand while reducing petroleum
oil usage, NAPIM has prepared the following monograph to put these issues into proper
perspective.

Vegetable drying oils such as linseed, tung, oticica and other oils have long been used in
lithographic ink vehicles. More recently semi-drying oils, especially soy oil, have come into
favor. They are generally used as replacements for petroleum oils used heretofore and are
most widely used in lithographic newsinks.

Members of the printing ink industry have enthusiastically supported an increased use of soy
and similar semi-drying oils and most manufacturers of lithographic inks oflFer soy or other
vegetable oil inks in their product line.

While NAPIM has no quarrel with reasonable legislation encouraging the use of vegetable oil
inks in appropriate end uses, the NAPIM Board of Directors is concerned that legislation
specifying required minimums such as the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993 would
encroach on technical formulary freedom where environmental or other health and safety
issues are not involved.

Present use of vegetable oils in printing inks reached about 70 million pounds in 1992
representing a market for only 0.4% of total US. vegetable oil supphes. Thirty million
pounds of this total were soy oils accounting for 0.25% of the total soy oil consumption in
the U.S.

Vegetable oils used in lithographic inks for federal government printing probably did not
reach 400,000 pounds in 1992, or 0.002% of total vegetable oil supply. Soy oil probably
represented more than half of this usage accounting for less than 0.002% of total soy oil
consumption in the U.S. If enacted, the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993 could create a
demand for only 1.2 million pounds of soy oil by 1997 and would represent a barely
discemable increase in total demand for soy oil.

8. Sponsors of S.716 have also expressed the hope that the Act would decrease reliance on
foreign oil. The projected use of vegetable oil inks resulting from the Act would result in a
reduction in petroleum oil usage of around 1.2 million pounds. This is only 00006% of
today's imports of crude oil and petroleum products.

9. Although greater use of vegetable oils in printing ink would bring a corresponding reduction
in VOC content, these reductions will not be as great as some observers seem to expect.
Even though today's usage of soy oils has replaced upwards of 30 million pounds of
petroleum oil, total reduction in VOC emissions is probably less than 3.5 million pounds. The
reason for this is that most of the conventional inks which have been replaced by soy were
dried without the application of heat and consequently only a small portion of the VOC
content would have been emitted to the atmosphere Thus, by 1997 it is doubtful that S.716
could resuh in a reduction of more than 140,000 pounds of VOC emissions.

10. The NAPIM Board of Directors, and most members of the printing ink industry, believe that
legislation to encourage increased use of vegetable oil is not necessary to ensure a growth in
the market for vegetable oil inks. Intense promotion of soy oil inks by the American Soybean
Association combined with external market forces will inevitably bring a substantial increase
in the use of soy ink by newspaper and commercial printers and will not be significantly
increased by legislation requiring their use for either federal or state contract printing.

\s\espiaapm.jer

TTTF FFFECT OF THE VEGETABLE INK PRINTING ACT
ON THE POTENTIAL MA RKET FOR VEGETABLE OILS

INTROniTCTION

There has been a growing interest in Congress to achieve a greater use of vegetable oils in
printing inks. Bills were introduced in the last Congress, but none were enacted. Now, in the
103 rd Congress there have been renewed efforts to legislate increased use of soy and other
vegetable oils in printing inks.

The concern of many legislators with the use of vegetable oils in printing ink reflects their belief
that such inks will reduce environmental pollution. While this concern is, no doubt, sincere, it
may also reflect a misunderstanding about the extent to which vegetable oil inks can be expected
to reduce pollution. The printing ink industry has diligently worked to reduce the volatile organic
compound (VOC) content of their products and, as a result, have made substantial reductions
over the years. This reduction has been achieved by a variety of means and when feasible the
approach has included the use of vegetable oils.

Consequently, it appears that much of the proposed legislation goes beyond reasonable efforts to
achieve a clean environment. Instead, it appears that the some legislation may be an effort to
create new markets for constituents' products rather than to deal with a substantial risk to health
or the environment.

On April 1, 1993 Senators Wellstone, Bond, Grassley and others introduced a bill to increase the
use of vegetable oils in federal government printing, known as the Vegetable Ink Printing Act of
1993 (S.716). This bill would encroach on the technical formulary aspects of the printing ink
industry in order to achieve a minuscule increase in the total market for vegetable oils. In view of
the misconception that the use of vegetable oils in printing inks would have a significant favorable
impact on the environment while substantially increasing the total U.S. market for vegetable oils,
NAPIM has prepared this brief monograph to put the issue into proper perspective.

msriissioN - vegetable on. usage

Vegetable Oils in Printing Ink

Vegetable oils such as linseed, tung, oticica and similar drying oils have long been used as
ingredients in printing ink vehicles. In fact, linseed oil was the vehicle used in inks in the days of
Benjamin Franklin and other early printers in the Colonies and linseed oil varnishes were virtually
the only ink vehicles available until the early 1900's. Vegetable oils such as soy, canola,
cottonseed or com oils are semi-drying oils which cannot always be substituted for linseed or
other drying oils.

In the last few years there has been a great deal of awareness of inks made with soy oils,
principally because of the intense promotion by the American Soybean Association (ASA)
combined with the exaggerated belief that soy inks are somehow significantly more
environmentally friendly than conventional inks. While soy oils do offer advantages in some ink
formulations, they also have deficiencies. (See NAPIM monograph, "A Realistic Appraisal of
Soya Inks.") As a result, most paste ink manufacturers today have soy inks in their product line,
although there are probably none who offer soy inks exclusively.

Production of Vegetable Oil Inks

For purposes of this discussion it is necessary to differentiate between conventional lithographic
inks and so-called "vegetable oil inks." Conventional inks typically use vehicles containing linseed
or other vegetable drying oils along with petroleum oils as "solvents" in the vehicle Vegetable oil
inks use semi-drying oils to replace most or all of the petroleum oils in the formulation. In the
U.S. virtually all of the semiAdrying oil used in vegetable oil inks is soy oil, although com, canola,
tall or other semi-drying oils may also be used

NAPIM is not aware of any recognized consultant or other authoritative source that has published
information on the use of semi-drying vegetable oils in printing ink. Certainly soy oil is widely
used in colored newsinks and in a wide variety of sheet offset (lithographic) ink products. It is
less often used in black newsinks, partly because of dispersion problems and partly because of
cost. Soy oil is even less widely used in heatset offset ink systems, although heatset inks with low
levels of soy oil are now becoming available.

By drawing on estimates from informed ink industry sources and limited information available to
NAPIM from consultants, NAPIM has attempted to arrive at a reasonable estimate of the share of
market accounted for by soy vegetable oil inks in 1992. Since the use in the U.S. of other semi-
drying oils other than soy is extremely limited, these estimates of soy ink's market share are
reasonably representative of total vegetable oil ink production. These estimates of market
penetration have been applied to ink shipments data from NAPIM's Quarterly Sales Report which
measures ink shipments in the U.S. by broad ink categories.

TABLE I

FSTT\t4TFn SHTPMFNTS Q F ^OV IITHOGR APHir INKS - 1992

Millio n Pounds

T ithogra phic Inks Total Ink Soy I nks

Newsmk 328 69

Heatset Web Offset 423 25

Sheet Fed Offset 127 31

Total

878 125

While the foregoing figures may not be completely accurate, NAPIM believes that they reflect
probable orders of magnitude. Moreover, NAPDvTs estimate of 125 million pounds of vegetable
oil inks in 1992 is reasonably consistent with estimates form other unpublished sources. Estimates
fi-om these other sources range between 70 million and 1 50 million pounds for current usage. The
70 miUion pound estimate is probably understated, but it is doubtful that consumption of
vegetable oil inks reached 150 million pounds in the U.S. in 1992.

Ve getable Oil Consumption

Because of the variety of different ink systems and color formulations in use today, it is diflBcult to
cite one specific percentage of soy or similar semi-drying oil which might be used in each major
type of vegetable oil lithographic ink. Nevertheless, it is possible to arrive at a representative
average oil content. By applying these average contents to total shipments of soy inks, NAPIM
estimates that total consumption of soy oils for printing ink was approxunately 30 million pounds
in 1992.

In addition to the semi-drying oils used in vegetable oil inks, linseed oil is the primary vegetable
oil used in conventional inks. Estimates of the total quantity of linseed oil used in ink were
obtained fi-om the major crushers and marketers of this product to the printing ink industry. The
consensus of these estimates places total consumption of linseed oil for lithographic ink in 1992 at
approximately 40 million poimds. Thus, the combined consumption of soy and linseed oils used
in lithographic inks was about 70 miUion pounds in 1992. Since soy oil accounts for nearly all of
the semi-drying oils used in ink, and linseed accounts for most of the drying oils used, these two
vegetable oils together account for virtually all vegetable oils used in printing inks today.

TABLE n
Fstimated ronsumption of Vegetable Oils in Lithographic Ink- 1992

Million Pounds

Lithographic Inks Soy Oil Linseed Oil Total Qjl

Newsink 21+ - 21+

Heatset Web Offset IVz 28 30.5

Sheet Fed Offset 6+ 12 18+

Total HT lO ^

Vegetable Oils Used in Ink for Federal Printing

In his sponsoring statement for S.716, Senator Wellstone has estimated that the federal
government "currently utilizes about 1,400 tons of ink for its in-house and contract printing
operations "• NAPIM knows of no other data on the proportion of total US lithographic ink
shipments used for federal government printing. However, in the absence of any factual basis to
arrive at an accurate estimate, NAPIM believes that inks for federal printing do not exceed 0.5%
of total U.S. lithographic ink consumption This suggests a figure of somewhere between 2.8
million pounds (1,400 tons) and 4 5 million pounds of lithographic ink.

On the basis of the proportion of soy oils used today in all lithographic inks, it seems reasonable
to conclude that the soy oil content of inks used for federal printing was somewhere around
100,000 to 200,000 pounds in 1992.

Total Vegetable Oil Supplies

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the total domestic supply of vegetable oils in
the U.S. in the 1991-92 crop year was 16 2 billion pounds, of which soy oils accounted for 12 2
billion pounds. By comparison, total domestic consumption of linseed oil crushed in the U.S. was
only 170 million pounds in the 1991-1992 crop year. At least two-thirds of the seed fi-om which
this was made is imported fi-om Canada with the balance grown principally in South Dakota and
Minnesota.

Total domestic supplies of vegetable oils as reported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture are
shown in Appendix A. These data have been arrayed according to whether they are drying, semi-
drying or non-drying oils in Table III, below, and compared with estimated usage in printing ink.

Obviously, except for linseed oil and other drying oils, the current consumption of vegetable oils
in printing ink is insignificant when compared with the total supply of these oils Only in the case
of linseed and miscellaneous drying oils does printing ink represent an important market,
accounting for 20% of hnseed oil supplies. On the other hand, printing ink accounts for only
0.25% of soy oil consumption today and only 0.4% of total domestic consumption of vegetable
oils.

TABLE m

TT S STTPPI.TFS OF VrGFTART F OnS VFRSTIS CONSUMPTTON IN
f TTHOCRAPHTC INKS

Drying Oils

Linseed
Other

Million Pounds

Total

Used In

.Supply

Inks

_2i

170

24.0

3.0

Total

200

20.0

Sftmi-Drying Oils

Soy

12,245

Com

1,201

Cottonseed

1,075

Canola

801

Other

414

0.25

Total

15,736

30+

0.2

Non-Drying

Peanut
All Other

179
70

249

Total

16,185

71+

0.4

niSriLSSION - SICNIFICANCE of the VFCFTAB IK ink printing AC T of 1993

Market Implications

Both Senator Bond and Senator Wellstone have noted that an imponant objective S 716 is to
increase the market for soy and other vegetable oils Senator Wellstone has stated that, "this is
precisely the type of legislation that can link promotion of rural Amenca's economy with
protection of the environment ...The federal government must realize its potential as a positive
force in the market place - encouraging desirable new products and technologies by creating a
new market for them "^ Senator Bond commented that the bill would, "help the milhons of
American farmers who currently grow agricultural products "^

As shown in the preceding sections of this repon, total consumption of vegetable oils in
lithographic ink accounted for only 0.4% of total US domestic supply of vegetable oils in 1992.
The quantity of oils consumed in lithographic inks by the federal government for in-house and
contract printing was substantially smaller and probably did not exceed 400,000 pounds in 1992.
This is only 002% of the total domestic supply of vegetable oils

The Vegetable Ink Printing Act of 1993 would require the use of vegetable oils at, or above,
specified minimal levels in lithographic inks used for federal printing If all such inks had
contained the specified levels in 1992, they would have consumed slightly less than one million
pounds of vegetable oil This is only 006% of the total vegetable oil supply. Assuming a three
percent per year growth in government ink consumption and a reasonably steady supply of
vegetable oils, the bill would create a potential demand for only 1.2 million pounds by 1997 This
would be less than 0.01% of total vegetable oil supplies

As suggested by Senator Wellstone^, the sponsors of the bill hope that this type of legislation will
encourage increased use of vegetable oils, especially soy oil for lithographic inks used in
commercial markets in the future NAPIM is confident that the promotion by the American
Soybean Association, combined with other external market forces, will bring an increase in the
use of soy iiik in any case, and that such growth will not be significantly affected by the bills
currently before Congress In view of this outlook, the bills' minimal potential effect on vegetable
oil markets should be considered

Senator Bond has also expressed the hope that this legislation, "would help to decrease reliance
on foreign oil that is used in the petroleum based inks ""* While it must be acknowledged that any
trend that produces the nation's reliance on oil imports would be advantageous, it must be noted
that the effect of greater use of vegetable oils in federal government printing would be so
insignificant to be almost meaiungless Since current cnade oil and product imports were 1.96
trillion pounds in 1992,^ a total savings resulting fi-om the use of vegetable oils for federal printing
would represent a miniscule 00006% of foreign imports.

Environm ental Imp lications

Both principal sponsors of S.716 have noted two potential environmental advantages attributed to
soy and other vegetable oil inks. One of these is the claim that such inks are more easily
recyclable than petroleum based inks since the deinking process is easier and cheaper. The other
claimed advantage is that vegetable oil inks may result in lower emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).

Whether or not soy based inks enhance the recycling process as compared to lithographic inks
containing petroleum oils is still open to question. The U.S. Department of Agriculture at Peoria,
Illinois has done some work suggesting some recycling advantage for newspapers, but other
references in the technical literature are still mixed and some of the most recent work of USDA
has been questioned. In fact, there is considerably less evidence of any recycling advantage in the
case of paper printed by sheet fed or heatset lithography. Thus, based on references in the
technical literature, NAPIM is neither able to agree nor disagree with the assertion that soy inks
are more readily deinkable.

An evaluation of the importance of VOC content in printing ink requires an understanding of the
drying mechanism of different types of lithographic inks. Newsinks, forms inks and sheet fed
offset inks dry without the use of heat so that only a small portion of the VOC content is actually
emitted. EPA, in its latest draft of its Control Technique Guideline (CTG)^ for lithographic
printing assumes that in the case of inks which dry without the use of heat 95% of the VOC
contained in the ink vehicle is retained in the printed ink fihn and only 5% of the VOCs in such
inks would be expected to be emitted. In the case of heatset web offset inks, EPA's CTG
considers that 20% of the VOCs are retained while 80% are emitted. However, practically none
of this 80% emission is actually emitted to the atmosphere since EPA clean air rules require
emissions to be controlled with modem control equipment such as incinerators or other control
devices.

Consequently, the replacement of 30 million pounds of VOCs through the use of soy inks in 1992
resulted in an actual reduction of VOC emitted to the atmosphere of less than 3.5 million pounds,
of which more than half was controlled through incineration of the emitted gas.

NAPEM agrees that every reduction in VOC emissions represents a move towards a cleaner
environment and use of vegetable oil can certainly assist in this respect. On the other hand, the
true potential redurtion of VOC emissions which would result from the increased use of vegetable
oil inks has been exaggerated in many of the articles which have appeared in the trade and
consumer press in the last few years. Meanwhile, it should not be overlooked that there will
undoubtedly also be other advances in printing ink technology which will result in further
reductions in VOC content of ink, just as there have been in the past.

Footnotes

1 Congressional Record, 4/1/92, pg. S4280.

2 Congressional Record, 4/1/93, pg. S4280
^Congressional Record; 4/1/93, pg. S4279
4 Congressional Record, 4/1/93; pg. S4279

^Total U.S. Imports of Crude and Product, 1992; America Petroleum Institute.
^Control Techniques Guideline For Offset Lithographic Printing; U.S. Environmemal Protection
Agency; 12/14/92.

APPENDIX A

IT s on. CROV pRnniir-nnN & noMFSTrr rnNSTnvTPnoN

CMOP VTAR no/1/91 - 9/30/92^

Millinn Pounds

Production (

r;onsuaiptioi

1 Export/Import

Type of Oil

Sov

14,345

12,245

2,100

Corn

1,821

1,201

620

Cottonseed

1,279

1,075

204

Sunflower

911

396

515

Peanut

356

179

177

Linseed (•>

182

170

SuflBower

Canoia(2)

801

(769)

Misc. (Mostly

Imported)^-')

100

(100)

Total

18,995

16,185

2,810

Notes

(1) About 2/3 of seed for linseed oil is imponed from Canada

(2) Imponed from Canada

(3) Imports include tune, oticica and others. Total shown is an estimate of
approximate total impons.

COMMUNICATING FOR AGRICULTURE

2626 E 82nd Street

Suite 325

Bloomington. MN 55425

(612)854-9005

1 800 445-1525

Statement of Bruce Abbe
Vice President of Public Affairs
Communicating for Agriculture

Submitted to the

U.S. House of Representatives

Government Operations Committee

Subcommittee on Information, Justice, Transportation and Agriculture

Hearing on H.R. 1595
Vegetable Ink Printing Act

May 26, 1994
Washington, DC

Commun,catmg lor Agriculture /s a nahor^al. non-prolit rural associalior^ w,lh naVor^al headquarters m Fergus falls MN

BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY

3 9999 05982 813 5

Chairman Condit, members of the committee, I thank you for the opportunity to submit a
statement for the record on behalf of the members of Communicating for Agriculture in support of
H.R. 1595, the Vegetable Ink Printing Act. The bill would require the federal government to use
as much vegetable oil ink in printing purchases as is technically feasible, without significantly
increasing the cost compared to petroleum-based inks.

My name is Bruce Abbe. I am vice president of public affairs for Communicating for Agriculture
(CA). CA is a non-profit, non-partisan rural association that includes farmers, ranchers and their
family members and rural agribusinesses in 48 states. Our testimony is simlar to a statement
submitted last year in support of companion legislation, now approved by the U.S. Senate.

President Clinton and many other political leaders from both political parties are right when they
say we must work to achieve economic growth at the same time we work to improve our
environment. Public policy questions on these issues should not, and need not, always come
down to sacrificing either jobs for the environment, or the environment to protect jobs. There are
tough choices that need to be made when it comes to protecting the environment. But there are
also many instances where the right decision for the environment — be it a purchase decision or a
new regulation - can be positive for economic growth.

Perhaps the best example is the emerging field of new renewable resource products for industrial
and non-food consumer uses made from agricultural materials. A shift to renewable resource
materials from non-renewable materials is one of the key challenges, and best opportunities, we
have in achieving a sustainable, protected world environment.

A growing number of forward-thinking organizations and individuals involved in agriculture,
environment, manufacturing, and rural development believe the time has come for the United
States to formulate a national renewable resource development policy. Such a policy would
involve a wide range of initiatives and coordinate programs among several federal agencies
covering such areas as research and development, commercialization and technology assistance to
new businesses, product and environmental standards, farm program rules and procedures, rural
development policies, international trade policies, and government purchasing policies. We think
there is much merit to this idea.

One of the earliest and most successful examples of these "new uses" renewable resource
products from agriculture is "soy inks". In a few short years since its first research and
development at the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service labs, through
its introduction in the marketplace and commercial production, soy ink has now become widely
accepted and used throughout the printing industry across the country. Other vegetable sources,
including com oil, also are now being used in printing inks.

As a renewable resource, vegetable oil inks can be manufactured from crops American farmers
produce in surplus each year. The environmental advantages of vegetable oil inks also extend to
recycling. Paper printed with vegetable oil inks is more easily recycled than that printed with
petroleum ink, because the de-inking process is easier, cleaner and more cost efficient.

Government regulations giving preference to certain types of products can be impractical if not
carried out properly — notably if those preferred products are not readily available, or if they are not
of adequate quality. That is clearly not the case when it comes to vegetable printing inks.

Vegetable inks are now used throughout the printing industry. State governments and local public
agencies, as well as many private sector businesses, are now requiring the use of soy or vegetable
inks in their printing purchases. Most any commercial printer now has soy or vegetable inks
available.

Communicating for Agriculture has used soy inks in all of its publications for many years, and we
have found them to be of superior quality.

This bill sets clear standards for the amount of vegetable oil content in various categories of
printing inks, that have been developed in consultation with the National Association of Printing
Ink Manufacturers. The Government Printing Office has indicated negligible impact on the cost of
printing, nor does it anticipate problems meeting those standards. And there are provisions in the
bill that would set procedures for federal officials to follow to reduce the vegetable ink content
required if the cost of those inks were to become significantly greater than petroleum-based inks.

In summary, we believe the Vegetable Ink Printing Act is a good piece of legislation, that has been
well-developed with input from the appropriate industries. It is "do-able", and is good policy.

Thank you.

85-815 - 95 (76)

ISBN 0-16-046865-5

9 780160"46865d

90000