under a certificate of necessity as part of the plant expansion, but that will clean up that whole area.

This tax feature has been endorsed by the advisory board to the Bureau of Smoke Inspection and Abatement of the City of Detroit. It has also been endorsed by the Common Council of the City of Detroit.

There is a question as to the certification method, but that is a matter of procedure which I am certain can be worked out.

On the question of FHA insurance, for the first time last week in our office the question was raised about FHA insurance for air pollution control equipment. This was in connection with a rental apartment project being built under FHA insurance. As I understood it-and I was not able to research it-they could not get FHA credit for garbage grinders and incinerators they wished to install in the apartment house.

The CHAIRMAN. To eliminate the smoke? They refused to give it? Mr. LINSKY. My understanding is that it was not eligible for FHA credit. It is a point I am not certain of.

The CHAIRMAN. We can make it eligible.

Mr. LINSKY. There is no other insurance that I know of where such an FHA insurance would have been usable in the past. However, as money gets tighter and profit margins tighten up, it may very well be a usable feature in the future and may even be right now in other areas and in projects I don't know about.

On research, there is no question that we need applied research on most problems, and pure research on a few problems. You know the story of the farmer who was being urged by the county agricultural agent to come in to town and attend the conservation and soil improvement courses. He said, "Son, I am not going to come in." The young county agricultural agent said, "Well, why not? You will learn how to do things better and improve your farming operations."

He said, "Son, I ain't going to come in. I ain't farming half as well as I know how now."

The CHAIRMAN. There is a lot of truth in that.

Mr. LINSKY. There is a lot that can be done simply by spreading information on available answers, information between, let's say, this plant I just spoke of in Detroit and the plant these men from Nazareth were just speaking about. There is parallel information available on control equipment. It is not yet set down in handbooks because technically this field is still relatively new. A method of transmitting that information would be useful.

The CHAIRMAN. In other words, you think a method of transmitting good results by many throughout the country to many others would be a good thing?

There is some research work that is not available from either local governments or industries because of the nature of the industry and the nature of the problems that we don't know now. There are some where we don't know the answers such as municipal incinerators, apartment house incinerators, as I mentioned once before, Bessemer steel furnaces, and sewage disposal sludge furnaces. In addition to that, the assembly of case histories in places where it has been done would be very helpful. Some work on that has been done but it is still minimal; the work that has been done.

I have here the proofs of a bibliography on air pollution prepared by the Bureau of Mines which is just going into print. That takes it up to a point. It doesn't keep it current, however. Where do I go for my answer now? As to the haze, smoke and smog that many areas have experienced, by doing inter-city research or measurement at the same time under different weather conditions in different parts of the country those areas that have the trouble may learn why they have it by comparing with others that aren't having it. What is it that Los Angeles does have in its atmosphere? If we could do a complete measurement of several communities the thing might stand clear and would help Los Angeles with their specific problem. Detroit is doing work, of course, and is working with the University of Michigan; with the other universities in the area, and with the other cities. But more work needs to be done, not only in Detroit but in every other major city. The question has been raised about the effect on blight. I would like to talk about that a moment. It is highlighted, possibly, in an advertisement of one of the fabric companies. It says, "Safer in Soot." I believe it is that kind of thing that is chasing people away from the cities.

The CHAIRMAN. It says, "Safer in Sun, Safer in Soot and Safer in Suds."

Mr. LINSKY. Yes. That advertisement I have seen in papers in several parts of the country. I should like to get into the record and for your own information what Detroit is spending on its air pollution work. Our budget runs between $100,000 and $150,000 a year of our bureau's operation. It has not been threatened in any way. The city feels that benefits are being obtained from that work. In addition to that bureau budget we are also engaged in research work, together with some of the Federal agencies, because of our international problem. The Detroit River runs along the other side and we have the problem of smoke from ships going up and down the river. We have been supporting that work because funds were not available to the Federal Government to do the work itself. We have been paying $4,000 a year out of our bureau's budget to rent quarters for the technical advisory board of the International Joint Commission to carry out its international treaty required actions. That is kind of silly but we are doing it because we think the results will be helpful to us and the information will be useful to us. We will be able to use it in our further program. But it doesn't add up.

This is a map of the city of Detroit. I would like to indicate blight and air pollution, if I may. The title of this chart is obvious, "Neighborhood Conservation." It has been gotten up by the City Planning Bureau of the City of Detroit and by other bureaus in cooperation therewith. The areas that I have marked as "E" are areas that are so badly blighted that they will have to be cleaned out, either now or later. In those areas marked as "#", the lighter shades are the ones they figure will have to be cleaned out or completely developed. The slightly dangerous ones in those areas are ones where they might be considered livable for a little longer but they will have to be cleared out in time, too. The areas that are marked "1" indicate our heavy industry areas.

I will just point them out. This is the down-river area, both inside and outside Detroit. Here is a heavy industry belt along here and

another industry area along through here up the river and out in the north. That area in the center, however, is the area that is blighted. It is not that which is immediately adjacent to the industries. Although there are evidences of blight in the past. As we have been cleaning up the air pollution by intensive work, that blight is reducing. In the heart of the city you have a history of blight and air pollution, of heavy smoke from badly burned coal, badly fired coal, and a generation of history, in fact, several generations of it.

People have moved out. One of the reasons that is so common is, "I wanted to get out in the fresh country air, or the fresh city air, or the fresh suburban air for my kids." This you don't pinpoint to a specific problem. It is the overall air pollution blight problem. It is in this field that I think much of this research toward which your bill is pointed can be helpful. I appreciate this opportunity to appear. The CHAIRMAN. You have certainly been very, very helpful and we appreciate it. You have given us some very fine information. I know the Senators from your State and the Congressmen are interested in this subject and I would suggest you talk to them before you leave town.

Mr. LINSKY. I will specifically, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You should get them interested in this problem. It is really their problem.

Mr. LINSKY. There is one point that they will be concerned about, just as I am certain you are. That is the requirement that should be emphasized either in wording or understanding-an understanding between men is as good as wording many times-that the research be keyed to the local community problem. With $5 million worth of research you can't do a lot of wild blue yonder research. You have got to concentrate on the problems you know you have. You have got to concentrate on the smog problem that Los Angeles knows it has, on the problems that New York knows it has, on the equipment design problem that we know we have.

The basic research is good and will be useful, but I think this is not the bill for it. I wonder if that is your feeling, sir?

The CHAIRMAN. You mean the housing bill is not the bill for it? Mr. LINSKY. Not the bill for the wild-blue-yonder research but for the immediate applied research.

The CHAIRMAN. Possibly so. We feel that the housing bill covers the slum clearance and blighted areas and we feel that blighted areas and slum clearance primarily are caused by smoke, dirt, dust, and so forth. It is not going to do much good to build new buildings in these areas and then have the same condition exist with smoke coming down upon them and making them blighted and slum areas again in 10 years. We will not accomplish much by doing that. That is why we are interested in the subject as a part of this bill.

Mr. LINSKY. Along that line is why we feel that if either spelled out in the bill that there be a local advisory group of people like myself, Dr. Greenburg, Austin Daley, and others to guide that research work so that it is well pointed, it would be helpful.

The CHAIRMAN. There is no question but what we need more research. Thank you very much.

The next witness will be Mr. Austin C. Daley, chief, air pollution regulation engineer, from Providence, R. I.

STATEMENT OF AUSTIN C. DAILEY, CHIEF AIR POLLUTION REGULATION ENGINEER, PROVIDENCE, R. I.

Mr. DALEY. I know you are awfully busy and I intend to be brief. I have a brief statement which I would like to read. Following it, I would like to make some informal remarks.

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed in your own way.

Mr. DALEY. My name is Austin C. Daley. I am the air pollution engineer for the city of Providence, R. I., a position I have held since January 1, 1949.

I am a member of our Air Pollution Control Association of America and have served on its dusts and fumes committee.

I am an engineering graduate of the University of Rhode Island and a registered professional engineer in the State of Rhode Island. Air pollution is annually costing Americans millions of dollars in property damage. This damage manifests itself in many forms. The cost of painting structures in cities is much greater than in rural areas because of the dirt in city air.

Rain combines with sulfur from smoking chimneys, creating a diluted sulfuric acid which actually eats away stonework on buildings. You gentlemen have all seen city buildings of stone being steam cleaned or sandblasted. This is an expensive process and is required only because of polluted air.

It is very disheartening for an urban resident to complete a new paint job on his house and have it covered with soot and dirt before the paint is even dry. Several industrial plants in Providence have paid damages to homeowners who suffered this mishap.

This is a problem that must be faced by all those interested in public, semipublic or group housing. Very few new housing developments are built in the wealthy residential areas and smoke and fly-ash from industrial stacks can cause rapid deterioration of a handsome new housing development.

Sootfall not only damages the property but it ruins the morale of those who live in the housing units. This speaker has on several occasions entered the homes of housewives who wept openly in frustration because of the filth that had been drifting inside their homes from nearby stacks. It is quite disturbing also to have a woman show you her infant covered with soot immediately after putting him out in his carriage for a sunning. A big washing hung out to dry and getting showered with filth is just another complaint.

Among the sites proposed for a new, upper middle income bracket apartment development is a spot on the east bank of the Providence River. It was pointed out that with Rhode Island's stream pollution abatement program rolling along nicely, this would be an attractive place to live.

That point may well be true but the site considered is only a quarter mile from the local power utility which has seven large stacks which frequently fire pulverized coal without benefit of electrostatic collectors. As a result, tons of soot and fly-ash will be showered on these new units if they are located in this proposed spot. The installation of electrostatic collectors by the utility is the only answer. All pulverized coal-firing plants located in cities should be equipped with these collectors. However, they are the most expensive of all air

pollution abatement equipment and that's where the Capehart-Kuchel amendment would be of immense help.

The story on the Providence Power utility can be repeated all over this Nation in steel mills, cement manufacturing, steam generation, industrial processing, and even down to the small homeowner firing an inefficient smoky old kitchen stove.

Air pollution with its dirt and filth hurts our property and our morale. It just isn't good municipal housekeeping. We in the administrative and pioneering phase of this work are grateful to Senators Capehart and Kuchel for offering us such a strong weapon to aid us in our fight to give the American people clean, fresh air.

However, please allow us to make a suggestion on the air pollution research provision of this amendment.

As to the study of the harm polluted air does to crops and livestock we feel that the Department of Agriculture can best handle this work. The Weather Bureau is admirably equipped to handle the meteorological aspects of the problem.

The Bureau of Standards could measure property damage.

The health aspect, still a very controversial issue, could logically come under the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

When it comes to research on air pollution prevention and stopping it at its source, it is our opinion that there is no department as well suited for this task as the Bureau of Mines. This department has been the strong right arm for air pollution control in America. When we in the administrative field are at loss for an answer we write to the Bureau of Mines and get it.

Most manmade air pollution is caused by the exhaust products of combustion. Combustion is impossible without fuel and who knows more about fuel and fuel burning than the Bureau of Mines?

In conclusion allow us to express our thanks once more. This amendment will go down in history as the first positive step ever taken by a nation to clean up the air that its people must breathe.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. We appreciate your statement. We have pretty much covered with other witnesses some of the things that we might ask you. There is no question in your mind but what we would get the cooperation of the cities, is there?

Mr. DALEY. I think you would get enthusiastic cooperation, Senator. I want to emphasize, sir, that what has been done in the past has been nothing to compare with this. The only time I have ever heard of a nation doing anything was in 1307 in England when a king passed a law on coal that was mined in the sea. That amounted to nothing. This is a problem which has been facing mankind for centuries. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time that any country has ever tried to do something about it. It is a growing menace. I am not qualified to get into the health aspects. I remember when I was in the Navy, I was in the Orient, I used to be shocked by conditions of open sewers in the streets and poor municipal water supply. We have laws regulating pure food, the municipalities supply us with uncontaminated water, we have proper waste disposal, and yet the most important food that nature gave us was air and we do nothing about it. The CHAIRMAN. And we breathe it 24 hours a day.

Mr. DALEY. We can do without other things for quite a bit longer than we can air. Nothing has been done. No matter how this comes