1 Adjusted to reflect retroactively the April 1963 2-for-1 stock split. 2 July 13. 3 Aug. 18. Sept. 11. 'July 19. • Aug. 21. NOTE. This report and the financial and statistical statements contained herein are submitted for the general information of the stockholders and are not intended to induce, or for use in connection with any sale or purchase of securities. Very truly yours, L. W. CADWALLADER, Vice President, Generating. Senator TYDINGS. Congressman Gude is here and he is engaged in several hearings on the House side at this time. Delighted to welcome you to these hearings, Mr. Gude. STATEMENT OF HON. GILBERT GUDE, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE SIXTH DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND Mr. GUDE. I am Congressman Gilbert Gude, from the State of Maryland. Senator Tydings, recently my office has been flooded with letters asking me to support "National CARIH Asthma Week." Of course I fully intend to support this commendable asthma resolution. But if we're really going to do something about asthma and other repsiratory disease, we have to do much more than pass the antiasthma resolution. We could start by attacking our problems of air pollution. The U.S. Public Health Service has sponsored two studies to determine the relationship between the frequency of asthmatic attack and the amount of air pollutants in the atmosphere. A positive correlation was obtained, both in Nashville, where pollution is primarily industrial, and in Los Angeles, where automobile exhaust is the major problem. The correlation is even more dramatic for emphysema and bronchitis. Last week I introduced air pollution legislation for the District of Columbia which is substantially patterned on the model ordinance of the council of governments. Since Mr. Scheiber testified on Monday, I shall limit my remarks to a discussion of the importance of the principal provisions of the model ordinance, as well as a summary of the differences between the ordinance and our bill. Senator TYDINGS. Let me ask you one question, Congressman. I am familiar with your bill. Could the District Commissioners adopt the same ordinance without an act of Congress, or not? Mr. GUDE. I do not believe that the District Commissioners have the power. For one thing, the distribution in the District of Columbia, we have the authority as far as air pollution control, dissipated between several different agencies. I believe that the prohibition of fuels containing more than 1 percent sulfur is crucial. From my conversations with the U.S. Public Health officials, I have gathered that affected industry would rather have to adjust only once, even if the initial adjustment is a big one. If industry has to adjust once to a 2- or 3-percent limit on sulfur content and then has to adjust all over again to a 1-percent limit a few years later, the cost could be prohibitive. The initial adjustment would, of course, be considerable. But I think that the recent example of industry's shift away from the manufacture of nonsoluble detergents proves that the cooperation of private industry can be obtained on these matters. According to most experts, about 40 percent of the sulfur dioxide pollution in the District of Columbia comes from Federal installations, principally from powerplants. The recent Executive order on pollution applies specifically only to New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia, but it does provide that the Federal Government must comply with local ordinances on sulfur. In effect, this important Executive order will have no effect on the District of Columbia unless the Congress meets |