348 



he urged, "* * * then by the measure's specific terms the bituminous 

 coal industry shoukl be exempted." ^^ 



Some industry witnesses were not convinced that their effluent was 

 in any way harmful, and some even attributed beneficial qualities to it. 

 Andrew B. Crichton, president of the Johnstown Coal & Coke Co. of 

 Pennsvlvania, and director of the National Coal Association, remarked 

 that: ' 



As a matter of fact, acid mine drainage acts as a germicide and renders harm- 

 less great quantities of sewage pollution now flowing into the streams of the 

 Nation. Any attempt to compel the treatment of mine drainage * * * is an 

 economic waste, as it robs the people of the benefit of the purifying action of 

 the streams * ♦ *.^ 



The claim was substantiated by Otto who quoted from a U.S. Geo- 

 logical Survey paper (Water Supply Paper No. 8) to the effect that 

 acid mine drainage helped to create a potable source of drinking water : 



The purifying effect of acid mine water [said the USGS report] will prevent it 

 from becoming a nuisance and damage to realty values * * *. The Susquehanna 

 River could not be used in its raw state for household purposes if no mine drain- 

 age was turned into it.^* 



Another witness told the committee that turbidity from mining 

 fines had been found beneficial to fishing in Western rivers.^° 



Ambivalence of State and 7mimclpal vieios on Federal legislation 



Although a few of the representatives of State and local govern- 

 mental agencies had professed themselves in favor of Federal legisla- 

 tion, a majority were somewhat ambivalent. They agreed that water 

 pollution was a serious and growing problem, but tended to resist an 

 extension of the authority of the Federal Government in dealing 

 with it. Reed W. Digges, manager of the Hampton Roads Sanitation 

 District Commission, and j)resident of the Virginia Industrial Wastes 

 and Sewage Association, Norfolk, Va., in his opening testimony before 

 the House committee, declared that : 



* * * Now is the time to start a large national program for antipollution, and 

 I beg of you not to delay. It is inevitable because all of our flowing streams, the 

 larger the more so, are open sewers."^ 



However, he opposed any control, because he did not think it would 

 be accejjtable to the Congress, and he did not think it would work if 

 it did pass. 



I think the way to approach pollution abatement is by lending a hand rather 

 than holding a sword over the heads of the people * * *. 



Every area knows its problems and is ready and willing to do something about 

 it, should they get financial help, engineering plans, working drawings and 

 sj>ecifications. The Government can make these things possible through helping 

 in the financing and you will not need a court action brought by the Surgeon 

 General or others to force areas to abate pollution/^ 



Instead of Government grants-in-aid, he favored financing by 

 revenue bonds or loans. 



By having the Government accept second lien revenue bonds for one-third 

 of the costs of a project, the financing of the remaining cost of the project would 

 be facilitated, and will be accomplished on more advantageous terms than 

 otherwise. 



37 Ibid., p. 272. 



3^5 Ibid., p. 244. 



3" House hearings, 1047, op. cit., pp. 70-71. 



*" Senate liearings, 1947, op. cit., p. 289. 



" House liearings, 1947, op. cit., p. 42. 



« Ibid., p. 43. 



