over to other areas. If I am wrong then there is nothing to my argument, because that is the whole basis of it; that I understood the act did that.

Mr. HOWELL. Now, your testimony, Mr. Thomas, in answer to some of these questions indicates that you recognize the fact that there is a shortage of supply of natural gas, particularly in Illinois, because the gas companies have not been able to buy the pipes or lay the lines. Mr. THOMAS. That is one thing.

Mr. HOWELL. Do you think because there is a shortage of pipe that there should be added Federal regulation on gas companies?

Mr. THOMAS. Well, I certainly do not think that this is the time. to take any regulation off of them, if you have got a shortage of pipes; if that is the reason, all right, that is just one cause. There may be a shortage of gas. I do not think there is, but, there may be. Mr. HOWELL. Nobody has testified there is any shortage of gas. They are all insistent that there is an abundance of gas and the question is getting it to the consumer.

Mr. THOMAS. That is my understanding of it; but I know that we cannot get enough gas in the city of Rockford and we certainly do not want to have any of it taken away by anybody other than by the Federal Power Commission saying it should go away.

Mr. HOWELL. Well, we did not get enough down in my community, down in Springfield, but that is no reason why I am going to oppose this bill, because I think that they are going to switch off what supplies of gas we are getting in Springfield and send it up to Rockford. I think when the gas companies are able to buy their pipe they will lay enough lines and extend their facilities so as to serve the maximum number of users, because after all, that is why they are in business.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Beckworth.

Mr. BECKWORTH. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Carson.

Mr. CARSON. Mr. Thomas, have you discussed this matter with the Illinois Commerce Commission?

Mr. THOMAS. I have not discussed this matter with the commerce commission: no, sir. I was in the commerce commission representing the city of Rockford when there was a change-over from manufactured gas to natural gas about a year ago.

Mr. CARSON. Well, do you know what the opinion of the Illinois Commerce Commission is regarding H. R. 2185?

Mr. THOMAS. No, sir; I do not know. I have not talked with anybody in the commission's offices about it.

Mr. CARSON. It might be interesting to you to know that Mr. Warren Henry——

Mr. THOMAS. I know him very well.

Mr. CARSON. Appeared before this committee on April 16 of this year and he said that he was "the chief engineer of the Illinois Commerce Commission and I appear here under express authorization from that body." And further:

H. R. 2185, in its effort to safeguard local regulation, has our full approval. And in connection with that he went on to say that by unanimous vote of the Illinois Commerce Commission they had adopted an

61167-47-39

amendment which they suggested be added to this bill making it much stronger than 2185 really is.

Now, that is the opinion of the Illinois Commerce Commission which I understand is your public utility regulatory body and has jurisdiction over all public utilities in the State of Illinois.

Mr. THOMAS. It is the public utility regulatory body; but I differ on many occasions with the Illinois Commerce Commission and particularly with Mr. Henry.

Mr. CARSON. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HOWELL. Any further questions?

Mr. DOLLIVER. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HOWELL. Mr. Dolliver.

Mr. DOLLIVER. Your position is that Rockford now being served by natural gas should not be deprived of that service by reason of the natural-gas company wishing to serve some other community that is not now served.

Mr. THOMAS. That is not the basis of my position.

My position is that we do not want to see any powers taken away from the Federal Power Commission of a regulatory nature. do recognize that in Rockford we need regulation of the public-utility company, whether it is the Natural Gas Co. of America or whether it is the Central Illinois Electric & Gas Co., or whoever it is, and we do not want to see any of that power taken away.

I just cited the shortage of gas in the city of Rockford as being one example of one small city that this could affect.

Mr. DOLLIVER. You rely upon the Federal Power Commission to prevent that?

Mr. THOMAS. That is right.

Mr. DOLLIVER. The dissipation of the gas that is now being used in Rockford to other communities. You are relying on that. Mr. THOMAS. Basically that is right.

Mr. DOLLIVER. And you do not want that protection destroyed? Mr. THOMAS. No, sir; I do not.

Mr. DOLLIVER. In other words you take the position that Rockford now being served by natural gas should continue to be served by natural gas under the protection of the Federal Power Commission regardless of any other community or regardless of the Natural Gas Pipe Line Co. and the producer and the distributor of gas.

Mr. THOMAS. Yes, sir; that is right.

Mr. DOLLIVER. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions?
Mr. HALE. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hale.

Mr. HALE. You are completely satisfied with the present law in every particular; is that right?

Mr. THOMAS. Well, we have not had very much experience, as you know, with the Federal Power Commission; but we certainly are satisfied up to the present point and I know that is the opinion of the people in Rockford; the mayor and the city council; and as I say, I am not an expert on utility matters, but I do want to have regulation in the Federal Power Commission. I feel they are an able body; they have given us a great deal of assistance, and I think that they are perfectly honest in their effort to do what is right by both the public and the utility company.

Mr. HALE. Certainly there is no amendment to the present law that you are prepared to sponsor?

Mr. THOMAS. No, sir.

Mr. HALE. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions, gentlemen?

Mr. HOWELL. Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Howell.

Mr. HOWELL. Mr. Thomas, I want to point out the conclusions of the Illinois Commerce Commission in reference to this act in a statement submitted on behalf of the Illinois Commerce Commission by Mr. Warren Henry on April 16. He says:

The confusion and uncertainty which have come to exist concerning the extent of the jurisdiction of the Federal Power Commission under the Natural Gas Act with respect to "the local distribution of gas and facilities used for such distribution" should be eliminated by explicit recognition of the principal that when natural gas has entered the facilities of a local distribution company within a State for ultimate public consumption within that State, State control should begin and should be exclusive from that point on. To this end the Illinois Commerce Commission suggest that there be added to section 3 of H. R. 2185, as now written, the following clause or sentence beginning on line 15 of page 3 of the bill:

"It does not include a person engaged in local distribution within a State who receives natural gas within or at the border of such State and sells and delivers such gas (a) to the general public for ultimate consumption therein, or (b) to another person engaged in local distribution within the same State who sells and delivers such gas to the general public for ultimate consumption therein."

So that is the attitude generally of the Illinois Commerce Commission and certainly the position which you have submitted today on behalf of the city of Rockford would appear to be contrary to that which the commerce commission submitted on behalf of the people of Illinois.

Mr. THOMAS. It is contrary to that position; yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions, gentlemen.

We thank you, Mr. Thomas, for your appearance today and the expression of views of your city.

Mr. THOMAS. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN E. LYLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

The CHAIRMAN. We are very pleased in having with us this morning our colleague, Congressman John E. Lyle, of Texas, who has appeared this morning because of his interest in this legislation and seeks the opportunity of making a statement to the committee. We will be pleased to hear you at this time, Mr. Lyle.

Mr. LYLE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, my name is John E. Lyle. I am a Member of Congress from Corpus Christi, Tex. I have spent my life in the heart of the gas fields of that great State of Texas. I have seen them develop. I have seen them develop in the interest of my own State and this country.

I am tremendously interested in the future of those gas fields, because I think the welfare of our conutry depends a great deal upon them.

This legislation, in my opinion, will not take away from the Federal Power Commission any powers that it rightfully has; but is designed to take away the threat of powers which they may assume.

It is not a reflection upon the character of any of those able gentlemen nor upon the Commission. We have this proposition down there. You have heard a lot about flare gas. It has hurt me and amazed me for years to fly over that great country and see those natural resources popping into the air. However, it is not all waste, because with all, with every cubic foot of that gas that comes up there is a portion of oil. We use it as a lift, as you might use electricity to raise water to the surface.

We use it as a lift to raise oil.

We can

Now, we could and should conserve that gas, of course. conserve that gas, but it will represent a tremendous investment. We cannot make that investment if we do not know to whom we are responsible, whether it be the State, or whether it be the Federal Government.

We have a real, well regulated industry in Texas. I am sure you all appreciate that fact.

I have discussed this problem for many years with my people there who are interested in it, and not alone, mind you, are the men who own the gas wells interested, but the little man who owns 25 acres or 100 acres is tremendously interested in it. And, when a man has eight gas wells and closes them down, and that little man cannot get his revenue from the gas that is under his ground because the producer does not want to produce in all of this confusion, then you are harming not only the people who drill wells, but the people who own the gas under the ground.

This committee wrote a very wise law, and, in my judgment, it was quite clear that the Federal Government had no jurisdiction over the production of that gas nor the marketing of that gas.

There seems to have arisen confusion, rightfully or wrongfully, I do not know; but I do feel that you and I, as Members of the Congress, have a right to be straightforward in this proposition. I think it is in the interest of the national welfare and natural resources of this country that we pass this measure.

I know nothing at all about the end use of gas, but I do know that the producer who goes out and spends $175,000 or $200,000 to drill a gas well ought to be able to produce that gas and sell it into some conveyance without having to report to Washington about it. I believe that this bill will assure him of that right.

I have not been here to hear the opposition. I heard the gentlemen who were interested in it at the beginning.

I do not know what the opposition is to the bill. I cannot conceive of anyone opposing a measure that is as American as this and is as sound as this, in the interest of a great industry.

I hope you will give it the consideration that you are capable of and that you will report it favorably to the House, that we might give this assurance that we need so much in Texas, in the interest of conservation and development of our natural resources.

I am deeply grateful to you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for this opportunity.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions, gentlemen?

We thank you Mr. Lyle.

Will the following gentlemen whose names I call answer if they are present and indicate the length of time that their statements are intended to take.

Mr. Joseph Pursglove.

Mr. PURSGLOVE. My statement will take approximately 10 minutes, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Crimmins, John M. Crimmins.

Mr. CRIMMINS. My statement will take approximately 15 minutes for the direct statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Joseph W. Haley.

Mr. HALEY. Not over 5 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. John Schreiber.
Mr. SCHREIBER. About 15 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. John E. Benton.

Mr. BENTON. I had expected to take about half an hour, but out of deference to the committee, I have drawn a pencil through most of it, and I hope to conclude in 10 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Nelson Lee Smith, Chairman, Federal Power Commission.

Mr. BURTON BEHLING (of the Federal Power Commission). Mr. Smith will be here at about 11:30, and will be available at the pleasure of the committee for the rest of the day. His direct statement will take about an hour to an hour and 20 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Pursglove.

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH PURSGLOVE, JR., VICE PRESIDENT, PITTSBURGH CONSOLIDATION COAL CO., PITTSBURGH, PA.

Mr. PURSGLOVE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committeeThe CHAIRMAN. Mr. Pursglove, I understand you are a vice president of the Pittsburgh Consolidation Coal Co.?

Mr. PURSGLOVE. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

My name is Joseph Pursglove, Jr. I am a vice president of Pittsburgh Consolidation Coal Co., which company is located in the Koppers Building, Pittsburgh, Pa., and is engaged primarily, through its subsidiaries, in the mining of bituminous coal in West Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania and in the sale and distribution of such coal in the many eastern markets of the United States and Canada. My duties with the company include the supervision of research in coal and of the development of further uses for and a better utilization of coal.

My experience in the coal business has been largely in the field of practical operations. After graduating in engineering from Cornell University, I spent a number of years operating coal mines and designing and building coal-preparation plants in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.

I have devoted the last 2 years to making studies and setting up an organization to effect a better utilization of coal. These studies have included a careful review of the data available in America and have taken me to South Africa, England, and Europe.

An announcement several months ago of a project being undertaken by my company, jointly with Standard Oil Development Co.— the central technical organization of Standard Oil Co., New Jerseyproposing to develop methods for transforming coal into gaseous and liquid fuels, has created considerable speculation as to the over-all effect that such a development may have on the future fuel economy of this country.