body of definitive terms, well-settled, well-recognized to assist in further interpretive and constructive problems.

Finally, "Nothing contained in this Act shall be construed as relieving a claimant from any other requirements of the mining laws of the United States." Thus other areas of settled mining law remain undisturbed.

Moreover, the present Bill removes any problem of reconciling 30 U.S.C. 161 with Section 3. As was pointed out by Senator Metcalf (Tr. 118-119), 30 U.S.C. 161 is still law. Mr. Barry agreed insofar as it was not affected by P.L. 167. The problem of statutory construction created by 30 U.S.C. 161 and reconciling it with Section 3 of the present law is obviated by the present amendatory bill. Any ambiguity is removed-both laws can be given application.

V. ECONOMIC NEED

Departmental rulings contesting and invalidating mining claims on the basis that the location is of a "common variety" mineral have harrassed legitimate miners, retarded expansion of mining into these areas, and had a devastating effect on small miners attempting to operate in this area. Present leasing laws do not give a solution to a mineral claimant because of uneconomical royalty demands and the knowledge that exploiting a deposit under lease leads to a sophisticated form of claim jumping competitive bidding after developmental and capital expenditures have revealed a location's value. This system of "using" another's resourcefulness is anathema to the American way of doing things— our entire heritage is aimed at rewarding work-not penalizing it.

Great economical wealth has been uncovered under the "Big Skies" of Montana, Idaho, Colorado, California, Alaska, and other western states because of the Mining Law of 1872. Since 1892 Congress evidenced a desire to put building stone within the scope of those laws. In 1955 Congress evidenced a desire to exclude from "Common varieties" those minerals with uncommon characteristics or of Administrative decisions have, however, negated this

uncommon occurrence.

policy.

The need for a change is acknowledged by all interested groups. The present proposed bill cures the mispractice and misinterpretation which has grown up in the confusion of the poorly defined "common varieties" section of the present law. I sincerely urge the approval of this bill by this subcommittee and its adoption into law by Congress.

Thank you.

Senator GRUENING. The next witness is Mr. James Henderson, representing the Las Vegas Building Materials Co., and also representing the National Sand & Gravel Association. Mr. Henderson, we are happy to have you here, and we are sorry for the delay.

STATEMENT OF J. R. HENDERSON, PRESIDENT, LAS VEGAS BUILDING MATERIALS, INC., LAS VEGAS, NEV.; ACCOMPANIED BY VINCENT B. AHERN, JR., ASSISTANT MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL SAND & GRAVEL ASSOCIATION

Mr. HENDERSON. Mr. Chairman, I have with me Vincent B. Ahern, Jr., assistant managing director of the National Sand & Gravel Association.

Mr. Chairman, Senator Metcalf, my name is J. R. Henderson. I am president of Las Vegas Building Materials, Inc., Las Vegas, Nev., and I appear before your committee as the representative of the National Sand & Gravel Association, whose board of directors, by appropriate resolution, has authorized and instructed me to speak for the sand and gravel industry in respect to S. 2281 and S. 3485.

I am a member of the board of directors of the association, which in February of this year celebrated its 50th anniversary. Its member companies are found in every part of the United States. The two bills are of much concern to our industry, and the association desires to be heard with respect to their provisions.

65-450-665

I would first like to give the committee an understanding of the great role which the sand and gravel industry plays in the Nation's economy. Our industry, in terms of mine units produced, is the largest member of the mining family. In an address at the 50th annual convention of the association, the Honorable John A. Carver, Jr., Under Secretary of the Interior, stated that the growth of the sand and gravel industry since World War II from 200 million short tons of annual production with a value of about $120 million, to 870 million tons and nearly $900 million, respectively, in 1965, has been, in his words, truly phenomenal. He said that when this record is matched. against the trend of the gross national product, it is clear that the sand and gravel industry has been a major contributor to the Nation's developing prosperity, "for you have outperformed the general economy by something like a third."

Our associtation has been in the forefront of the forces which are dedicated to preserving the natural beauty of our country. Through graduate programs at the University of Illinois and in many other ways, the sand and gravel industry has made a substantial contribution to this movement. Edward K. Davison, president of the Davison Sand & Gravel Co. of Pittsburgh, and a member of our board of directors, was invited to appear on the program of the White House Conference on Natural Beauty, a little over 1 year ago. Mr. Carver referred to his contribution to that program. He congratulated the association and our member companies for their sustained contribution to the conservation of the country's land resources by the restoration of worked-out sand and gravel deposits. This restoration provides for a residual use of the land which makes a substantial contribution to the economy and avoids the blight of land ruthlessly destroyed with little care for the national effort inaugurated by the President to recapture our natural beauty.

The Under Secretary put it this way in his talk:

Let me say, here and now, that the work you have done in encouraging your members to follow the excellent example of those who have been most successful in site rehabilitation is entitled to the highest commendation. I take great pleasure in extending that recognition-unstintingly.

At the present rate of sand and gravel production in the United States, and assuming that production does not increase in response to growing demand, our industry will have to produce well over 25 billion tons of sand and gravel in the 30-year period from 1962 to 1992. I use this span of years because the American Society of Planning Officials estimates that in these 30 years, increased demand will mean that we shall actually have to produce 42 billion tons in order to provide the basic facilities for the expected population growth by 1992. By the year 2000, it is expected that our country's population will total 350 million persons. Great construction programs of all classifications will have to be undertaken and carried out.

Every conceivable form of building must be increased if the country is going to provide all of the facilities which a population of these staggering dimensions is going to need for basic accommodations. As a part of its preview of the future, the American Society of Planning Officials said that by 1992 our annual sand and gravel production will have to total more than 2 billion tons.

Our association has made several surveys of land use by the sand and gravel industry, in order to ascertain the extent of existing sand

and gravel reserves. Based on current demands, and not allowing for the expected increase, presently held reserves for sand and gravel production will be exhausted in not more than 20 years, taking the country as a whole. There is an ill-founded assumption that sand and gravel is an inexhaustible natural resource, but what I have already said to you in this statement shows this to be a dangerous assumption.

When it formulated its program for natural resources development, the Fairfax County, Va., Planning Commission warned:

*** gravel is a natural resource. Although it is commonly found and erroneously regarded as not valuable, it is an important and essential element to our economy and to our every day existence. Gravel is an unrenewable resource that should be used, and should not be lost forever by development on the surface of gravel deopsits.

The western Governors, at their conference in May 1964, expressed their concern with the seriousness of the problem presented by the fact that sand and gravel resources and reserves are limited, and made it clear that in their judgment, this was a problem which must be solved if the construction program in the West is to be carried forward at anything like its expected proportions:

Sand and gravel: Whereas the demands of industry and of the public for high-grade construction aggregates are increasing by leaps and bounds in order to meet the expanded highway and other construction programs so necessary to our economic growth and well-being: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Western Governors' Conference urges that Congress amend existing law to permit the application of the general mining laws to deposits of sand and gravel which can be mined, processed, and marketed for use of highgrade construction aggregates.

The sand and gravel industry, then, faces some real problems in the future in obtaining necessary reserve deposits. These problems have been compounded since 1955 by the interpretation of Public Law 167. Public Law 167 sought to exclude, among other minerals, "common varieties" of sand and gravel. The Bureau of Land Management of the Department of the Interior undertook to define the term "common varieties" to include all sand and gravel.

Since that time, the Bureau of Land Management has continually denied sand and gravel claims, and taken the position that they had no choice under the statute but to exclude sand and gravel even though this created a problem of desperate importance in the very States where so much of the land is under Federal ownership. Public Law 167 was intended to prevent the exploitation of public lands by unscrupulous speculators. The National Sand and Gravel Association shares the Bureau's desire to make it impossible for anyone to exploit the public lands.

The exclusion of sand and gravel from patentability of lands in the Federal domain has created a serious economic problem in the Western States. As of 1964, the Federal Government owned 86.9 percent of the land in Nevada, and in Clark County, Nev., 98.94 percent of the land. While this is by far the largest ownership of Federal land in any Western State, other Western States are also finding themselves in serious difficulty in respect to the availability of sand and gravel of suitable quality for use in their construction programs.

For example, Federal ownership of land in Utah is 69.1 percent; in Idaho, 64.8 percent; in Oregon, 51.1 percent; in Wyoming, 48.4 percent; in California, 44.9 percent; in Arizona, 44.7 percent; in Colo

rado, 36 percent; in New Mexico, 34.9 percent, and in Montana and Washington, over 29 percent.

And, Senator Gruening, I did not quite get Alaska, but I am sure it is in excess of 80 percent.

Senator GRUENING. We exceed all of the other States in the amount of public domain.

Mr. HENDERSON. The country must be aware of the fact that if sand and gravel is to be made available to the public, responsible producers must have access to lands in the public domain in the Western States. Sand and gravel must today not only meet rigid specification requirements, but also must be available at reasonable cost, which means that sand and gravel must be mined reasonably close to the construction market, since transportation is the most important cost element in sand and gravel prices.

The two bills now being considered by this committee, S. 2281 and S. 3485, are designed to define "common varieties," within the meaning of Public Law 167, to the end that the sand and gravel industry will be able to patent mining claims on lands within the Federal domain. The National Sand & Gravel Association supports the principle to which both bills are devoted.

We have given the most careful consideration to this legislation. We believe that S. 3485, introduced by Mr. Metcalf for himself and for Mr. Gruening, of Alaska, if enacted in its present form, would achieve the goal of assuring that the Western States will have an adequate supply of sand and gravel available in the future for monumental construction programs.

While the association prefers the language of S. 3485, we believe that S. 2281 will also provide a solution to the same problem. We do believe, however, that it would be desirable to make certain changes in S. 2281 as it is presently drafted:

1. S. 2281 would add a new section, section 3 (a), to Public Law 167. Under subparagraph (a), the owner of any unpatented mining claim will be required to file with the Secretary of the Interior a statement containing information regarding the claimant and documentation of the location and description of the mining claim. Beginning on line 17 of page 3, it is also required that "statements pertaining to claims located prior to the effective date of this subsection shall be filed within 90 days from and after the date of location of the claim." Failure to file the statement within the allotted time will cause the termination of any rights in the claim.

Many sand and gravel producers have claims which are unpatented but which were located several years ago. It will be impossible, therefore, for these claimants to file the statements within 90 days from the date of location of the claim, since this period of time elapsed some time ago.

I believe the intent here is to compel future claimants to file these statements within 90 days of the location of their claim. Deletion of the words "prior to" on line 18, page 3, and substitution of the words "on or after" will eliminate this difficulty and carry out the intent of the provision.

2. Subparagraph (e) on page 5 needs clarification. It appears that the confusion in this subparagraph may be due to a typographical error omitting some part of the sentence.

3. Section 3A (g), on page 6, states that no mining claim may be located on land which "has not been classified by the Secretary of the Interior as proper for such use and disposal." No criteria are established for this classification of land. The Secretary would apparently be enabled to classify land without regard to the availability of minerals therein, and there do not appear to be any limitations on his authority. We believe that the authority granted to the Secreary under this provision is too broad, and that it should either be eliminated from the bill, or alternatively, that criteria for this classification system be specifically enumerated in the bill itself.

4. Section 3A (f) will require the owner of any unpatented claim located after enactment of the section to file a patent within 3 years from the date of location. We do not believe that this requirement presents an onerous burden, but in section 3A (h), it is further provided that the owner must undertake substantial mining operations within 5 years from the date the patent is issued. Thus, a sand and gravel producer has only a total period of 8 years within which he must undertake substantial mining operations.

The problem of maintaining adequate reserve supplies of sand and gravel for future markets is an increasingly difficult task for sand and gravel producers. The 8-year period established under section 3A eliminates the use of these lands as reserve deposits. This problem can be partially solved by allowing a more reasonable time within which the producer must undertake substantial mining operations. We suggest, therefore, that 10 years from the date of patent be allowed before substantial mining operations must be undertaken.

5. Section 3A (h) (2) provides that title to patented claims will revert to the United States if the land is used for any other purpose but mining within 25 years from the date of patent unless all of the mineral deposits have been economically extracted. The National Sand and Gravel Association, through its land rehabilitation research program at the University of Illinois, has been seeking to encourage simultaneous rehabilitation by the sand and gravel industry. Our research has demonstrated that it is more practical, less costly, and in the public interest to commence rehabilitation at the same time that mining operations are commenced. This avoids the scarring of the landscape for the entire period of time during which mining operations are conducted.

Simultaneous rehabilitation, however, would be prohibited by 3A (h) (2) since the land could not be converted to another use after rehabilitation until the entire deposit is exhausted. We believe it is in the public interest, therefore, to provide that any part of the claim can be rehabilitated and converted to another use within the 25-year period provided that the portion of land involved has been exhausted of mineral deposits.

The sand and gravel industry has the right to say, in the light of the evidence, that in war and in peace, it has provided without Federal subsidy, the basic raw material on which all construction programs are launched-sand and gravel. It is recognized by the U.S. Department of the Interior as a progressive, enlightened industry which has constantly sought, by every conceivable means, to improve the quality of its product and to provide the public with an indispensable material at the lowest possible price.