valuable for geothermal steam." Now "prospectively valuable" is a term which has a specific meaning to the Survey, and they told us, they told the Department that on the basis of using this term "prospectively valuable" they could figure out about 80 million acres of land that would come within that category. This led rather promptly to a revision of the order to one of more modest scope. Mr. SAYLOR. If they are still prospectively valuable, this 80 million acres, since the President is worried about giving away this valuable asset, and you have got these experts down in Geological Survey, you mean to tell me that the Interior Department has suddenly, because you got a little mail protesting that you have suddenly abandoned this theory of taking care of this great national interest and this great protection of the public, and changed your philosophy completely and come down now to a mere pittance of what you had before? So what has happened to this concept of great national concern, and untapped mineral wealth? Suddenly it is something that you put on and take off as it suits you. Mr. WEINBERG. No; I wouldn't agree with that, Mr. Saylor. What happened was that the enveloping arm of the Interior Department reached out and put a cloak over more land than it is really necessary to withdraw at this time, in order to meet the President's objectives. Mr. EDMONDSON. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. SAYLOR. Yes. Mr. EDMONDSON. I think that you put it in more down-to-earth terms in the phrase used by the Secretary when he said it was a big goof. I think that is what happened. Mr. SAYLOR. Oh, I would never accuse the Secretary of the Interior or the people in the Interior Department and the experts in the Geological Survey and BLM of ever making a big goof. Why I am surprised, Mr. Edmondson, that you would accuse the people of your party of doing anything so dastardly. This is unheard of. Mr. EDMONDSON. Will the gentleman yield further? Mr. SAYLOR. Yes, I yield. Mr. EDMONDSON. I think that candor in this instance is probably preferable to sophistry. We have candor operating here this morning, and I think it is on both sides of the aisle. Mr. SAYLOR. I am always delighted to know that is the reason. I wonder if it was candor that caused that memo of disapproval on November 15. I wonder if that is that same kind of candor, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to this afternoon. Mr. EDMONDSON. The gentleman from Texas. Mr. KAZEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When the Department came to the conclusion that 51,000 acres was too large, what criteria was used? Mr. WEINBERG. Well, let me read you what was said within the Department on that. You will have to pardon me while I find some pages that I have marked here. I hope I turn it to the right one. Pardon me, could I consult with Mr. Finnegan? My marker must have slipped out. The view on the part of the agency was that areas of geothermal leases should be held as closely as possible to the area of production, and they felt that 51,200 was too large. We believe that a single lessee should not be permitted to acquire leases for a major portion of the usable publicly owned geothermal resources in any one State. In that light they regarded aggregate holdings of 51,200 acres to be wholly excessive. Mr. KAZEN. Does the Department know sufficiently, does it have enough knowledge on spacing and things of this kind in relation to the normal acreage allotments? Mr. WEINBERG. Well, the Department has some knowledge of course as to where the active thermal steam areas are, but the feeling is that it is a lot easier to move up, once having set a limit, than it is to move down. Mr. KAZEN. Was this an arbitrary figure? Mr. WEINBERG. No, it is not arbitrary. It is a judgment figure. No one can determine the last acre which makes a limit too high or which, not having it, makes it too low. This is a judgment factor, and this was the judgment of our technical agencies based upon their views and their experience. Mr. KAZEN. Let me ask you something. Not knowing anything about the subject, is it similar to-well, let me rephrase the question. Is steam to be found in pools or in certain strata that are limited, like, say, oil and gas? Mr. WEINBERG. I would like to ask Mr. Wayland, the Chief of the Conservation Division, of the Geological Survey, to answer that question if I may. Mr. KAZEN. Is he going to be a witness later on? Mr. WEINBERG. He is here. Mr. EDMONDSON. I wonder if we couldn't hold further questions. I think the bell has rung requiring our presence on the floor. Can you be back at 2 o'clock this afternoon? Mr. WEINBERG. Yes. Mr. EDMONDSON. The subcommittee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. (Whereupon, at 11:20 the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 2 p.m. on the same day.) AFTERNOON SESSION Mr. BARING. The committee will come to order. Will the witnesses take the witness table again? When the subcommittee recessed, the gentleman from Pennsylvania was questioning the witnesses. The gentleman from Pennsylvania. STATEMENT OF HARRY R. ANDERSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC LAND MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; ACCOMPANIED BY EDWARD WEINBERG, DEPUTY SOLICITOR; FREDERICK FISHMAN, STAFF ASSISTANT TO THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, PUBLIC LAND MANAGEMENT; AND RUSSELL G. WAYLAND, CHIEF, CONSERVATION DIVISION, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY-Resumed Mr. SAYLOR. Now, Mr. Secretary, on November 15, 1966, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued a release which contained his memorandum of disapproval of S. 1674. Were you called to the White House to advise the President in any way on this veto message? Mr. ANDERSON. Were we called to the White House? Mr. SAYLOR. Yes. Mr. ANDERSON. No, sir. Mr. SAYLOR. Did the White House call you for any advice on this? Mr. ANDERSON. They did not call me, sir. Mr. SAYLOR. Do you know if they called anybody in the Interior Department? Mr. ANDERSON. Not to my knowledge. Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Fishman, were you called to the White House? Mr. SAYLOR. Did anybody from the White House staff call you with regard to the preparation of this memorandum of disapproval? Mr. FISHMAN. No, sir. Mr. SAYLOR. Do you know of anybody in the Interior Department that was called? Mr. FISHMAN. No, sir; I do not. Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Weinberg, were you called to the White House? Mr. SAYLOR. Were you called by the White House or anybody on the staff of the White House with regard to this? Mr. WEINBERG. No, I was not. Mr. SAYLOR. Do you know anybody in the Interior Department that was called? Mr. WEINBERG. No, I do not know what the discussions were, if any, between the White House and the Department. Mr. SAYLOR. If there were no calls on the Solicitor's Office, was there any call you know of or have you heard of anybody that was called in the Interior Department? Mr. WEINBERG. No, I know of no one that was called. Mr. SAYLOR. Do you know of anybody that was called to the White House in the Interior Department?" Mr. WEINBERG. No. I don't know what discussions may have been between the Secretary and the Under Secretary and the other top people in the Department and the White House. Mr. SAYLOR. It says here, or they gave, as I recall, six reasons. No. 1 says: "It is unfair in its unlimited 'grandfather' clause rights." Mr. Secretary, does this reflect the opinion of the Department of the Interior that these "grandfather rights" are wrong? Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Saylor, we testified several times last year in open session on the "grandfather" clause. Mr. SAYLOR. Well now, Mr. Secretary, there are on the statute books and there have been for a number of years a number of pieces of legislation which the Interior Department has sent up to this committee, with "grandfather" clauses in them. How come your Department has been in favor of "grandfather" clauses in other types of legislation, and you now say that you do not believe in "grandfather" clauses here? Mr. ANDERSON. I don't know which "grandfather" clause you are talking about. Could you give me some specifics, Mr. Saylor, other than the particular one here? Mr. SAYLOR. What about the Mineral Leasing Act, which allowed the conversion of mining claims to leases in cases where there was due diligence by the people for prosecution of their mining claims. They were allowed to convert them. What is wrong with that? Mr. WEINBERG. If it is the provision that I think you are referring to, those were valid existing claims on the date the act was passed. Mr. SAYLOR. Aren't these valid existing claims that are on there now? Mr. WEINBERG. No, sir. Mr. SAYLOR. Why aren't they? Mr. WEINBERG. Because they were not filed for the mineral for which they purported to seek leases. Mr. SAYLOR. Neither were the rights under mineral leasing which were granted. Mr. WEINBERG. No. There was testimony before the committee last year, Congressman Saylor, which conceded that the purpose of the applications for lease was to obtain geothermal steam, not to obtain oil or gas, in one instance, and we wrote a letter to the committee following that testimony. Mr. SAYLOR. Well, it seems this is rather strange, that in this field the President has used this medium and says that we aren't to have any "grandfather" clause. Yet I notice that the Auto Safety Act of 1966, the President had no hesitancy whatsoever in passing and signing a bill which granted some "grandfather" rights. In title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in the restraining clause, there was nothing that the President ever mentioned with regard to the "grandfather" rights that were there protected. Mr. WEINBERG. Well, there are "grandfather" clauses and "grandfather" clauses, and we do not feel that you can categorize them all as invariably bad or, conversely, invariably good. Mr. SAYLOR. Oh, well, now is there any "grandfather" clause that you would approve of, if this committee decided to put one in the bill? Mr. WEINBERG. That is kind of an iffy question. Mr. SAYLOR. I am going to get an iffy answer, I can tell you that. Mr. WEINBERG. That is correct. I have to give an iffy answer to an iffy question. Mr. SAYLOR. Not necessarily. Mr. WEINBERG. But the Department and the administration from the beginning recommended against a "grandfather" clause that was based upon recognizing invalid claims, which is the problem with the "grandfather" clause in this legislation. Mr. SAYLOR. Well, if these people who have a present oil and gas lease would drill and discover oil and gas and geothermal steam, because this is perfectly within the realm of possibility, then what would the position of the Department be? Mr. WEINBERG. The position of the Department would be that they would have a lease for oil and gas, period. Mr. SAYLOR. All right, so we have got the geothermal steam; what do we do with it? Mr. WEINBERG. Cap it. Mr. SAYLOR. Throw it away? Mr. WEINBERG. Cap it. Mr. SAYLOR. Cap it? Mr. WEINBERG. Yes. Mr. WEINBERG. Because it is not covered by their oil and gas lease. Mr. SAYLOR. Because there is no statute that covers it? Mr. WEINBERG. No. There is a provision on water in the Mineral Leasing Act, which relates to oil and gas leases, and that is that if you drill for oil and hit water, you cap the well. Mr. SAYLOR. We are not going to get water, you said. We are going to get steam. So now what do we do, cap the steam? Mr. WEINBERG. You and I agreed last year when I testified that the steam is, in essence, water. Ι Mr. SAYLOR. Now, let me tell you all these experts that were down there. I haven't found any of them yet except I thought maybe this morning when you turned around and asked one of the men in back of you to come up and give you a little information, maybe, I thought, I was going to get the name of an expert. Mr. WEINBERG. He is an expert. Mr. SAYLOR. He is? Mr. WEINBERG. He is. Mr. SAYLOR. What is his name? Let us get that in the record, real fast. What is his name? Mr. WEINBERG. His name is Russell Wayland and he is the chief of the Conservation Division of the Geological Survey. Mr. SAYLOR. And he is an expert? Mr. WEINBERG. He is an expert. Mr. SAYLOR. In what? Mr. WEINBERG. In geology. Mr. SAYLOR. An expert in geology? Mr. WEINBERG. That is correct. Mr. SAYLOR. All right. Now, then, he has been advising the Interior Department, is this right? sir. Mr. WEINBERG. He is an employee of the Interior Department; yes, Mr. SAYLOR. All right. Now, the second reason the President gave says that 51,000 acres is four times greater than the experts say is needed. Now, I want to know where we have had any drilling for geothermal steam in the United States. Have we had any? Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, Mr. Saylor. We have had drilling on private land. In Sonoma County, for example, in the Salton Sea area, and there may be others. Mr. SAYLOR. All right. Now, when they drilled down there, how close were the wells? Mr. ANDERSON. The wells are approximately-Mr. McCabe from Magma Power is here to give a closer definition or description of areas. Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Secretary, let us not try to get Mr. McCabe into this. This is the Interior Department that is now testifying, and since there have been no drilling on public lands, and you have got experts down there advising the President, I have got to find out what their knowledge is about this matter, who advises you, and apparently advising the Interior Department. The reason I am asking this, Mr. Secretary, I want to find out. Mr. ANDERSON. I am definitely not an expert in this field, Mr. Savlor. I would like to establish that right now. Mr. SAYLOR. We will accept your denial of expertise in this field, but as the Assistant Secretary in charge of public land management, it is your responsibility to come before this committee and give us the best advice that you have, expert or otherwise. The President says |
