Luzerne County. It bears on the problem that Mr. Connally described to you; namely, that there is the possibility-although people have said in the past that we have no estimate of what it would cost to fill the voids in these areas there is the possibility from the studies that have been made by the State of Pennsylvania that from 15 to 20 million cubic yards of fill could do the job for the primary purpose. There is, even more important, this fact: that there are some of these areas which are in greater need of it than others, and unless we begin somewhere we will never be able to solve this problem. That is the reason that my bill includes, for example, the provision. for surveys to be made, because there are actually great differences of opinion and great differences in the maps themselves of the underground conditions in many of these areas, and until such surveys are made and are significantly made, it will be impossible to ascertain precisely what should be done in certain areas. There are other areas, however, in which this has been accomplished and which now simply await the economic means to carry forth a flushing program such as Mr. Connally suggested. That is the reason for the second part of the bill that I have now introduced. I would like to point out that in all of this, both in Congressman Flood's amendment and in my bill, we are not asking the Federal Government to take over the entire area or to spend enormous sums of money to accomplish this task. Rather what we are requesting is that it be undertaken and beginning particularly in those areas which need it most. for three specific reasons. One is to conserve this resource which, as I say, is almost unique in our area for the United States and maybe of even greater value than it is now to us at some time in the future. Secondly, unless we do it, we are going to have a most tremendous cost in the way of private property and damage to persons themselves. Third, because of our very heavy unemployment situation we will be paying out a great deal more money in unemployment compensation and in other ways than we will for this purpose. Accordingly, I suggest to you that you bear this very much in mind. all three or four of these factors, when you consider this amendment of Congressman Flood's which I heartily endorse; and, second. that you take into consideration a further advance into this field, not an advance to the tune of $40 million at all, but simply so it can be ascertained which of these particular projects could be undertaken in an economic manner. Mr. EDMONDSON. Thank you for a very fine statement. Mr. ICHORD. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Scranton, would not there be duplication under the act of 1955 and under your bill? Mr. SCRANTON. I think this could be very easily handled. Frankly, sir, we have discussed this at some length with both the State department of mines and with the Bureau of Mines, and they have the best information and, as you have seen this morning, the most highly talented people in this field. I think they are very well aware, if we are to understake something of this sort, it must be done in conjunction one with the other, and there would not be duplication that might be indicated by the wording of the law. After all, you are limited in your funds. Mr. ICHORD. You provide for 45 percent matching? Mr. SCRANTON. Yes; that is correct. I feel very strongly that the local community should be involved in this, for two reasons: First of all, I think it is important for them to participate in it in the way of providing some of the features of it; second, because in this way you do not put the onus on either the Bureau of Mines or the State department of mines to decide what particular projects will be undertaken first. Mr. ICHORD. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. EDMONDSON. The gentleman from Colorado. Mr. DOMINICK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have no questions. I just want to go on record as endorsing a very fine statement made by Congressman Scranton on the problem. I have some concern about the cost of the work that might be carried out in the Flood proposal, and your recommendation is of material help. Mr. EDMONDSON. Mr. Scranton, I wonder if you would comment on Mr. Ankeny's suggestion. I note your bill provides no culm should be purchased with appropriated funds. Do you think this fill material could be obtained from municipal, civic, or other local sources? Is that your idea? Mr. SCRANTON. I certainly think a very great proportion of it would, sir. For example, I know the city of Scranton owns considerable piles of this material which they could, as part of their participation, donate. There are also other so-called culm piles which are owned by private citizens-and I am not talking about coal companies nowwho are very anxious to get rid of this and I think would be willing to donate it likewise. I would not in any sense of the word, because I am not well enough informed, be willing to say this is not a problem for a project to the tune of 10 to 20 million cubic yards, but I do not think that is what we have in mind, at least in the first few years of this program. Mr. EDMONDSON. I would like to thank you on behalf of the committee for your contribution to the hearing. Both you and Congressman Flood I think have placed a problem before us that certainly is a serious one for your State and for the Nation. Are there any further questions or statements from other members of the committee? I would like to thank those who came here from Pennsylvania to present their views regarding this measure and assure you that we are seriously concerned with it. We will be holding further hearings on this subject as quickly as the final position of the department is made known to us. The subcommittee stands adjourned. (Whereupon, at 12 noon, the subcommittee adjourned, to reconvene at 9:45 a.m., Tuesday, April 11, 1961.) SEALING OF ABANDONED ANTHRACITE COAL MINES TUESDAY, MAY 9, 1961 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MINES AND MINING OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to other business, in the committee room 1324, New House Office Building, the Honorable Ed Edmondson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. EDMONDSON. We will move on to H.R. 4094 and H.R. 5356. When we last held hearings on this legislation, the department report had not been received. That report is now available to us. Our departmental witness this morning is Mr. J. A. Corgan, Chief of the Division of Anthracite, Bureau of Mines. Mr. Corgan, I understand you are going to represent Mr. Ankeny, the Director of the Bureau, this morning. Mr. CORGAN. That is correct. Mr. Ankeny is out of town and he asked that I come up and present the statement. I have here with me Mr. C. S. Kuebler, research director, Anthracite Research Center, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Schuylkill Haven, Pa. Mr. Kuebler is in direct charge of our anthracite activities in the field. I would like to have him here with me. Mr. EDMONDSON. We would be very pleased to have him. I think it will be helpful to the committee. Go right ahead, Mr. Corgan. STATEMENT OF J. A. CORGAN, CHIEF, DIVISION OF ANTHRACITE, BUREAU OF MINES, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR; ACCOMPANIED BY C. S. KUEBLER, RESEARCH DIRECTOR, ANTHRACITE RESEARCH CENTER, U.S. BUREAU OF MINES, SCHUYLKILL HAVEN, PA. Mr. CORGAN. When we were here a couple of weeks ago, we presented our statement, as you know, on H.R. 4094. What is it that you wish me to do now, present the statement on H.R. 5356, on Mr. Scranton's bill, or answer questions on H.R. 4094? Mr. EDMONDSON. I had misunderstood the situation on that. I understood your report earlier was not complete. Am I in error on that? Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. EDMONDSON. Back on the record. Is the statement you gave identical with the report? Mr. CORGAN. I think it is. I cannot recall any differences. Mr. EDMONDSON. In that event, and in accordance with the orde previously entered, the official report will be made a part of t record at the beginning of the hearings held on April 10, 1961. Ta report is dated April 17, 1961, and is signed by John M. Kelly, Assist ant Secretary of the Interior. (The report referred to is at p. 1.) Mr. EDMONDSON. Do any members of the committee have any ques tions for Mr. Corgan or Mr. Kuebler? If not, I would like to ask some questions concerning the operation of the program and I assume Mr. Kuebler is directly in charge of We had some testimony at the last hearing, Mr. Kuebler-were you present, Mr. Kuebler? Mr. KUEBLER. No, I was not, sir. Mr. CORGAN. He was not here at the last hearing, sir. Mr. EDMONDSON. The questions were the subject of what the esti mates were as to the cost of completing this program and doing a favorable job on it. I note in the report which has been supplied to us that the estimate is a 10-year program, $50 million. Is that your figure on which the Department has given us the report? Mr. CORGAN. That is right, Mr. Chairman. The $50 million is an estimate figure which we arrived at for the filling of all voids in the anthracite region that could be filled on a justifiable, economic basis. and also the filling in of strip pits throughout the region in the interest of conservation of anthracite and the protection of health and safety of the people. Mr. EDMONDSON. As I understand it, your estimate of time is that in 2 or 3 years the funds currently authorized might be exhausted. Then at the end of 2 or 3 years, we would need to face the problem of whether to go forward with an additional program or whether to let it stop at that stage. Is that right? Mr. CORGAN. That is right. If we were to use the $10 million; that is, $5 million of the Federal Government's money and $5 million of matching funds from the State, it would require from 2 to 3 years. That is right, if we took the entire program into consideration. Mr. EDMONDSON. Are either of you gentlemen aware of what has happened in Pennsylvania, whether or not the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has amended its statute to meet the problem of the change in language? Mr. CORGAN. I believe they have, Mr. Edmondson. I believe the State has passed a piece of legislation or amended their current bill both in their House of Representatives and in the Senate. I am quite sure that it has passed both Houses. Mr. EDMONDSON. Are there any further questions of the departmental witnesses? Mr. Pearl has some questions. Mr. PEARL. Mr. Corgan, you may recall at the last meeting Mr. Kyl asked Mr. Ankeny this question: "There are several reservations stated here"-in other words, in Mr. Ankeny's prepared statement-and then the question was: "Do you still believe that the act with this proposed amendment would have valid purposes?" That question was not gone into further because of the fact that there was no departmental report approved and available at that time. Mr. Ankeny's answer, before further discussion was stopped, |