although I know that in due time they can speak for themselves, but it includes the Kaiser Steel Co., it includes the Independent Coal & Coke, which is a major coal producer, it includes Utah Power & Light Co., and we are the ones who have appeared at these various hearings and asked that the proper legal and engineering studies be made first so we will know where we stand, and then if there isn't enough water, we think that ought to end the thing. If there is, our hearts and everything else go out to Sanpete County, because there is no question about the fact that they could use that water. But here we go again, before we have the data, and I can only repeat again that on the basis of the studies of our company's engineers and the available studies and the independent engineers which we have retained, and you will hear from Mr. Templeton shortly we can only oppose the project, because we hit this continual fog. My remarks to Mr. Harvey: We were invited to attend a meeting of the water and power board. That was the one on November 17, I think, of 1961. And, to our amazement, we got up and we made our statements in good faith, thinking this was a fair opportunity to present various positions. To our amazement we find out that the minutes that you have said may be also a part of the record, the minutes showed that before the hearing the board had voted in favor of the project. The minutes-I do not know if they show, but I think the record does show that on the morning of the second day the Governor called the board in and said that the studies had been made, and apparently there was some hesitancy, after our doubts were expressed, that the studies had been made, and the Governor said they had been made by the Federal Government. And so they completed the hearing and then the board reiterated the decision they had already made. We had had a prior hearing with the water and power board down in Carbon County, and one of the members, who happens to be a member of the bar, a man of outstanding ability and reputation in the community, Hugh W. Colton, of Vernal-he had told us at that prior hearing I think that was about 1958 or 1959-that certainly as far as the board was then constituted and as he himself felt, there should not be any further pushing of this project until there was the requisite study. And a further part of the minutes, and that was the question I asked of Jay Bingham, is the statement of Colton:

Again, I believe that a study should be made for the coordinated development of the remaining water resources in both the Price River and the San Pitch River area to determine the availability of water in both areas and the most feasible means of making the maximum use of this vital resource. In my opinion it would be a mistake to undertake further construction in either area until a comprehensive plan is developed. Please include this letter in the minutes of the meeting of November 17, 1961.

Now, I am informed that Mr. Nielsen was there at the, really a secret meeting of the board, when the Governor said, "There is no need to do this because the study has been made by the Government."

I personally went with some of our other groups to talk to the Governor to see if such a study had been made, and I think there is in the record a statement that the Soil Conservation-and it has been made today-Service had not made the study because they relied upon the assurance of the State of Utah that the study had been made. So it is again. "Let's operate and then we will find out whether we put the appendix in or take it out."

In today's hearing, for the first time, although it must have been prepared carefully much longer in advance of this date than I believe we were aware of the hearing today, but in the Soil Conservation Service's statement presented by Mr. Bradshaw, who has been most cooperative, and Mr. Libby, on page 2 there appears that now the Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the State engineer, has made a water supply study to determine—and then it says what is determined.

are.

Well, that was the reason for my question, to say, where is that study? Because, if and when that is made and we develop the facts, I think we can, at long last, stop this internal squabbling. But, so far as I know we still haven't seen that study and we don't know where we And, if the committee please, until that time occurs, the company that I represent, and I believe the other industrial users, and I am certain that the other segments of Carbon County must join together in saying we oppose the project, although we hate to hurt what is the obvious need of our fellow citizens of Sanpete. But we can't expose what happens to be, in my case, the largest payroll industry of the State of Utah to the uncertainties of such a project that can impair our rights and our operation, and we can't take any solace in the statement that there ought to be water and that down at Woodside, some 30 miles below the Wellington coal washing plant, on the basis of some statistics, there was water on an average, when we know for the 4 or 5 years of operation of our plant that the water is so scarce that, as you gentlemen have heard us say before, we have had to operate on the sewage effluent, from the sewers of Price and Helper and Wellington. And maybe we will get now the seepage or leakage from this other reservoir. But it isn't funny to us, when we know how tight it is, to be told that there is plenty of water, because in the years that we have been operating and I think it is now 4 or 5-we have faced nothing but just barely the water to get by. And, gentlemen, it is all fine to talk about priority, but if you live on a stream, you will know that as a practical matter there is such a thing as "highority."

We represent Mount Olivet Cemetery, that has the oldest right on Emigration Canyon, and we have seen 500 homes go in there subsequently, and we don't have any water. We have a hard, cold choice of suing 500 people, and they might be good customers, if you will stand another little bit of humor, or we could dig a well and forget the oldest water supply in the State of Utah on that stream. It was built by the Federal Government, as you know, when that was part of the reservation.

We represent companies in Salt Lake County who draw upon Utah Lake to the south and the Provo River, and we have rights that go back to the territorial days. And we have seen what happened. When Deer Creek was built, and we found to our amazement-Mr. Wallace who has testified here, sits on the same legal committee-we found to our amazement that, maybe through an error, but nevertheless the Deer Creek people had held back about 15,000 acre-feet of our water, and then, because Salt Lake was short, they turned around and sold it to Salt Lake City, and Salt Lake City had some of those prior rights. Well, again, do we go ahead and sue each other and get into a lot of legal things and the expense of litigation, or do you just say, "Well, I guess we lost the water and we are out"? But there is a very grave danger of "highority" preceding priority.

Then there is another thing that I should make of record, and that is that while Mr. Nielsen and the Sanpete people have been very frank-and I don't question that for a minute-in stating that they do not and, as far as they are concerned, cannot impair prior rights, the Federal Government, as represented by the U.S. attorney, was that they were not bound by State action-and we know in the Santa Marguerita River and other cases, the Pelton Dam case, that the U.S. Government asserts a doctrine of paramount rights under which it is perfectly conceivable that, having built a reservoir up there, the Government would then say that, "By reason of our paramount prior rights, we will take the water to operate that dam, that reservoir." And we have never yet had a frank statement from the U.S. Government that they would protect these downstream higher rights. We have had just the opposite. The U.S. attorney had come down to Carbon County-he has been overruled twice, but the official statement was that, "We are not bound."

Thank you for the time and for the attention that we have received. Senator Moss. Thank you very much, Mr. Behle. If I may encroach just a moment, Astronaut Cooper is down and is safe and well and will be taken aboard the ship Kearsarge in just a few minutes. [Applause.] Mr. BINGHAM. I feel constrained to comment that I think the integrity of the Governor and the water and power board has been questioned. Mr. Behle, if he has availed himself of the minutes and proceedings of the hearings, knows this is not a fact, that the board, no more than your committee, would decide a matter and then hold a hearing to becloud the issue. This is not the fact, and I hope your record will publish these documents to correct this misstatement. Senator Moss. The minutes will be in the record in full.

Mr. BEHLE. They should show what the record is; and, if it is a misimpression, I believe it is shared by a good many people over in this direction.

Mr. BINGHAM. The facts will speak for themselves.

Mr. NIELSEN. While they are waiting on that, may I correct the record by stating to Mr. Behle and to you, Mr. Chairman, that I have never at any time met with any Utah Water and Power Board and the Governor. This is the first time I have ever been accused of such a thing.

Mr. PAPPAS. While we are answering back and forth, Mr.

Senator

Senator Moss. Mr. Luke Pappas.

Mr. PAPPAS. I believe the record was established in the House showing the full record of the minutes of the Utah Water and Power Board hearing. When the resolution was read into the record this morning endorsing this policy as adopted by the board-will by its own minutes show that Mr. Nielsen and one other member of the Sanpete delegation attended as advisers, and it so states in the minutes.

Mr. LITIZZETTE. And were there when the action was taken. Senator Moss. The minutes will have to speak for themselves. All right, Mr. Skeen.

Mr. SKEEN. Senator, at this time I would like to call on Mr. Gerald Oviatt. He is the chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Carbon County.

Senator Moss. Fine. Mr. Oviatt, Commissioner Oviatt, we are very glad to have you. If you would care to sit, you may pull that chair forward and you may sit rather than stand, if you would like to do so.

STATEMENT OF GERALD O. OVIATT, CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CARBON COUNTY

Mr. OVIATT. I have a short prepared statement I will submit for the record. My name is Gerald Oviatt. I am chairman of the Carbon County Commission. I submit this as an official statement of the commission, including Louie Kosec, commissioner, and Albert Santi.

I also would like to state that there would have been more people from Carbon here today, but we had a water hearing there with the Corps of Engineers this morning, and some of the people couldn't make it didn't think they could make it up here in time. Also, I would like to point out that we were told in Price this morning by the Corps of Engineers that Carbon County does not have adequate water supply. I hear so many: We have it; we don't have it. I think that the thing here is to find out whether it is there or not before we do anything. With that, I thank you.

Senator Moss. Thank you very much, Commissioner Oviatt. This statement will be in the record in full, and I can confirm what the commissioner said about a hearing that was held in Price this morning, to which many Carbon County people had to attend, or wanted to attend, and many here, including Commissioner Oviatt, have driven from Price this morning in order to attend this hearing in the afternoon. That makes a full day for them, too.

(The prepared statement submitted by Mr. Oviatt is as follows:)

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am appearing as the chairman of the Carbon County Commission, for Commissioners Louis Kosec, Albert Santi, not as an engineer or expert. It is my desire to bring to your attention, as briefly as possible, some of the important factors in Carbon's economy which exist now and in my opinion will be magnified with the loss of any water in the county.

As you know, we were one of the first counties in the State of Utah to be classified as an area showing chronic unemployment and eligible for assistance under the Federal Government's area redevelopment program. Since being classified, many more of our citizens have joined the rolls of the unemployed. Recently, within the past 2 months, the United States Steel Corp. alone found it necessary to reduce their working force in their mines in the East Carbon area by over 100 men. There are more than 200 empty homes in Dragerton and Sunnyside. Without water there is little hope of bringing in new industry or building the economy through expansion of existing facilities. Water has been scarce and the present supply barely large enough to maintain what we had in the 1950's.

Coal is the potential of the county and to date, no process known for byproducts or means of producing electricity has been found that is not dependent on large quantities of water. We have been unable to entice new manufacturing or industry to move in because we cannot guarantee sufficient water.

Many hours have been spent in research, engineering, and giving testimony and we are now adding more. The issue here is whether to build or not and can the cost be justified. It will be decided by people who have no personal interest in it and if the project is approved, the impact on an already depleted area will be far reaching. I do not believe that your committee would decide without first weighing the good effects in one area against the damaging effects in another. As I stated before, I cannot give expert or legal testimony in this matter, but as an official of the county, I urge you to consider all aspects, especially the economic, before you reach your decision. This is a very permanent thing which

cannot be changed in the future and if constructed, will help to place a limit on any progress in our county. Respectfully submitted.

GERALD L. OVIATT, Chairman, Carbon County Commission.

Senator Moss. You may go ahead.

Mr. SKEEN. Thank you. We would next like to hear from Mr. Arthur Biggs.

Senator Moss. Mr. Biggs.

Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Biggs is representing the United Mine Workers of America.

Senator Moss. Thank you. We are glad to have you. You may stand there or you may come over, if you would like to be seated here, depending on how you would like to proceed.

STATEMENT OF ARTHUR BIGGS, INTERNATIONAL BOARD MEMBER, UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, DISTRICT NO. 22

Mr. BIGGS. We express the appreciation of the United Mine Workers, Senator Moss, and members of the committee, for the opportunity of appearing here before this group in opposition to the north Sanpete watershed project.

My name is Arthur Biggs, and I am international board member of the United Mine Workers of America, District 22, which has 16 local unions in Carbon County, Utah, with a working membership of 2,000.

Mr. Frank Stevenson, president of District No. 22, joins me in submitting this statement to the committee.

As I stated previously at the House hearings in Washington, D.C., last August, the United Mine Workers of America did not oppose then, nor do they oppose now, the canal lining and watershed protection features of the north Sanpete watershed project. However, we do vigorously oppose the transbasin diversion of water from Carbon County to be stored in a reservoir located at the Narrows site on Gooseberry Creek, a tributary of Price River. Price River is the main source of supply for the commercial coal mines located in Carbon County.

I need not tell you, Senator, that the coal mining industry is seriously depressed. Unfortunately since last August the unemployment figures insofar as coal miners are concerned have continued to rise and I am sorry to say that the situation now is worse than it was when I last testified before the House subcommittee in August of 1962. United States Steel has curtailed its operations at its Horse Canyon mine and has laid off 119 members of our union and approximately 25 supervisory personnel. The United States Steel washer plant, located below Wellington, Utah, because of forecasts of 62 percent of average on waterflows past Heiner gage will probably have to operate this year on a strictly rationed basis. In 1961 this plant operated on the sewage outfall of Price and Helper Cities.

The commercial coal mines in the Carbon County area must still look to boiler use of coal in steam generation electrical plants for their main market.

Last August I stated that a dependable and constant supply of water for steam boiler use was an absolute necessity and that any