In consideration of the execution of the foregoing Lease, Jackson Hole Preserve, Incorporated, agrees that it will not sell or otherwise dispose of, or pledge, or otherwise encumber, any of its stock (other than qualifying directors shares) in the Grand Teton Lodge & Transportation Company so long as said Lease is in effect, without the written consent of the Director of the National Park Service. Dated: May 4, 1953.

Attest:

[CORPORATE SEAL]

JACKSON HOLE PRESERVE, INCORPORATED, By LAURANCE S. ROCKEFELLER, Its President. JOHN V. DUNCAN, Its Secretary.

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Secretary, we want to say we appreciate very much your coming down. I know you have been delayed. We appreciate your being here.

Mr. England, Mr. Wallhauser has a question, if you would be seated. We are pleased to have you down. You are very nice to come in. I think the Park Service will benefit from your comments, and certainly the Secretary seems to appreciate them.

RATES IN NATIONAL PARKS

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I agree with the chairman's comments, Mr. England. I wondered as to the rates that you paid in the parks as compared with facilities that you would like to have compared them with outside of the parks.

Mr. ENGLAND. I tried to recollect every detail concerning my visit to the parks but time did not permit me to check the prices I paid. My wife has a recollection the prices were a little on the high side, but I do not want that to go in the record as any official comment by

me.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. In other words, it is your impression that you did not pay lesser rates for the park facilities than you would have paid

Mr. ENGLAND. No, they were at least as high as the going commercial rate, if not a little higher, but I am not sure which park charged which. I cannot remember. We went to five parks and spent a month. I do not remember.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. This, then, at least from your individual expression, does not seem to jibe with the desire of the Park Service to provide facilities at lesser cost to the American public, which is one reason why they have these negotiated contracts. This is an amazing statement to me because one of the major points made by the Secretary when he was here was, and I fully concur in it, that one of the desirable factors is to provide excellent service for the American public at small cost. Your experience has been that this has not been so?

Mr. ENGLAND. I would say the rates were no lower than comparable commercial rates. You are taxing my poor memory when you ask me to pin things down specifically. I am trying to help the Secretary and not embarrass him in any way.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. We are, too.

Mr. ENGLAND. This is the first time I have actually met him.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. We are, too, trying to help the Secretary, but we are more interested in helping the American public than the Department of the Interior or any other branch of the Government for that matter.

Mr. ENGLAND. It seems to me that if I had his job, I would be very much inclined to have a management consultant firm, particularly one who had done work in the resort field, study the whole relationship between the Department and its concessionaires and review the basic relationship, review the basic agreements, because it sounds very unlikely to me that the same concessionaires would have the best deal year after year after year, from the very beginning of the Park Service. Something sounds very wrong.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I think you have made very good points and I won't belabor them any further. Thank you very much. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. England, is there anything you would like to add to your comment on this as you think over this problem? We certainly have been appreciative of your forthright statement of a feeling of an American businessman, who took his wife and three children to the national parks and has some definite concrete feelings about the kind of service that he was able to pay for.

Mr. ENGLAND. I am fortunate in that I recovered the notes I made during my trip and I would be pleased to tell the Department, park by park, what we found, where conditions were better than others and what specifically was wrong, in our opinion, in each park.

Mr. BROOKS. We would be pleased to have a copy of that.

Mr. ENGLAND. These notes are in very rough form and they are very detailed. They are about small things.

Mr. BROOKS. I can say that I feel that the Secretary would be interested. I do not know what the Park Service would say. Maybe Mr. Beasley would have some influence on them to that extent.

Mr. BEASLEY. We would welcome any further observation.

Mr. ENGLAND. I will be glad to draw together these notes in articulate form.

Mr. BROOKS. Maybe they will send someone out to go over those comments, if that is in line with the policy.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I would like to make one further comment, Mr. Chairman, in not too serious a vein. I wondered, Mr. England, if you really enjoyed your vacation after having taken such a decided look at all of these facilities? You were more or less on a business trip, which is commendable.

Mr. ENGLAND. Not at all.

We had a grand time and the grounds were so beautiful, the mountains and lakes, et cetera, so beautiful that you can overlook these details.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I am sure the Park Service is very appreciative about your remarks concerning the rangers and employees. We agree with you, those of us who have visited the parks.

FIRE HAZARDS IN NATIONAL PARK ACCOMMODATIONS

Mr. ENGLAND. I would hate to be in some hotels and inns in the parks if there were a fire. There are some terrible firetraps in those parks. Someday there is going to be a real tragedy. Every room is taken at this time of year. The rooms are just jammed and some day there will be a fire and it will be a terrible one, far away from modern firefighting equipment, in the mountains where there is no water pressure. Some buildings date back to 1890.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Did you think there were adequate exits?

Mr. ENGLAND. You get a wooden building going in the middle of the night and in a matter of seconds you can have exits cut off. My father was a medical examiner in Berkshire County, where I come from. He had occasion to examine a lot of bodies that were pulled out of fires from old country inns. When they blaze up at night, the first warning you have is smoke and fire coming into your room. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Nedzi?

Mr. NEDZI. May I suggest that you include this in your comments to the Park Service so they are on notice at least that this kind of situation exists?

Mr. ENGLAND. I will. May I make a comment as concerns the Rockefeller Building in Grand Teton Park? I think that is a freak. I do not think there are too many multimillionaires around who can build a building and give it to the Government. I think some businesslike arrangement has to be made for putting up buildings and paying for them. You cannot depend on the exceptional millionaire who will donate a whole building to the Government.

Mr. BROOKS. I think this is a point well taken and I will say that at this time, Mr. Beasley, I wish you would give us a report as soon as it can be made of the sprinkler protection, the fire protection, the fire hazard, and the efforts that are being made to control it, and to eliminate the hazards to the American tourist in the national parks because I think it is a very significant point, well raised, and I hope that such inspections can be completed and the improvements necessary completed before we have a catastrophe that would cost the lives of many Americans.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Mr. Chairman, on the other hand, we do not want to unduly alarm the American public on this point. It may well be that Mr. England's observations

Mr. BROOKS. I would rather alarm them a little than burn them a little, though.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I agree with that, but I think Mr. England has made some good points. I think there may be some answers

Mr. BEASLEY. Mr. Chairman, before obtaining the report I can assure you that there are sprinkler systems or other necessary protection against fire that you can provide for in the facilities that are involved.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Thank you.

Mr. BROOKS. When you give us that report you can give us a rundown on the protective systems in each of the areas.

(Subsequently, the Interior Department furnished the following report on fire hazards in hotels in national parks, exhibit 11:)

EXHIBIT 11-FIRE HAZARDS IN HOTELS IN NATIONAL PARKS

This report on sprinkler protection, fire protection, fire hazards, and the efforts which have been made to control and eliminate the hazards in both Governmentowned and concessionaire-owned hotels located in areas administered by the National Park Service is being submitted in accordance with Chairman Brooks' request.

Only two old Government-owned hotels having more than two stories and located in national parks; namely, Paradise Inn and Annex in Mount Rainier National Park and Crater Lake Lodge in Crater Lake National Park, and the Glacier Point Hotel in Yosemite National Park owned by the Yosemite Park & Curry Co., do not have sprinkler systems. The Paradise Inn and Annex was purchased by the Federal Government on July 17, 1952, in accordance with the act of 1950 (Public Law 800, 81st Cong., 2d sess., of September 21, 1950). This

purchase was made in order to replace this hotel with a modern and fire-resistant type structure. As soon as a site for the new structure has been approved, action to construct it will be initiated. In order to continue the use of the Paradise Inn and Annex, the National Park Service has collaborated with the concessionaire in minimizing the fire hazards by (1) installing a fire alarm system, (2) prohibiting occupancy of the third floor, (3) providing night watchman patrols, (4) replacing over 200 portable room heaters with stationary wall heaters, and (5) training employees of the National Park Service and the concessionaire in firefighting techniques. Since this old structure is scheduled for demolition, the installation of a sprinkler system, which would cost about $100,000, has not been recommended.

Funds have been authorized to convert the Crater Lake Lodge into a visitor center during the 1963 fiscal year. National Park Service plans call for the rehabilitation of the Glacier Point Hotel in Yosemite National Park by the concessionaire. The third and fourth floors of this building are not now being

used.

Complete automatic sprinkler systems have been installed in the following frame hotels which are more than two stories:

1. Many Glacier Hotel, Glacier National Park, Mont. 2. El Tovar Hotel, Grand Canyon National Park, Ariz.

3. Big Meadows Lodge, Shenandoah National Park, Va.

4. Lake Hotel, Yellowstone National Park, Wyo.

5. Mammoth Hotel, Yellowstone National Park, Wyo.

6. Old Faithful Inn, Yellowstone National Park, Wyo.

7. Oregon Caves Hotel, Oregon Caves National Monument, Oreg. There are eight other frame hotels in areas administered by the National Park Service, but they have only two stories. Most of these hotels are scheduled to

be replaced with more modern structures as soon as funds become available. Automatic sprinkler systems are costly, especially, if additional water supply has to be provided. Therefore, sprinkler systems have not been installed in any of these hotels.

An annual fire hazard inspection is made by National Park Service park officials of all structures in each park. Corrective action is taken where the Service is responsible. All of the larger parks and many of the smaller ones have firefighting plans and organizations. Simulated fire drills are held. Watchman service is required at the larger hotels. We have provided extensive firefighting equipment at all of the larger parks and have mutual agreements or arrangements with municipal, State, and Federal fire departments where these services are available.

Training in fire prevention and firefighting is a continuous assignment of the National Park Service rangers. This training includes concessionaire personnel. Service representatives attend fire schools within and outside of the Service. Training in the use of first-aid firefighting, such as portable fire extinguishers, is given to all employees in the parks and often to the families of personnel living in the parks.

Of the total of 195 fires reported during the past 41⁄2 years, only 8 small fires were in hotels of 2 stories or more. No visitors have been injured as the result of building fires during the last 41⁄2 years in the areas administered by the National Park Service. A serious fire, of course, could change this excellent record. On the other hand, we believe that the loss can be reduced through training, inspections, and prompt corrective action.

The officials of the National Park Service are keenly interested in the safety of park visitors and of the Service's employees. In fact, it is including in its 1964 budget estimates a request for a safety and fire prevention engineer for each regional office in an attempt to reduce all accidents and fires in the parks by means of intensive fire hazard inspection and training programs.

Mr. BROOKS. Thank you, Mr. England, very much for being here. We wish your wife could have accompanied you.

Mr. ENGLAND. If I can help you any further, let me know. Mr. BROOKS. Thank you very much. At this time I would like to move to the helium conservation contracts and call Mr. Henry P. Wheeler, Jr., the Assistant Director of the Helium Division.

89028-62-pt. 3- -6

ABSENCE OF PRICE REDETERMINATION CLAUSE IN LONG TERM HELIUM

CONTRACTS

During this fiscal year 1962, the Bureau of Mines negotiated four noncompetitive fixed-unit-price contracts with private contractors for the extraction of helium from their natural gas supplies. The contracts extend for a period of 22 years, including the time required for construction of the plants. The procurement of helium from private industry is a new program and involves a large expenditure of Federal funds. The Bureau estimated that during the 22-year period, the procurement of helium gas from the private companies will total about 62.5 billion cubic feet at a maximum cost of about $1 billion.

These four contracts were made with the following companies: Helex Co. (subsidiary of Northern Natural Gas Co.), $11.24 per 1,000 cubic feet.

Cities Service Helex, Inc. (subsidiary of Cities Service Co.), $11.78 per 1,000 cubic feet.

National Helium Corp. (subsidiary of Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co.; and National Distillers & Chemical Corp.), $11.78 per 1,000 cubic feet.

Phillips Petroleum Co., $10.30 per 1,000 cubic feet.

Although these contracts will run for 22 years, the contracts contain no provision for renegotiating or redetermining the price per 1,000 cubic feet of helium. Thus, the Government is not protected against incorrect estimates of costs of plant construction, operation, maintenance, taxes, interest, insurance, or the ups and downs of the future value of the helium during the 22 years of the contract term.

The subcommittee understands that the Bureau is now negotiating four more long-term helium contracts.

I understand also from the Secretary's statement this morning that they intend to have no more 22-year contracts without a redetermination clause in them that is fair to the Government. I would say, Mr. Wheeler, since you may be intimately aware of it, when was this decided and what is the date of the order?

STATEMENT OF HENRY P. WHEELER, JR., ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, HELIUM, BUREAU OF MINES

Mr. WHEELER. The decision was made and reported to Congressman Kirwan in a letter dated August 3.

Mr. BROOKS. Thank you very much.

Why did the Bureau not use price redetermination clauses in the four contracts, sir? Do you know?

Mr. WHEELER. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. I just would be interested.

Mr. WHEELER. If I may have about no more than 5 minutes, sir, I would like to tell you what we have tried to do, very briefly.

Mr. BROOKS. On that problem?

Mr. WHEELER. This will relate to this problem and I think you will have to look at it with kind of a broad brush; it will not take more than 5 minutes.

Mr. BROOKS. Why don't you say, if you do not know why they did not use them, if you do know