will turn to page 5 of your statement and I read again, and you are speaking of the miners and you say:

All they can do now is go out on wildcat strikes and this is their way of recognizing that the coal industry and the Department of Interior are outside of the law, indeed are lawless.

I think you might want to make a further statement in reference to that allegation.

Mr. NADER. Yes, sir. Thank you for giving me the opportunity,

Senator.

My first reference would be to the bulk of hearings that were conducted by this very committee on the problem and that are being conducted. For example, these citations for violations, which are numbering in the thousands, are allegations that the law has been violated and that penalties would have been imposed if it were not for the injunction brought by the small coal mine operators.

Throughout the last 10 or 15 years, there has been placed on the House and Senate committee records the tremendous number of violations of Federal law and of State law by mines and mine operators of all sizes. I might also add that my testimony alludes to a number of areas where the Department of the Interior is not obeying the new Coal Mine Health and Safety Act.

We can go further, if you wish. For example, the coal mine or the coal industry in West Virginia has been a notoriously low payer of property taxes, with all kinds of irregularities, detailed in an impressive fashion by the McAteer report, the report of the West Virginia graduate students, which I understand you helped support but if you want to stick to the coal mine health and safety area, and not to drastically small contributions to the local governmental units by these giant corporations holding these very valuable underground assets, we can concentrate on the kinds of records that Interior is providing the committee and indeed any citizens that request them.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Nader for more fully explaining the two items that I brought to his attention. I think he is very strongly of the opinion that the aspects of coverage within the Department of the Interior, through the Bureau of Mines, makes it impossible to have compatibility between these comments that have been given. This, I have to say for the record, causes me concern, and

has for some time.

Also, in reference to his further discussion of the breaking of the law, I think this is important. He delineates that he had a further explanation of his thinking in this regard. Mr. Nader has made reference to my contribution. It was a personal one, and I was glad to make it. Certainly it will be my continuous desire to contribute what I can personally and officially to the oversight in seeking the truth with reference to not only the administration of this act but of other acts of the Congress.

I can join you in saying that I think the action of the Congress in the passage of the law which has been signed by the President of the United States has often and is now being subverted and I think that it is not just a question of judgment within an agency or agencies. I think there is actual flouting of the mandate of the Congress of the United States.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

power if they want to exercise it and great evidence collecting capability to persuade a court of law or equity to move in furtherance of their complaints. They have not done so.

Senator WILLIAMS. Your third recommendation deals with the possibility of claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act and the possibility of massive liability suits such as the present situation and this recommendation has a great deal of merit for us to ask the Justice Department to render an opinion in this area.

you

Mr. NADER. I might add in that context, for example, a coal miner by the name of August Mosden was killed on April 27, working for the Augle Bay Norton Co., St. Clairsville, Ohio, and I would request obtain the Department of Interior's report of that accident to see what happens when the Department of Interior does not do the job as it is required to do under the law on inspections and approvals and to see the kind of connection that a lawyer for the widow of Mr. Mosden can make in a case against the Federal Government for $100,000 or $200,000 or $300,000 under the Federal Tort Claims Act. That is just one example.

You might request from the Department of Interior a list of all coal mine fatalities since the act went into effect and to ask their opinion whether the mines which were not inspected, not inspected as they should have been, involved a connection by virtue of that neglect with the casualties.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Nader, would you turn to your prepared statement where I read: "Once again the question is raised as to whether a Department should be permitted to combine a promotional subsidy role for an industry with its safety regulatory responsibility."

I think I understand what you mean, but perhaps for the record you might cover this more fully?

Mr. NADER. Yes. This is a situation similar to the Atomic Energy Commission, which also has the combined role unique to the Western World I might add of promoting the use of atomic energy and subsidizing and creating a private utility system utilizing atomic energy at the same time it has a responsibility for the safety of nuclear powerplants, radioactive waste transportation disposal and to some extent worker hazards.

The Department of Interior has long been given a promotional role. For example, traditionally, regardles of the profits of the coal industry, the bulk of coal mine research has been conducted by the Department of Interior. If my memory serves me correctly, I think this has gone up to $50 or $55 million a year and may now be on the edge of being phased down, however.

In addition, the Department of Interior has rendered very considerable help to the coal mine industry in improving its productivity, improving its use of coal and in doing the kinds of research and test analyses that will develop other more exotic uses for coal beyond simple energy uses. At the same time it has had the responsibility of safety. There is no question that improved safety standards in the mines after years of neglect are going to involve initial added expenditures which will cut into profits and that is where the conflict comes in and that is where the countervailing allegiances and pressures are located. Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you very much. Now, Mr. Nader, if you

will turn to page 5 of your statement and I read again, and you are speaking of the miners and you say:

All they can do now is go out on wildcat strikes and this is their way of recognizing that the coal industry and the Department of Interior are outside of the law, indeed are lawless.

I think you might want to make a further statement in reference to that allegation.

Mr. NADER. Yes, sir. Thank you for giving me the opportunity, Senator.

My first reference would be to the bulk of hearings that were conducted by this very committee on the problem and that are being conducted. For example, these citations for violations, which are numbering in the thousands, are allegations that the law has been violated and that penalties would have been imposed if it were not for the injunction brought by the small coal mine operators.

Throughout the last 10 or 15 years, there has been placed on the House and Senate committee records the tremendous number of violations of Federal law and of State law by mines and mine operators of all sizes. I might also add that my testimony alludes to a number of areas where the Department of the Interior is not obeying the new Coal Mine Health and Safety Act.

We can go further, if you wish. For example, the coal mine or the coal industry in West Virginia has been a notoriously low payer of property taxes, with all kinds of irregularities, detailed in an impressive fashion by the McAteer report, the report of the West Virginia graduate students, which I understand you helped support but if you want to stick to the coal mine health and safety area, and not to drastically small contributions to the local governmental units by these giant corporations holding these very valuable underground assets, we can concentrate on the kinds of records that Interior is providing the committee and indeed any citizens that request them.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Nader for more fully explaining the two items that I brought to his attention. I think he is very strongly of the opinion that the aspects of coverage within the Department of the Interior, through the Bureau of Mines, makes it impossible to have compatibility between these comments that have been given. This, I have to say for the record, causes me concern, and has for some time.

Also, in reference to his further discussion of the breaking of the law, I think this is important. He delineates that he had a further explanation of his thinking in this regard. Mr. Nader has made reference to my contribution. It was a personal one, and I was glad to make it. Certainly it will be my continuous desire to contribute what I can personally and officially to the oversight in seeking the truth with reference to not only the administration of this act but of other acts of the Congress.

I can join you in saying that I think the action of the Congress in the passage of the law which has been signed by the President of the United States has often and is now being subverted and I think that it is not just a question of judgment within an agency or agencies. I think there is actual flouting of the mandate of the Congress of the United States.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you, Senator Randolph.

I am going to direct the staff to do what you suggested, have the General Accounting Office determine just how the budgetary increases that we have legislated have been spent, No. 1; and No. 2, to find out what the Justice Department's opinion is as to the applicability of the Federal Tort Claims Act.

We appreciate your comments and Senator Schweiker wants to

comment.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, first, I think it is important to place this in the hearing record: You recall that during the final minutes of the consideration of the act in the Senate of the United States it was my feeling that even though we were prescribing moneys before an act even became law, it was necessary for the Senate to set its stamp of approval on at least a sum of money that would be allocated to the Bureau of Mines, to the Department of Interior, and to the Health, Education, and Welfare Department. I know it was your feeling, Mr. Chairman, as well as the feeling of the Senate and, I believe of the Congress, that we realized the urgency of the enforcement of all of the provisions of the act.

I don't have all of the answers, but I do continually study this problem as I know you do. We must bring to the attention of Congress and the administration, and let the American people know, that we mean to do what we can in affirmative action of one type or another to see that the Mining Health and Safety Act, which has been passed by the Congress, is enforced to the benefit of the miners. Yes, even the production of coal and the role that it plays is very important in our economic life. And I think the testimony today has helped us. I hope, Mr. Chairman, you are planning on a continuation of the hearings this week and next week and perhaps in the immediate future.

Thank you.

Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you.

Mr. NADER. May I make one remark, Mr. Chairman.

There is a historical tradition after passage of a regulatory act for the regulatees, meaning basically the industry, to seek an appearance before Congress and to negotiate privately behind closed doors with the regulatory agencies.

In the auto safety area this has been attempted and partially blocked because the National Highway Safety Bureau requires minutes or even transcripts of significant meetings in their executive suites with representatives of the auto industry. This has kept at a minimum the kind of abuse, the kind of undisclosed agreements and assurances that the public is entitled to know about immediately.

In that regard, I might suggest that you request of the Department of Interior a detailed report on the meetings with private industry in June that were held in secret, a detailed report on the participants, the length of the meeting, the subject matter discussed, and all other necessary details regarding the assurances, exchanges, details, and representations made. And I think this would tend to discourage the submerging of the administrative process out of sight, not only of Congress or the coal miners, but out of sight from the rest of the governmental apparatus.

In that regard, to continue to hope that the subcommittee will feel it important to ask the top executives of the owners of the coal mines

including Mr. Henry Ford who owns a rather less than desirable mine or two, and the executives of the steel companies, and the chemical companies and other parent corporations, I don't think it is enough to restrict exposure of this Congress and this subcommittee to Mr. John Corcoran who speaks with one voice for the industry as a whole. As long as the industry can present a united front behind a trade association, the subcommittee will never get at the facts and will never try to locate the superior companies, the companies that are trying to do a better job than their peers, and accentuate that kind of competitive difference in order to goad the laggards onto greater heights. Instead of permitting the trade association to come up with dubious figures about the impossibility of doing this and that, if the subcommittee could locate one or two companies that have shown it can do this and that, that single fact is more important than almost any other data that I could think of that would be brought before this subcommittee.

Although the coal industry dislikes competitive enterprise in these matters, dislikes coming forward singly to put each of their best feet forward, I think the subcommittee could insist that this be done. The record in all of these areas is desperately in need of that kind of information.

Senator WILLIAMS. Senator Schweiker.

Senator SCHWEIKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Nader, in your testimony on page 4 you cite that statistics of the spot inspection in the "dangerous mines amendment" and cite statistics based on a yearly projection or rate and earlier in the hearing I had introduced statistics from the Interior Department saying in essence to the effect that: At the present rate of spot checks on these explosive prone mines, they were checking them once every 15 days, and I wonder if your figures confirm this or are at variance with this or can't you interpolate because you are talking in one case of a projected time frame versus the current rate of checks and do you have any way of authenticating whether they are accurate in saying they are now checking every explosive mine once every 15 days or don't your figures relate to that directly?

Mr. NADER. Well, to date, the data in my testimony comes from the Bureau of Mines itself. The projection is an oral projection by an official in the Bureau of Mines.

Senator SCHWEIKER. Right.

Well, you say the difference in terms of projections and I just wondered about it.

Second, on the same page you also talk about the Federal Tort Claims Act and the responsibility that the Federal Government might be exposing itself to and also miners that have been killed in mines which should have been spot inspected and I wonder if you would elaborate on it or maybe give us an illustration or just explain in a little more detail what the liability here is in the Federal Government in your view?

Mr. NADER. Yes, sir. The Federal Tort Claims Act basically eliminated the doctrine of "The Sovereign can do no wrong and therefore cannot be sued."

It is an act with some ambiguities, a great deal of judicial interpretation, and it is an act which simply says that the Government is put in the place of any individual who has a duty to perform with