138 



In the United States, for example, we have had these holdings in 

 Alaska, I believe, for a bit more than 3 years. I think we hold around 

 20,000 acres, or something: like that in Norton Sound, which is some 

 land at which the Bureau of Mines has been looking at this summer. 



Our claim, I guess they call it claims, our holdings extend out to the 

 3-mile limit in the State of Alaska. Beyond that it is Norton Sound 

 and clearly within U.S. territorial waters, and I think it is impossible 

 to get an answer back from the proper Government agencies as to what 

 their intended disposition of that is. You can as far as Alaska goes, 

 but you may not deal with the Federal Government there. They sort of 

 return your letters unopened and say, "Write us back in a few years." 



If you are going to operate as a U.S. company on the high seas now, 

 5^ou must probably have vessels of over 300 gross tons and you must 

 meet all the Coast Guard crewing restrictions, which are very difficult. 

 You cannot compete in the world market under such regulations. 



I suppose if our company was going to operate on the high seas 

 under some hypothetical circumstance we literally could not afford to 

 have an American-flag ship because of the very difficult ship regula- 

 tions that go with it. 



As far as safety regulations are concerned we always meet all the 

 American Bureau of Shipping standards and we are insured with 

 Lloyd's and we meet all safety regulations, including U.S. Coast 

 Guard, but the crewing requirements are impossible on U.S. ships. 



If you are going to work in the high seas, you have to have a 

 ship, and the evidence is straightforward, you almost couldn't afford 

 to mine in the high seas and bring the ship back to a; U.S. port with 

 a U.S. flag on it. 



Mr. Fascell. Then our present methods and systems might, in the 

 future, drive all of this business to other nations ? 



Mr. Bascom. I don't mean to be unkijid but that is realistic. It 

 is difficult to make an arrangement with the U.S. Government where 

 it is relatively easy to deal with Australia, for example. 



Mr. Fascell. AVliat is the potential for living under the sea today 

 and in the next few years, and how would this change the picture? 



Mr. Bascom. What would be the purpose of living under the sea ? 



Mr. Fascell. We seem to be struggling for land everywhere. Per- 

 haps we will arrive at a point where this is carried to the bottom of 

 the seai as a place to live. "VVliat do you think ? 



Mr. Bascom. I don't think that is an appropriate thing for me to 

 comment on at this time. In my judgment our company doesn't have 

 any need to have people living imder the sea. 



Mr. Fascell. How much ocean-floor mining potential is being ex- 

 ploited at the present time, and what does it look like 10 years from 

 now and 25 years from now ? 



This calls for some predicting, I know. 



Mr. Bascom. I don't think very much is being exploited at the 

 present time. First of all, you must develop a technology — which is 

 coming along nicely — but any major project in the minerals business, 

 the development of an oilfield from scratch or a large major mine, you 

 are certainly talking about 7 years of development time. 



We have only been working at this for 3 or 4 years now, so give 

 us at least the average time on land before you come back and ask 

 "What can you do in the ocean?" 



