this this honorable co the mineral well there is a prohibition in section sixty nine seventy six prohibition basically says that the real property congress was intending to preserve the dairy for the feet the theater's was not intended it was not intended to protect against alienation of a particle of soil or for it for  prohibition basically applies basically applies to the prohibiting elimination accessing this property and transfer the property to a third person otherwise why does it say eight hundred why is it saying all that legislation the dairy form including bracket eight hundred seventy five acres it looks to the feet it's basically said the number of steps the navy visit the site come back and say look i want to dig some holes i want to geologically explore i want to spend a couple hundred thousand dollars putting holes in the ground to determine whether or not there's sufficient commercial material there and the navy gives you a written permission says yes you can do it i think it's pretty close to supporting the concept that you could mine approx fifty doesn't say yes but it's pretty close second argument we've made i think it's i think if you go into this whole concept of what's fair and honest the only good faith dealing in making of contracts in fifteen contracts you go to that premise do it up front i think there are only six bidders in this in this matter two of them were my remote were mining companies i was not involved in the details or it was because i represent both companies but but but the point and the point  point a matter is there was a whole lot of people that were bidding in these things and if you're going to make that you're going to make that determination you make the determination it so that people don't expend a half million dollars in trying to accomplish something that they're going to  would continue is subject to the other conditions of the statute the statute as was pointed out made rule and cultural and also includes a explicit provision on the disposal of any it's a real property and then the definition of real property said no what these restrictions to what a structure on the disposal of the real profit in tearing the dairy farm over we will permit it releasing next keeps take maintains it in its rule and agricultural nature so what you're saying i gather is that hey which goes the extra mile and so yes and you're putting a pro division on the disposal of the real property once you have taken the sand and gravel out of the real obvious not going back if you just want to lease or to have a dairy farm five years later you can get out leave the dairy farm and the property is still there you have not disposed of it you might have disposed of it for five years but fast through a lease but it's still there when you come back and that is what the statute explicitly contemplates we would also direct this court's attention to the par regulations in addition to the t s a regulations which also continually define embedded sand and gravel as being part of the real property and so that when we want to dispose of them you go to a r four zero five dash ninety which is entitled t disposal of real property plus the legislative history where congress chose to enact the more restrictive statute plus the parallel regulations plus the actual can fully negligence indicate that sending right the mining operation is simply not within the contemplation and is not permitted by the statu nature vary we would argue that the definition we would look to context the statute and see that preference given to dairy farming and see if that clearly is not governed by your culture would also want to look to other statutes governing leasing ok so the issue is that  the secretary of the navy maybe is the real property contain the danger for our any improvements to such persons under such terms as the secretary considers appropriate lest one look at the statute itself even taking away from restrictions the doesn't permit me to exercise discretion you are out as a matter of statutory so does the discretion factor that would otherwise take fall away when the navy is giving as reflects the following one there is a letter from an entity that at times noticed cheney reliable joint venture to the navy in january saying not specifically giving a lot of details was simply saying we have a history of safe