Page images
PDF
EPUB

INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS AND NUCLEAR WAR

SURVIVAL

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1976

U.S. CONGRESS,
JOINT COMMITTEE ON DEFENSE PRODUCTION,

Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m., in room 5302, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. William Proxmire (vice chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Proxmire and Tower and Representative Mitchell.

Senator PROXMIRE. The committee will come to order. We expect to have Senator Tower here a little later. He is delayed, and when he comes in I am going to ask him to make a statement. He has a statement he would like to make at the beginning of the hearings, but because he is late and because we have a couple of witnesses, I think it is best for us to go ahead, and perhaps when you finish your statement Senator Tower can make his.

Today the Joint Committee begins 3 days of hearings on the defense industrial base. They are part of the committee's year-long review of plans and programs that affect our preparedness for wartime contingencies or other national crises. In this week's hearings, we will be examining the current condition of the defense industry, its costs, and its mobilization potential. Next week we will look at a new program for the strategic stockpiles of critical materials.

These are vital matters that have been neglected for some time. I am glad to say that this neglect appears to be ending. Over the last few months, studies have been completed on several aspects of the defense industrial base.

The Defense Science Board has recently completed its study of industrial preparedness plans and programs. On its own initiative, the Boeing Aerospace Co. has been examining the feasibility of hardening industrial facilities against nuclear attack, and they have been kind enough to provide the Joint Committee with the first results of their tests. [See appendix II, p. 55]. And we will have a witness from the Boeing Co. testifying a little later this morning.

This year the Defense Department finished its "Profit 76" study and promulgated a new investment-based profit policy, which will certainly influence the nature of defense industry. Also, the Federal Preparedness Agency has developed an entirely new method for managing the strategic stockpiles.

Now, these initiatives are timely. The committee has expressed its concern in the 94th Congress that our mobilization and industrial

JOINT COMMITTEE ON DEFENSE PRODUCTION
(Created Pursuant to Public Law 774, 81st Congress)

LEONOR K. SULLIVAN, Missouri, Chairman

WILLIAM PROXMIRE, Wisconsin, Vice Chairman
PARREN J. MITCHELL, Maryland

JOHN SPARKMAN, Alabama
DAVID W. EVANS, Indiana

HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, JR., New Jersey
GARRY BROWN, Michigan

JOHN TOWER, Texas
ALBERT W. JOHNSON, Pennsylvania EDWARD W. BROOKE, Massachusetts

WILLIAM H. KINCADE, Staff Director
RHETT B. DAWSON, Minority Counsel
LEON S. REED, Professional Staff

ROBERT TERZIAN, Counsel
ROBERT GRAY, Professional Staf
MARTHA BRADDOCK, Chief Clerk/Editor

LORY TRAPP, Secretary
SHARON CARTER, Secretary

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF WITNESSES

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1976
Hon. Jacques S. Gansler, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Page

Materiel Acquisition --------
Mr. Thomas K. Jones, program and product evaluation manager,

Boeing Aerospace Co. (accompanied by Mr. John R. Potter, director
of facilities, Boeing Commercial Airplane Co.; and Mr. Edwin N.
York, nuclear effects specialist--

APPENDICES

26

I. Biographies of witnesses :

Mr. Jacques S. Gansler--

Mr. T. K. Jones---
II. Report prepared by The Boeing Aerospace Company:

Industrial Survival and Recovery After Nuclear Attack.
III. Responses by witnesses to additional questions for the record :

Mr. Jacques S. Gansler---

Mr. T. K. Jones------
IV. Summary Report of Joint Department of Defense/Office of

Management and Budget study, J. Gansler, Chairman. U.S. Air-
craft Industry : Capacity Analysis and Policy Implications.---

(III)

135 167

221

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS AND NUCLEAR WAR

SURVIVAL

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1976

U.S. CONGRESS,
JOINT COMMITTEE ON DEFENSE PRODUCTION,

Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m., in room 5302, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. William Proxmire (vice chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Proxmire and Tower and Representative Mitchell.

Senator PROXMIRE. The committee will come to order. We expect to have Senator Tower here a little later. He is delayed, and when he comes in I am going to ask him to make a statement. He has a statement he would like to make at the beginning of the hearings, but because he is late and because we have a couple of witnesses, I think it is best for us to go ahead, and perhaps when you finish your statement Senator Tower can make his. .

Today the Joint Committee begins 3 days of hearings on the defense industrial base. They are part of the committee's year-long review of plans and programs that affect our preparedness for wartime contingencies or other national crises. In this week's hearings, we will be examining the current condition of the defense industry, its costs, and its mobilization potential. Next week we will look at a new program for the strategic stockpiles of critical materials.

These are vital matters that have been neglected for some time. I am glad to say that this neglect appears to be ending. Over the last few months, studies have been completed on several aspects of the defense industrial base.

The Defense Science Board has recently completed its study of industrial preparedness plans and programs. On its own initiative, the Boeing Aerospace Co. has been examining the feasibility of hardening industrial facilities against nuclear attack, and they have been kind enough to provide the Joint Committee with the first results of their tests. [See appendix II, p. 55]. And we will have a witness from the Boeing Co. testifying a little later this morning.

This year the Defense Department finished its “Profit 76" study and promulgated a new investment-based profit policy, which will certainly influence the nature of defense industry. Also, the Federal Preparedness Agency has developed an entirely new method for managing the strategic stockpiles.

Now, these initiatives are timely. The committee has expressed its concern in the 94th Congress that our mobilization and industrial

« PreviousContinue »