to insure very careful consideration of the agency's budget and full presentation by NASA of its plans and programs to the newly created committees of the House and Senate.

The Honorable John Stennis was the first chairman of the NASA Authorization Subcommittee of this committee and I regret that he is unable to be with us today as we begin our authorization hearings for this year. For the information of my colleagues and those in the room, I wish you to know that John Stennis is making satisfactory progress in the hospital at this time.

We have scheduled 12 days of hearings on this bill, concluding April 10. This should permit us to act on the bill in committee and make our recommendations to the full Senate well before the end of the current fiscal year. In the course of these hearings, we will want to explore NASA plans in detail with NASA witnesses, with witnesses from other government agencies, and with a number of witnesses from outside government. We are seeking to hear, within the limits of a hearing schedule allowing timely legislative action, as many witnesses and as many viewpoints as possible. A number of persons and organizations have asked to testify, and we will accept testimony from as many as possible and written statements from all.

Six members of this committee, including the chairman, are new to NASA authorization hearings. If, as these hearings proceed, we seem to be replowing ground, I hope we may have the indulgence of the other members and the witnesses. It is essential that we become thoroughly familiar with the programs and justifications presented in order to formulate our positions, make decisions, and discharge our responsibilities to the Senate.

As I said during our organizational meeting, we new members will be looking to the veterans for advice and counsel as we proceed. I might note in particular that Senator Cannon, in addition to his many other duties, has presented and defended the NASA authorization bill on the Senate floor in each of the past 3 years. He is second to no Senator in his knowledge of NASA programs and I know we will turn to him for help many times in the months ahead.

The ranking minority member of this committee, Senator Goldwater, is as knowledgeable and has much experience on this committee and we expect to turn to him also for advice and counsel.

I mention these two but not by way of exclusion of others who have had much experience in the committee. We have several new members on the committee, including myself, who will have much to learn in the hearings.

Our hearings will include a number of witnesses in addition to the NASA management presentations on budget justifications. On March 9 we will hear testimony from Professor Maurice Levy, president of the European Space Research Organization.

On March 15, witnesses from the Departments of Agriculture, Interior and Commerce, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Science Foundation will appear and testify on the relation of their space activities to NASA work.

On March 21, representatives of the Department of Transportation will testify on their activities coordinated with NASA in aeronautics and on such matters as the joint NASA/FAA noise reduction efforts.

92-229 (Pt. 0-73-2

On April 4 and 10 we are scheduling additional witnesses. These will include the Air Transport Association, the Chairman of the Space Science Board of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, the Aerospace Industries Association and others. I will have further information on these 2 days of hearings in the near future.

Today, Dr. Fletcher will present an overview of the NASA budget plan and authorization request for fiscal year 1974. At the conclusion of his testimony, Astronauts Conrad and Stafford will discuss the upcoming Skylab missions and the Apollo/Soyuz test project planned

for 1975.

Next Tuesday, Dr. Fletcher will return to testify on the long-term aeronautics and space objectives in order to give us a better framework in which to consider the detailed fiscal year 1974 plans in subsequent testimony.

Senator Goldwater.

Senator GOLDWATER. I have nothing to say.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cannon.

Senator CANNON. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Weicker, do you have any opening statement?

Senator WEICKER. I would only make a few comments at the outset, Mr. Chairman, not for lack of interest, but shortly after 10 o'clock I have to introduce Pat Gray before the Judiciary Committee and, therefore, I will have to leave for a few minutes. I hope to get back right after those hearings. I am not so sure that more orbiting will be going on in that committee than this committee.

I do want to say this, as I have said it for the past several years. I cannot agree with the continual cutting back of programs under NASA. I think there is going to be one hell of an accounting here in the not too distant future. I realize Dr. Fletcher and his fine staff do all this with a stoic look on their faces and a smile but clearly the implication to me is a cutback on the commitment of this country to scientific research and development in the broadest sense, and that should be a matter of real concern to all Americans. It goes, as I said, way beyond any particular Apollo program or landings on the Moon. It relates to the national attitude and national appreciation of what is involved in broad research and development and what is involved in that entire concept, a concept that quite frankly does not necessarily benefit me today but certainly will benefit many people tomorrow if

continued.

I will be most anxious to hear Dr. Fletcher's comments on this general subject and I would hope the committee itself will carefully review these requests and not hesitate to supply our own initiative if that seems called for. I look upon the document, S. 880, the administration's effort, as only the beginning. I think the ball is in our court. They have made their position clear. I do not think it is up to us to just criticize or defend, but, rather, come up with our own alternative in whatever direction that will take us.

But speaking for myself I continue and will continue to press for solid efforts by this Nation in the exploration of space, in the exploitation of what comes out of space, and in the general concept that R. & D.

in the scientific sense is essential, absolutely essential, to our future as a Nation.

Senator CANNON. Will the Senator yield?

Senator WEICKER. I yield to Senator Cannon.

Senator CANNON. I would like to associate myself generally with the Senator's remarks but I also want to point out that we have attempted to exercise initiative before in this committee. I give as evidence, the nuclear engine program. We consistently took the leadership in that area by authorizing and appropriating the funds and then after we had one and a half billion dollars invested, the administration just simply cut it off by cutting its throat and withholding the funds.

So it is pretty difficult for us to exercise much initiative when we can authorize and appropriate for programs that this committee deems to be completely valid and completely supported and documented and then have the administration just take the meat ax to it and say we will make our own decisions in this area.

I want to associate myself with my distinguished colleague's remarks. Senator WEICKER. I know the Senator's efforts and committee's efforts and he is entirely correct in his comments, but at a time when the Congress is trying to restore its role in the eyes of the people and regain the confidence of the people, I can assure the Senator that the time will come-I do not know if it is 2, 3, or 4 years away when there is going to be an accounting for this attitude that has been reflected in these last few budgets by certain individuals, both within the Congress and within the administration, and at least I want it to be said that we said so and that it was the Senate that tried to take the lead.

As the Senator well knows, there are no votes to be gained by this budget, no constituents on the Moon or outer space. But certainly, it is for the benefit of the Nation as a whole, and let it be said that the Senate did try to take the lead and pointed out to the Nation what needs to be done. I think we will then have brought upon ourselves the type of confidence that we are looking for at this point.

Senator GOLDWATER. Will the Senator yield? I would like to associate myself with the remarks you have made. I see in the abandonment of space efforts abandonment of the future of this country. I do not think it is wrapped up in Moon rocks or Jupiter or Mars. It is wrapped up in the spinout and fallout from space and if we can ever get this across to the American people, I then think we will have some constituents who are interested because it will involve millions of jobs. And in reply to Senator Cannon's comment about impounding the funds, I feel we can write legislation that will force the President to spend money. I think there are cases when he can withhold. I think there are cases where he cannot, and I think we can write it in a way that, if we can get it passed, will prevent him from withholding. I will be glad to join in any effort on that.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Helms?

Senator HELMS. I have no statement at this time, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Domenici.

Senator DOMENICI. I just would say this, Mr. Chairman. I generally would associate myself with the remarks of Senator Weicker.

I, too, am concerned that we frequently are very shortsighted and that we respond too quickly to emotional situations.

I will be extremely interested in finding out in addition to what is proposed within the budget what the Administrator and those with him consider to be left out of it so that we can seriously consider our responsibility.

I would say to Dr. Fletcher I must leave early today because of another committee meeting. I hope you do not construe that to be a lack of concern on my part and I say that to my fellow members. I will do my share to move along with the committee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Senator Bartlett, do you have any comments you would like to make at this point?

Senator BARTLETT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that I must leave early and will be back later, but I am very much interested in the testimony. I have read it and I am very impressed with it.

I have been certainly very impressed with the accomplishments of the space program and I strongly feel, as Senator Weicker expressed very well, a desire to see this probing of the unknown continue.

I am looking forward to my time on this committee, Mr. Chairman, and looking forward to getting better acquainted with the thinking about the future.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Did you have any opening remarks you would like to make, Senator Abourezk?

Senator ABOUREZK. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

First of all, I want to congratulate the new chairman of the committee, Senator Moss, who has provided me, and I know the other members of the committee, with a great deal of help in trying to become acquainted with the committee and its jurisdiction.

Regarding the entire space program itself, I am interested personally in applications, the earth resources, the weather, the communications, and the proposal of a Space Shuttle which happens to be the major part of the committee's work. Of course, this has been a very controversial program in the last year or two.

I think a great many studies have been made on the Shuttle. NASA has made a study. Opponents of the Shuttle have made a study. Mr. Chairman, and members of this committee, it is extremely difficult to understand the mathematics and economics of the Shuttle proposal, whether one is on the proponent side or the opponent side. We probably do not possess that technical competence to determine whether the figures that are given to us by NASA or by the opponents of it are

accurate.

I think it is uncontrovertible that the purpose of the Space Shuttle is an assumed moneysaving device for future launch activities. If all of the members of this committee are to understand whether the program is a moneysaving program in actuality or whether we are just being told that, I would suggest to the committee and to the chairman that the chairman appoint a neutral panel of scientists and economists to review the studies that have been made both by opponents and proponents for the Space Shuttle so that they can define and interpret for us whether the figures are valid, whether they are accurate, so we can finally walk away and say we finally do understand what is being said by both sides in this argument.

I think that because of the massive costs of this program it would be essential for the responsibility of this committee and the responsibility of the Congress to try to make such a study and to interpret and define what is being said about the costs of the Space Shuttle and whether indeed it is a moneysaving program.

So I am recommending to the committee that this panel be formed at the earliest possible date. I thank the chairman for the opportunity to make this statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator. This is one thing we will certainly consider within the committee. I appreciate the comments of the various members of this committee at the opening of these hearings. I think they clearly illustrate the desire of the committee to examine the testimony with great care, and to feel no obligation simply to approve what is presented to us if we think that what has been proposed is inadequate. I am delighted that we begin that

way.

As I indicated, today we will have a broad overview and as the hearings go on we will have detailed discussion and consideration of specific parts of the NASA program. We will call on all the expertise we can find to inform us. None of us possess engineering degrees in disciplines that primarily are associated with NASA's mission but all of us have a responsibility to our own constituents and to the United States as a whole.

Dr. Fletcher, we will be pleased if you will proceed with your testimony. You have with you Dr. Low and Mr. Shapley and Mr. Lilly. [The biographies of Dr. James C. Fletcher, Dr. George M. Low, Mr. Willis H. Shapley, William E. Lilly, Brig. Gen. Thomas P. Stafford, USAF, and Capt. Charles Conrad, Jr., USN, follows:]

BIOGRAPHY OF JAMES CHIPMAN FLETCHER, ADMINISTRATOR, NASA

Dr. James C. Fletcher was sworn in as Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in a White House ceremony in the President's office on April 27, 1971.

President Nixon announced Dr. Fletcher's nominations as NASA Administrator on Feb. 27, 1971 and the appointment was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on March 11, 1971.

Dr. Fletcher became President of the University of Utah in 1964 after two decades of leadership in industry, government and military activities.

He was born June 5, 1919 in Millburn, New Jersey, attended high school in Flushing, New York and graduated from Bayside High School, Bayside, New York. He received a B.A. degree in physics with a minor in mathematics from Columbia University in 1940.

After graduation, Dr. Fletcher served as a research physicist with the U.S. Navy Bureau of Ordnance, at Port Townsend, Washington, studying the problems of degaussing ships as protection against magnetic mines.

In 1941 he became a special research associate at the Cruft Laboratory of Harvard University. He went to Princeton University in 1942 as a teaching fellow and later was an instructor and research physicist.

At the end of World War II, he began work on a doctorate in physics at the California Institute of Technology under a teaching assistantship and an Eastman Kodak Fellowship. After receiving his Ph. D. degree in 1948. Dr. Fletcher joined Hughes Aircraft Co., Culver City, California, as director of the Theory and Analysis Laboratory in the Electronics Division. Six years later this division-instrumental in developing the Falcon air-to-air missile and the F-102 allweather interceptor-had grown from 120 to 25,600 employees.

In 1954, Dr. Fletcher joined the Ramo-Wooldridge Corp. as an Associate Director and soon became Director of Electronics in the Guided Missile Research Division. Later the Guided Missile Division became Space Technology Laboratories, a subsidiary of Ramo-Wooldridge, with technical responsibility for all