Mr. CHENOWETH. You don't want to build all these facilities right together, do you? Don't you want to disperse them to a certain extent? Colonel HEATON. Yes, they would be dispersed, sir, sufficiently dispersed from other facilities so that the operation of this facility wouldn't endanger the other facilities. Mr. CHENOWETH. I was just thinking, instead of putting everything into southern California, you might want to come over to southern Colorado. Colonel HEATON. I could see that coming, sir. Mr. DUCANDER. How much isolation do you require? Colonel HEATON. From a center of population for these facilities, I feel of the order of 10 miles. Mr. DUCANDER. How close could you be to a Government facility? Nothing like this could be handled at Cape Canaveral or the Pacific Missile Range? Colonel HEATON. No, sir, not at the ranges. It could be handledthis isn't meant to imply this is where it will be, but it could be handled at the rocket test station at Edwards in California. There is enough area there and it does have such things as availabe water supplies and power supplies, and it is sufficiently isolated, not only by distance, but also because of topography, we can sufficiently isolate these toxic stands from others so they won't endanger the others. There would be some days possibly because of temperature inversions, or because of adverse wind directions, that they would have to suspend operations, but this would be rare in a location such as that. That is just an example of the kind of thing you look for. Mr. CHENOWETH. How many people will be employed in this operation? Colonel HEATON. For the one we have here, a rudimentary facility, it will be small in number, probably not more than, say, 20. Mr. CHENOWETH. None of them will live on the facility? They will live some distance away? Mr. ABBOTT. Yes, sir, and they move in to work. I might point out that facilities of this type are not very desirable neighborhoods. This fluorine is very nasty stuff if it gets loose. Consequently you need to be a long way away from other things. These facilities do not employ very many people. I can't help but draw a comparison between these and, for instance, some types of oil refinery plants. I remember talking rather extensively at one time with a vice president of one of our larger oil companies immediately after he had just succeeded, after a lot of difficulty, in finding a location for an oil refinery on the east coast. The company had explored practically the whole coast and could find no community that would even have the thing. However, they did finally succeed in finding a community which had had no experience with oil refineries and were welcomed with open arms, whereupon he was amazed, because such oil refineries are a nuisance. The chief employment is during the construction of them. After that the employment is so small they add very little to the economy of the area, but they certainly do continue to provide a nuisance for year after year after year. I think many of these same considerations apply to this sort of thing. As far as I am concerned, I would like to have a thing like this as far away from where I live as I could get it. Mr. MILLER. We have a big liquid carbonic plant out in Oakland that looks like something-this fellow who used to draw all of these fine cartoons, but it only employs three people. It is all automatic. We will take that last provision under advisement. We will discuss it with the chairman of the committee to see how he feels about it. After all, he is the man who has to do most of the defending of the bill on the floor. Thank you very much, gentlemen. It has been not only interesting, it is rather sort of history-making to participate in the first budget for NASA. (Whereupon, at 4:17 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.) 1960 NASA AUTHORIZATION HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, AND DEVELOPMENT (SUBCOMMITTEE NO. 2), EXECUTIVE SESSION The subcommittee met at 10:30 a.m., Hon. Olin E. Teague (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Witnesses present from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration were: Dr. Hugh L. Dryden, Deputy Administrator; D. D. Wyatt, Assistant to the Director, Space Flight Development; Dr. Homer Newell, Assistant Director for Space Sciences; E. M. Cortright, Chief of Advanced Technology, Office of Space Flight Development; M. B. Ames, Chief, Flight Mechanics Research Division; A. F. Sepert, Director, Office of Business Administration. Mr. TEAGUE. As I understand the purpose of our hearings, this is a case of a subcommittee handling parts of NASA's authorization in committee and on the floor. Mr. Yeager, as I understand it, it is the first four Mr. YEAGER. Yes, sir; the first four major R. & D. categories. Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Wolf, have you had a chance to check these requests on page 201? Mr. WOLF. We have been religiously going to the hearings. Mr. TEAGUE. Well, I religiously read this before 1 o'clock this morning. Mr. Wyatt, last night I took each of these projects to go through and read what you have written in here. Mr. WYATT. Yes, sir. Mr. TEAGUE. No, starting with that basis, suppose we go through it again and check it. Let us turn to page 207, for example. Mr. WYATT. Yes, sir. Mr. TEAGUE. Actually, you describe the objectives in each one of these and then you go to the justification? Mr. WYATT. Yes, sir. Mr. TEAGUE. Do you people have something different or more detailed to give us than what is already in this book? Mr. WYATT. In response to any questions you might have. That is our purpose in being here, to verify it for you. Mr. TEAGUE. My biggest problem is understanding some of the terms and what they mean. Because some members of Congress are going to get up and ask about them. Mr. Wyatt, would you work out a statement for us clarifying the scientific basis for your program? 41011-59- -16 237 Mr. WYATT. We can do that, I am sure, sir. (Material requested follows:) SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS IN SPACE Space science, as used here, is simply a convenient phrase to mean scientific research conducted in outer space. It is fundamental research with the principal objective of extending the frontiers of knowledge about the earth's upper atmosphere and outer space. It was such basic research in the past that laid the groundwork for such practical applications as meteorological and communications satellites, now under development. It is such fundamental research in the present that is required to lay the groundwork for future applications, one or two decades hence. Space research is also necessary to support various activities in space, such as the placing of man in space, the development and use of an orbiting manned laboratory, and the instrumented or manned exploration of the moon and planets. The vehicles for space research are sounding rockets, satellites, and space probes. The sounding rocket is arbitrarily defined as a vehicle which follows a more or less vertical trajectory out to a distance of not more than one earth's radius, that is 4,000 miles above the surface of the earth, and then falls directly back to the ground. When the payload is so launched that it continues to orbit a number of times about the earth, then it is called an artificial satellite. If the payload is propected more than 4,000 miles from the earth's surface and does not become an earth satellite, then it is called a space probe. Included in such vehicles must be special power supplies, radio equipment, and automatic instruments to measure and relay back to earth the information sought. In the total program areas included in this category, contracts have been placed with: Aerojet General Corp., California; Ordnance (Army); Itex Corp., Massachusetts; Naval Research Laboratory (ONR-Navy); New York University; Aerolab Development Co., California; Ballistic Missile Division (ARDC-Air Force); Army Ordnance Missile Command; Bureau of Standards (Commerce); Alton Engineering Co., Maryland; Iowa State University; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; University of Minnesota; Naval Ordnance Test Station (ONR-Navy); Army Ballistic Missile Agency; Jet Propulsion Laboratory (Cal. Tech.); Corps of Engineers (Army); University of Chicago, Illinois. Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Yeager, we have to write a report, don't we? Mr. YEAGER. Yes, sir. What the chairman wants, essentially, though, is a report to the committee, saying that we have gone over these items and they are satisfactory to the subcommittee. Mr. WOLF. With the chairman's permission. Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Wolf. Mr. WOLF. I would like to ask-I am sure this question is going to come up. How much has been cut from the original suggested amount that you wanted for each of these projects? Some member is going to ask this on the floor, and why is this lesser amount now satisfactory? Mr. TEAGUE. They are going to ask you how you know that this amount is right. Now, this is a new organization. There is no history to it. Mr. WYATT. That is correct, sir. Mr. TEAGUE. And they are going to ask you how do you know this $16 million, for example, is a proper amount. Mr. WYATT. May I ask Dr. Dryden. Dr. DRYDEN. May I review the history of this? I mean the history of the way in which these numbers have been set down. Mr. WOLF. We want a simple answer that we can use. Dr. DRYDEN. Yes. I will give you the history briefly. NASA itself did not come into existence until October 1. There had been appropriated Mr. TEAGUE. As a result of your authorization bill last year? Mr. TEAGUE. July. Dr. DRYDEN. Before that time, at the earlier session of Congress, an appropriation for NACA had been passed-in the same session of Congress, I am sorry, but the NACA appropriation had been passed and a sum for NASA was introduced and defended before the then Space Committees and Appropriations Committees. An amount of $80 million was appropriated by Congress in that supplemental. When the President set up NASA he transferred into it by Executive order from the Department of Defense some activities and moneys. The moneys were of the order of $117 million which had been appropriated in the Defense Department appropriation. That accounts for the moneys that were appropriated for the fiscal year just ended, that is, will be ended on July 1. In September, the Budget Bureau asked for an estimate for NASA for the next year. That was before Dr. Glennan was appointed. And under instructions from the President the NACA, which was the body then in existence, sent a simple letter with a line estimate of $623 million to the Budget Bureau as the best estimate that could be made at that time of what the requirements would be. This was based on rather hasty program planning. Mr. TEAGUE. New people in new jobs? Dr. DRYDEN. New people involved. It was the best we could do. Dr. Glennan had this letter put in front of him the first day he was in office, to sign and transmit to the Budget Bureau. He obviously did this without any opportunity to review the background. Also by direction of the President, we had initiated some time before discussions of our program in relation to the defense program, in particular with the program of ARPA. Those first discussions showed right away that there was some duplication in programing. As a result of this, a meeting was set up, chairmaned by Dr. Killian, and attended by Mr. Quarles and Roy Johnson and one or two others on the defense side, and by Dr. Glennan, myself, and Dr. Silverstein, and one or two members of the staff, to discuss these duplications and remove them. We identified I believe-I don't have the notes with me about 60 to 70 million of actual duplication. For example, we had both budgeted for the clustered engine project that is now being run by Army Ballistic Missile Agency and obviously we didn't want to send Congress two budgets having the same item. So that immediately reduced our original estimate to somewhere around $560 million. I can get the exact figures. Mr. ULMER. $523.6 million was the formal request to the Bureau of the Budget. Dr. DRYDEN. There continued a discussion of the program. At no place in this discussion was a ceiling suggested by anybody. It was à discussion of the merits of the various items in these programs, to come down to what looked like a proper program for the country, considering both the defense or ARPA program and our own. As a result of this discussion, we formally submitted a request for $485,300,000, with a backup of what went behind those numbers, and |