exact assay and quantity that the customer would want. This material could be prepared in advance of the January 1 date from material that is being preproduced. I think the main concern is the amount of feed material that would be coming in. I believe we have sufficient capability to take care of that.

Representative HOSMER. Mr. Chairman, we are close to the end here. I do not want these hearings to adjourn without commenting on Mr. Quinn's testimony which, throughout these 3 days, has been clear and lucid and responsive and of very much value to everyone concerned. I think he is due commendation for the job he has done before the committee.

Mr. QUINN. Thank you very much, sir.

Representative HOSMER. Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, if we have any time after the rest of the questions are in, since the AEC has been on for 3 days after their opening statement they might be given an opportunity to make a closing statement, if they want to.

Representative PRICE. I certainly agree with the gentleman with reference to Mr. Quinn.

I would say that applies to all witnesses we have heard from the Commission during the 3 days of hearings. It has been a splendid hearing. I think it has probably brought forth more information on this problem of uranium enriching services than any previous hearing that we have had.

I also would like to comment, if the estimates on the anticipated earnings through the 1980's are anywhere near correct, that this will make the AEC probably one of the largest businesses in the country. It would also make it possible if some private industry took up this problem of building their own gaseous diffusion plant or purchasing one from the Government, it still would be a profitable business.

DEFINITION OF URANIUM TERMS

The Commission in its August 1 letter commenting on the National Coal Association's report on uranium ore reserves uses several terms which we would like to have defined for the purpose of the record. I don't mean here this morning but supply for the record. These terms are "currently known reserves," known low-cost reserves," "reasonably assured reserves," and, "total resources."! Would define those terms and submit them for the record! Dr. SEABORG. Yes, we can do that. (See app. 8, p. 353.)

Representative PRICE. Mr. Hosmer has already extended an invitation to the Commission to make a summary, if they care to do so. Dr. SEABORG. I don't think I will.

Representative PRICE. Under the House rules of 1 minute limita tion, if you would like to make one.

Dr. SEABORG. I don't think I will try to make a summary but I might make a short closing statement.

The Commission appreciates the opportunity that has been afforded to appear before the committee to clarify some of the complicated aspects of our toll enriching criteria, our post-1968 policies, and our new policies for safeguarding nuclear material.

We think this has probably been very beneficial to the industry in helping clarify this very complicated field. We are looking forward to the testimony by the industry; their reaction and their response to

our testimony which, of course, we will study very carefully in the light of the policies that we propose.

Representative PRICE. Thank you, Dr. Seaborg.

This concludes the initial portion of the Joint Committee's hearings on the proposed uranium enrichment services criteria and related matters. The committee will now recess until Tuesday, August 16, at which time we will receive testimony from industry witnesses concerning these matters.

We believe this will afford an adequate opportunity for analysis of the record developed today.

All those interested in testifying at the forthcoming hearings should notify the Joint Committee as soon as possible.

The committee will issue a press release in advance of the hearings giving further details concerning them. These hearings are now recessed until August 16.

(Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., Thursday, August 4, 1966, the Joint Committee recessed to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, August 16, 1966.)

URANIUM ENRICHMENT SERVICES CRITERIA AND

RELATED MATTERS

TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 1966

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,

JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY,

Washington, D.C.

The Joint Committee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to call, in room AE-1, the Capitol, Senator John O. Pastore (vice chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Representative Holifield, Senator Pastore, and Representatives Price, Hosmer, Young, and Bates.

Also present: John T. Conway, executive director; Edward J. Bauser, assistant director; Leonard M. Trosten, staff counsel; James B. Graham, technical adviser; and Jack Rosen, staff consultant.

Senator PASTORE. The Joint Committee's hearings scheduled for today and tomorrow are a continuation of the committee's inquiry into the AEC's proposed uranium enrichment services criteria and related matters. The provision of enrichment service is of great importance to the civilian nuclear industry and the Government. This service also represents the last segment of the nuclear fuel cycle to remain solely in Government hands. The committee believes it is essential that there be a full public exploration of the subject, in order to help assure that the most equitable arrangements are developed from the standpoint of all concerned.

We also wish to question the witnesses on related matters listed in our press release of August 9, 1966, which without objection will be inserted in the record at an appropriate point. (See app. 3, p. 314.) Our first witness today will be Mr. James Pickard, who was the chairman of a special committee established by the Atomic Industrial Forum to study the AEC's proposed toll enrichment contracts. He will be followed by Gen. K. D. Nichols, who chaired another Atomic Industrial Forum Committee established earlier to review the AEC's proposed criteria for providing toll enrichment services, particularly the charges for these services.

If it is convenient, I would hope that Mr. Pickard and General Nichols would come forward and bring to the witness table whatever associates they may call upon.

It is nice to see you, General Nichols, after so many years. You are just as young and handsome as you ever were. Mr. Pickard, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF JAMES K. PICKARD AND GEN. K. D. NICHOLS, ATOMIC INDUSTRIAL FORUM

Mr. PICKARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My name is James K. Pickard of Pickard, Lowe & Associates. I am pleased to appear before you today to testify on behalf of the Atomic Industrial Forum's ad hoc committee on toll enrichment contracts, on which I served as chairman. Appearing with me are Edwin A. Wiggin, technical projects manager of the forum, and Gerald Charnoff, a partner in the law firm of Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Trowbridge & Madden. Mr. Charnoff formerly was the forum's staff counsel and worked very closely with our ad hoc committee.

The ad hoc committee on toll enrichment contracts was established by the Atomic Industrial Forum to review the Commission's proposed uranium enrichment contract forms to determine whether the proposed contract arrangements adequately anticipate

After completing our study, we found that the July 1, 1966, contract forms do adequately recognize these possibilities. Further, we believe that the contracts will adequately provide for the information which may be required by the AEC to assure the recovery of its costs in providing efficient uranium enrichment services.⠀⠀⠀

In connection with our review of the contract forms we also reviewed the Commission's proposed uranium enrichment services criteria. The basic review of the criteria, insofar as the proposed ceiling charge of $30 per kilogram unit of separative work is concerned, was performed by the forum's study committee on toll enrichment, which was chaired by Gen. K. D. Nichols. (See app. 5, p. 317.).

Earlier this month the ad hoc committee's analysis of the July 1 uranium enrichment services contracts was distributed to forum member organizations. With your permission, I should like to submit a copy of this report for the record. We will be pleased to answer any questions you may have with regard to this report.

Senator PASTORE, Without objection, it is so ordered. (See app. 6, p. 323.)

CHARGE FOR ENRICHING SERVICES; STANDARD TABLE OF ENRICHING

SERVICES

There remain a number of unresolved issues which could influence private choices between leasing or purchasing enriched uranium from the AEC and toll enriching during the option period of 1969 and 1970. These include the as yet undetermined uranium enrichment service charge and the not yet established "standard table of enriching services." In this connection, we have suggested to the AEC that, until it is able to permit the customer to select the U235 content of the tails resulting from his feed material, the standard table should be constructed on the basis of a tails assay which would reflect the market