I think the problem has been, as I understand, last year they only had four people from the States under this fellowship program and they were all from one State. Representative HOLIFIELD. That betrays a lack of interest on the part of the States, does it not? Mr. HYDEMAN. It probably works both ways. I think it may have to be a more stepped up program from the Federal level. I think the State interest will be increased if the States have an opportunity to get jurisdiction in this area. It is somewhat difficult to determine exactly why there should be a lack of State interest. Representative DURHAM. There is quite a sum requested this year for this type of work? Mr. HYDEMAN. That is right. Mr. BERMAN. We are not sure which comes first, the chicken or the egg, on this. To go back to your original question, we would favor continued expanded Federal assistance to the States to the extent that this appears to be necessary to get them going. Mr. HYDEMAN. The Public Health Service, I understand, does have a short course in Cincinnati, which is very good for the people who will be at the inspection level under the one or two health physicists at the top. Other people could either be trained there or on the job. Representative DURHAM. We more or less have to train these people in the public health schools throughout the country. Mr. HYDEMAN. I think this is correct, sir. (Letter dated May 28, 1959, from William H. Berman to Hon. Chet Holifield follows:) Hon. CHET HOLIFIELD, ATOMIC ENERGY RESEARCH PROJECT, Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, Congress of the United States, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. HOLIFIELD: This letter will supplement our testimony before the Joint Committee last Friday, May 22, 1959, with respect to your question about the nature and budget of the University of Michigan Law School's atomic energy research project. The atomic energy research project was established in September 1958 by the law school in order to expand the school's previous activities in the atomic energy field. Prior to last September, Dean Stason and three other members of the regular law school faculty had been actively interested in the legal problems of atomic energy, but felt that they could not give these problems the time which they deserved. Consequently, Mr. Hydeman and I were given the opportunity of coming to Michigan as full-time directors of the new project. The project was established with the objective of undertaking continuing studies of legal and policy problems in the domestic and international phases of atomic energy. The initial financing is on a 4-year basis. This financing has been supplied from three principal sources: calculated over the 4-year period, the Ford Foundation provides 50 percent; the W. W. Cook Law School Endowment Fund provides 371⁄2 percent; and the remaining 121⁄2 percent of the funds are derived from the Michigan Memorial Phoenix project. As you probably know, the Phoenix project was established primarily to pursue research and educational and training activities in the nuclear field. Some portion of the funds which come to us from the Phoenix project are supplied by the Detroit Edison Co., earmarked for law school atomic energy research. We recently received an additional contribution, also through Phoenix, from Glen L. Coulter, a Detroit attorney and a graduate of the law school. These are the sole sources of our funds to date. All of these names, except Mr. Coulter's, were set forth in our publication on the Federal-State problem, but were not included in the committee print which is a result of the exclusion of the cover page, the fore word, and the page containing acknowledgments. None of our financial sponsors has imposed any conditions upon the grants made, except that the Ford Foundation grant was made specifically for research in the international field. Of course, the views expressed in our studies are those of Mr. Hydeman and myself, and we do not clear any of our work with those who have been kind enough to make gifts to the law school for the support of our project. Under the organization of the project, Mr. Hydeman and I have the primary responsibility. There is a project executive committee chaired by Dean Stason, upon which Prof. William Bishop, Prof. Samuel Estep, Prof. William Pierce, Prof. Eric Stein, and Mr. Hydeman and I serve. The purpose of this executive committee is to make major policy decisions regarding the nature and scope of studies to be undertaken within the project. In addition to the executive committee, we have established an advisory committee composed of the following individuals: E. Blythe Stason, dean, University of Michigan Law School, chairman, Dr. John C. Bugher, The Rockefeller Foundation, Prof. David F. Cavers, the Harvard Law School, Mr. Walker Cisler, the Detroit Edison Co., Mr. Kenneth E. Fields, the International Standard Electric Corp., Mr. Charles F. MacGowan, the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, William Mitchell, Esq., attorney at law, Mr. Clark C. Vogel, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Prof. Abel Wolman, the Johns Hopkins University. This advisory committee is to meet once or twice each year, for the purpose of examining and opining upon the project's long-range goals and the utility of specific studies which are in the planning stage. As Mr. Hydeman indicated during the course of his appearance before the committee on May 20, 1959, we are presently engaged in a study relating to the need for, and the possible methods of achieving international control over the health and safety aspects of the sea transport of radioactive materials, the sea disposal of nuclear waste products, and the nuclear propulsion of vessels. We are also in the planning phase of a study which will examine the appropriateness of the present organization, at the Federal level, for the promotion, operation, and control of the various aspects of our national atomic energy program. We trust that this will provide you with sufficient amplification of our May 22, 1959, statement, and we would be delighted to have this letter incorporated in the record of the hearings. Respectfully yours, WILLIAM H. BERMAN. Representative HOLIFIELD. Thank you very much, gentlemen. The next witness is Mr. Otto Christenson, Conference of State Manufacturers Associations. STATEMENT OF OTTO F. CHRISTENSON, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, MINNESOTA EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTING CONFERENCE OF STATE MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATIONS Mr. CHRISTENSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, my name is Otto Christenson. I am executive vice president of the Minnesota Employers Associations. I am appearing on behalf of the Conference of State Manufacturers Association. The conference includes 38 State manufacturers associations located in the 38 principal industrial States of the Nation, with a combined membership of over 55,000 industries throughout the United States. On March 19 of this year I appeared before your Subcommittee on Research and Development of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy and then gave a somewhat detailed statement of whom I spoke for and what the ideas of industrial management are in the fields of employee radiation hazards and workmen's compensation. To save time I now request that I be permitted to file copies of the statement I then gave which sets forth management's thinking in those two fields. We would appreciate it if the members of your committee would take 5 minutes to read it, either today, or at your desks later. Representative HOLIFIELD. It will be accepted. Mr. CHRISTENSON. Thank you. (The document referred to follows:) You are fully familiar with the fact that up to 1954 the nuclear energy field was a Government monopoly devoted to the military and defense needs of the Nation. Since 1954 the Atomic Energy Act has opened the field of the use of radioisotopes to all American industry. Some 10,000 scientists, engineers, and technicians now working in nuclear energy for private industry in the United States are doing a splendid job of developing commercial uses for radioisotopes. They are now able to "tailor make" radioisotopes having almost any desired combination of radiation type, energy, and length of existence of around 900 known kinds of radioisotopes for atoms giving off radiation, and of these well over 100 are readily available commercially. Over 4,500 licenses have been issued by the Atomic Energy Commission. Over 1,500 of them have been to priavte industry. In less than 5 years isotopes have been developed for use in the petroleum industry, the chemical industry and such industries as tobacco, rubber, paper, and many others. Most management in the industries using radioisotopes now have arrived at a judgment in the field of Federal-State relationships. Putting it in most general terms it is that at least for some time to come reactor licensing, regulation and supervision should remain with the Federal Government and that the Federal Government continue to control the export and import of source special nuclear or byproduct materials or the disposal at sea of these materials. Some people in this field believe that a time limit should be expressed in the law so that a review of the situation in this area would be specified for a certain time. Also some people believe there should be greater clarification of the siltuation regarding byproduct materials produced at reactor sites, and say the current language is somewhat vague in this respect. But as to the use of radioisotopes, management believes the licensing, administration of regulations, and establishment of rules should be turned over to the States as soon as the States set themselves up to handle the situation. Rules, regulations and inspection are necessary and they are tied up with State functions in the fields of safety, health, education, transportation, water and air pollution, insurance, fire hazard control, port authorities, workmen's compensation, etc. We believe better progress will be made under State operations where regulations can be issued from time to time by State boards of health, industrial commissions, departments of labor, departments of safety, etc., who will be in position to issue flexible rules and regulations, changing them from time to time if local situations recommend it in this transition stage of the growth of the industry than by any rigid Federal controls or regulations. We just don't think it is practical for the Federal Government to seek to regulate and inspect the thousands of industrial uses of radioisotopes in the coming years. Let me cite a few illustrations to demonstrate the situation. In the manufacture of cigarettes, shredded tobacco is pressed into a long, continuous, paper-covered rod. This rod is inspected by a radioisotope gage. Radiation from a source within the gage penetrates the rod and instantly detects any areas that have too litle or too much tobacco. This is used to control automatically the "firmness and fullness" of packaging. It must be emphasized that this procedure is absolutely safe-the radiations from radioisotopes do not make other atoms radioactive and the isotope source itself its leak-proof. Such gaging is now used on about 90 percent of all U.S. cigarettes. When you open a can of noodle soup today you can be sure of finding more than just broth. For, in its manufacture, consistency of the noodle soup was monitored by the quick thinking automatic rays to assure that each container has the same proportions of noodles, meat, and broth. You may also have noticed that you no longer have to pound the bottom of the catsup bottle to make it flow. Here again atomic rays control the consistency of tomato paste during the mixing of all ingredients and filling of the bottle. You will also find that you are not shortchanged when you open cans of liquids of all types-beer, detergents, etc. The level of the liquid is measured by a sensitive radioisotope level gage during the filling operation and all improperly filled cans are detected and corrected. Radioisotope gages have universal application, so that almost every item in your kitchen may have been produced with their aid. They are used to control the thickness of soda cracker dough in the bakery and the fat content of canned meats for baby food. The cardboard cartons and paper bags, in which you bring home your groceries, are controlled in their manufacture so that packages are more uniform and less likely to tear. Almost everything manufactured in sheet form-paper, plastic, metals, adhesive tape, rubber, sandpaper, etc.-is now improved by isotope gages. Radioisotopes are helping us not only by their use on the production line, but perhaps more importantly, by the information they give the engineer in improving the design of the things we use. The familiar use is the study of wear of piston rings, valves, crankshafts, and other parts of our automobiles and lawnmowers by making a piston ring radioactive, for example, and measuring the almost infinitesimal amount of radioisotopes that appears in the crankcase oil after a trial run of the engine. It is possible to determine the rate of wear in a few hours rather than being required to run the engine for many days, even months, before the wear could be measured. Improved lubricants as well as engine design can be very readily evaluated by this means. Another appliance whose design is continually being improved by radioisotope tracer studies is the washing machine. By using various kinds of slightly radioactive dirt to soil a variety of clothes, industry can determine the efficiency of the washing operation, the effectiveness of various soaps and detergents or even the ability of different textiles to shed soot, grease, and dirt. Radioisotopes are used in various ways to improve the growing of food crops prior to processing. Tracer experiments are rapidly adding to our knowledge of how best to fertilize. Radioisotopes also help the farmers develop new varieties of crops. This is possible because intense radiation causes mutations in growing parts of plants and in seeds. In North Carolina, a new variety of peanuts has been developed through radiation mutations. This has a much stronger hull and can be handled with less breakage than the usual variety. Radiation is also helping agriculture eleminate insect pests. The most striking success to date has been the eradication of the screw-worm fly from Florida and the entire Southeast United States. A very great area in which radioisotopes are benefiting mankind is in medicine. In England for two shillings you can buy a book such as the one I am now holding in my hand, giving an index of industrial uses of isotopes at work. This booklet, as you can see, has single space printing and lists hundreds of articles on 17 pages, listing the industrial use of isotopes in such things as agriculture, aircraft, beverages, building materials, chemical industry, coal and coke, electrical engineering, fertilizer, food, glass and glass containers, jewelry, laundry, leather, linoleum, oil refining, paint and varnish, paper and printing, photography, plastics, refrigeration, rubber, surgical instruments, textiles, wood products, tobacco, etc. Once we get an understanding of the wide use of radioisotopes in industry today, and just a little comprehension of the tremendous industrial uses of isotopes in the next 10 years, we commence to understand why the businessman who has given some thought to the subject, believes that it is impractical for the Federal Government to license, issue rules and regulations, and inspect operations to see that these rules and regulations are complied with. To him it is simply not practical that any Federal agency could properly keep up with this responsibility without duplication and overlapping on almost all of the departments and commissions and employees of all of our States. Obviously in 1954 the States were not prepared or sufficiently knowledgeable to license or inspect users of byproduct materials for example in the quantities available from the Commission. It was appropriate that the Atomic Energy Commission license users of those materials and inspect facilities to determine that the terms of the licenses were being met. However, today the situation is different: about 4,500 individuals or institutions have been licensed, of which over 1,500 are industrial firms. This number is growing constantly. We believe it is unrealistic to expect that the Atomic Energy Commission can keep up with this situation, particularly as regards inspection of facilities. On the other hand, the individual States can perform this type of function within their own borders. They have departments already established for this. In our opinion, efforts should be made to avoid unnecessary regulatory burdens upon industry, or, by all means, to avoid duplication or overlapping of Federal and State regulations. We do not believe the Federal Government should continue its regulations in those areas of the nuclear field such as possession, transfer, use of source materials, byproduct materials or reasonable quantities of special nuclear material unless there are clear and overwhelming reasons for so doing. We do not believe such reasons exist in the above area. Thirty-eight States have already acted to assess their responsibilities in the nuclear field, either through study and coordination or through some sort of radiation hazard control. This whole subject dramatically illustrates the need for some such legislation as is embodied in H.R. 3 and S. 3 which proposes "to establish rules of interpretation governing questions of the effect of Acts of Congress on State laws." This legislation would deal with those areas where power is vested both in the Federal Government and in the States. The problem before you today serves as a specific example of a situation that, in our opinion, H.R. 3 and S. 3 would do much to correct. To date there has been no official interpretation of the extent to which the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 preempts to the Federal Government the historic rights of the States to regulate health and safety of the public within their borders. The question that the act raises is implicit in the amendment that the Atomic Energy Commission has submitted to the Joint Committee. H.R. 3 and S. 3 would (1) require Congress to express its purpose clearly when enacting legislation and (2) require the Supreme Court to follow its own rule and construe Federal statutes as displacing State power only where Congress expressly stated its intention so to do. So we believe such legislation is desirable as a matter of principle and that the problem before the committee today is a clear illustration of the need of such legislation. Thank you. Representative HOLIFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Christenson. Are there any questions? Representative DURHAM. You have made a very clear explanation of what is being done with this radiation material. The only thing that worries me is that you recommend that this be completely turned over to the States with as little regulation and supervision as possible. I might say I would agree with that, also. You state the fact that you do not believe these regulations that are in existence today are necessary. What do you base that on? Do you base that on being a manufacturing group? 3 Mr. CHRISTENSON. Mr. Durham, I have been in this field only about years and believe me, I don't know all the answers. I have been amazed as I have gotten into this field with industry, at the tremendously wide use of radioisotopes. I do not know anything about nuclear reactors except in substance when I have gone to Government installations in various places. I, and the people with whom I have talked, still have the general feeling this is a different problem and a different hazard and a different situation than the wide commercial use of radioisotopes. There the general feeling is that as soon as a State is qualified, as soon as a State has the setup to take over the investigation and the licensing and the inspection and the safety hazards and the health hazards and the air and water pollution, in this whole broad field, it has got to be by the State. We do not think 100,000 people working for the Federal Government could properly inspect what you will have in 10 years. Representative DURHAM. I see your point. At the present time there are 4,500 licensees. |