Operating expenses The following table summarizes the AEC's requests for operating fund authorizations under its major programs and the committee's action thereon: 1 A table showing the Atomic Energy Commission's appropriations request for operating expenses for fiscal year 1969 and the effects of the authorization recommendations of the Joint Committee on this appropriations request, is set forth as an appendix to this report on p. 59. Plant and capital equipment The following table summarizes the AEC's request for authorization for "Plant and capital equipment" under its major programs, and the committee's action thereon. More detailed information on the 90-760 - 74-78 specific construction projects proposed, together with the committee's comments and recommendations thereon, is presented in section XVIII of this report entitled "Plant and capital equipment," beginning at page 47. 1 A table showing the Atomic Energy Commission's appropriations request for plant and capital equipment for fiscal year 1969 and the effects of the authorization recommendations of the Joint Committee on this appropriations request, is set forth as an appendix to this report, on p. 60. The following table presents a capsule summary of the authorizations requested by the AEC for fiscal year 1969, the committee's recommendations thereon, and the net difference: As noted in the tables above, the Joint Committee included a provision in the bill rescinding a prior year authorization for the Argonne Advanced Research Reactor amounting $25,000,000, except for funds heretofore obligated and such additional sums as may be necessary to close out the project. As noted below in the discussion of "Plant and capital equipment" (sec. XVIII, p. 52), the committee believes that this project is no longer justified on the basis of current national priorities. It is believed that the savings effected by this action will be not less than $18,000,000 in project construction obligations. Accordingly, the Commission's fiscal year 1969 authorization request has been reduced by this amount. These savings are exclusive of additional costs for associated research and development and capital equipment not related to construction which otherwise would have been incurred in connection with this project and do not reflect the fact that the estimated cost of the project has risen by $10,000,000. Adjustment for Reduction in Foreign Travel The recommended net authorization for operating expenses reflects an adjustment of $500,000 by the committee related to a reduction in overseas travel. Subsequent to submission of the AEC budget to Con gress, the Bureau of the Budget, on February 14, 1968, issued instructions to Federal agencies concerning a 25-percent reduction in overseas travel in fiscal year 1969. This action was prompted by the Nation's balance-of-payments situation. The committee was advised that the AEC budget included $1,500,000 for foreign travel, exclusive of travel to Canada, Mexico, Central and South America, for both Government employees and contractor employees. When Western Hemisphere travel is included in the definition of foreign travel, the total estimate for foreign travel is $1,740,000. The cutback required by the Government-wide foreign travel reduction is applicable only to Government employees and would reduce the Government employees' portion of the $1,740,000 from $320,000 to $240,000, a reduction of $80,000. The committee believes that a reduction in foreign travel should be made in both Government employee and contractor travel. A 25-percent reduction in such travel would be $435,000. The committee believes that in this time of budget stringency a larger reduction would be appropriate and has reduced foreign travel by $500,000. In this connection, the committee believes the Commission should exercise as stringent controls over foreign travel by contractor employees as it does over such travel by Government personnel. A detailed review of each major committee action by program is contained in the section of this report entitled "Committee Comments," beginning at page 7. BACKGROUND On January 29, 1968, the Atomic Energy Commission transmitted to Congress a proposed bill to authorize appropriations for the Commission for the fiscal year 1969 program. On the same day these bills were introduced in the Senate and House of Representatives by, respectively, Senator Clinton P. Anderson (by request), for himself and Senator John O. Pastore, Chairman, and by Congressman Chet Holifield (by request), Vice Chairman, as S. 2880 and H.R. 14905. Hearings on these bills were held before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, as summarized in the next section of the report. The full Joint Committee met in an executive session on March 27, 1968, for the "markup" of the AEC authorization bill. At this session, the committee approved certain amendments to S. 2880 and H.R. 14905, which were incorporated in "clean bills" introduced on March 29, 1968, by Senator Anderson (for himself and Chairman Pastore) as S. 3262 and on April 1, 1968, by Vice Chairman Holifield as H.R. 16324. On April 2, the committee voted to approve the reporting of the "clean bills" favorably without amendment and adopted this committee report. HEARINGS The Joint Committee's authorization hearings began in public session on January 30, 1968, with a statement by AEC Chairman Glenn T. Seaborg, accompanied by his fellow Commissioners and principal staff, who reviewed the overall AEC budget request for fiscal year 1969. There followed public hearings on January 31 and February 5, 6, 7 and 21 at which the reactor development, nuclear space, physical research and raw materials programs were reviewed. The record of these hearings is published in two parts entitled "AEC Authorizing Legislation, Fiscal Year 1969." In addition, executive hearings were held on February 8 and 20 when the naval reactor and weapons programs were reviewed. The record of the executive hearing on the naval reactors program has been published, with classified testimony and materials deleted for security reasons, under the title "Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program-1967-1968." This print also includes the unclassified portion of the record of an executive hearing held in 1967 concerning the same subject. Due to extensive coverage of classified information the record of the hearing on the AEC weapons program is not expected to be published. During these public and executive hearings the following ALG witnesses appeared before the Committee to testify: Dr. Glenn T. Seaborg, Chairman; Dr. Gerald F. Tape, Commissioner; Mr. James T. Ramey, Commissioner; Mr. Wilfrid E. Johnson, Commissioner; Mr. R. E. Hollingsworth, General Manager; Dr. George M. Kavanagh, Assistant General Manager for Reactors; Mr. John A. Erlewine, Assistant General Manager for Operations; Mr. George F. Quinn, Assistant General Manager for Plans and Production; Brig. Gen. Edward B. Giller, Assistant General Manager for Military Application; Mr. John P. Abbadessa, Controller; Mr. Joseph F. Hennessey, General Counsel; Vice Admiral H. G. Rickover, Director, Division of Naval Reactors; Mr. Milton Shaw, Director, Division of Reactor Development and Technology; Mr. Milton Klein, Director, Division of Space Nuclear Systems; Mr. John S. Kelly, Director, Division of Peaceful Nuclear Explosives; Dr. Paul W. McDaniel, Director, Division of Research; Mr. Rafford L. Faulkner, Director, Division of Raw Materials; Mr. William Wegner, Deputy Director, Division of Naval Reactors; Mr. Charles Winter, Deputy Director, Division of Military Application; Mr. David T. Leighton, Associate Director, Division of Naval Reactors; Dr. Amasa S. Bishop, Assistant Director for Controlled Thermonuclear Research, Division of Research; and Dr. William A. Wallenmeyer, Assistant Director for High Energy Physics, Division of Research. In addition the following representatives of AEC laboratories testified: Dr. Alvin Weinberg, Director, Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Dr. Michael May, Director, Lawrence Radiation Laboratory at Livermore; Mr. J. A. Hornbeck, President, Sandia Corporation; Dr. Norris E. Bradbury, Director, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory; Dr. Robert Wilson, Director, National Accelerator Laboratory; and Dr. Roger Batzel, Lawrence Radiation Laboratory (Livermore). During the hearing on February 6 concerning the reactor development program Senator Howard H. Baker, Jr., of Tennessee presented testimony in support of increased funding for the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE) at Oak Ridge, Tenn. A number of AEC programs were not the subject of detailed committee hearings during this year's authorization process. As to these, the committee requested that the Commission submit statements for the record for review by the committee and its staff. The committee, in turn, submitted questions in writing to the Commission on these programs for reply. Except for information of a classified nature, all of the foregoing materials have been included in the printed record. COMMITTEE COMMENTS INTRODUCTION Pursuant to section 261 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the committee has reviewed the authorization for all appropriations to the AEC, including both construction and operating funds, for fiscal year 1969. The committee's recommendations follow: A. AEC request I. WEAPONS The AEC requested $840,790,000 in weapons program operating funds for fiscal year 1969. This represents an increase of $118,340,000 above the fiscal year 1968 level. Of the amount requested, $270,690,000 is for production and surveillance of nuclear weapons; $250,000,000 is for research and development on nuclear weapons; $314,600,000 is for testing of atomic weapons; and $5,500,000 is for special test detection activities. The new obligational authority requested for plant and capital equipment for fiscal year 1969 is $294,670,000. This is an increase of approximately $114 million over the fiscal year 1968 request. Of the amount requested for fiscal year 1969, $215,400,000 is for construction projects and $79,270,000 is for capital equipment not related to construction. The increase in weapons program operating costs for fiscal year 1969 relates primarily to intensified AEC effort on both the ABM (antiballistic missile) system and the Poseidon program. The significant increase in fiscal year 1969 plant and capital equipment obligations stems in predominant part from the decision to deploy an ABM system. B. Committee action The committee strongly recommends that Congress authorize the full amounts requested for the nuclear weapons program-$840,790,000 for operating funds and $294,670,000 for plant and capital equipment obligations. The rapid increase in numbers of Soviet strategic missiles and the Red Chinese development of thermonuclear weapons have made it particularly important that our strategic posture be upgraded. In this connection the Joint Committee welcomed and vigorously supports the executive branch decision of September 18, 1967, to proceed with deployment of an ABM system. Due to the national importance of such a system and the large sums of money involved, the committee has arranged to obtain the assistance of the General Accounting Office, the auditing arm of the Congress, in maintaining a continuing surveillance of the actions being taken in connection with the ABM development and deployment program. It is the committee's hope that the Commission, within the funding levels called for in its budget submission and without detracting from its priority objectives, will be able to conduct R&D on warheads for |