evaluating programs for the assessment of objectives, performance, and efficiency. An OMB representative sits as an official observer on ICAS and the Federal Committee for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research.

FEDERAL LEGISLATION ON

WEATHER MODIFICATION ACTIVITIES

The spread of private weather modification activity in the United States in the late 1940s and early 1950s raised concern in the Congress about the usefulness and effectiveness of this new technology. The Congress, through Public Law 83-256, approved August 13, 1953, established an Advisory Committee on Weather Control. The Committee was required to study and evaluate public and private experiments in weather control and determine the extent to which the United States should experiment with, engage in, or regulate activities designed to control weather conditions. Its report, issued in 1957, was modestly favorable on the potentials of weather modification and recommended further research.

In following up on the report recommendations, the Congress enacted Public Law 85-510, approved July 11, 1958, which authorized and directed NSF to initiate and support a program of study, research, and evaluation in the field of weather modification, and to report annually to the President and the Congress. In addition to establishing weather modification as one of its research programs, NSF also required all commercial and private weather modifiers to maintain records and submit reports on their activities.

In 1968 NSF's authority under Public Law 85-510 was repealed, apparently on the assumption that it would be reassigned to some other agency during the same congressional session. However, no other authorizing law was passed until Public Law 92-205 was enacted on December 18, 1971. This law required that all nonfederally sponsored weather modification be reported to the Secretary of Commerce.

Since 1966 the Congress has considered several bills concerning the assignment of individual agency authority and responsibility for weather modification and one to prohibit weather modification anywhere in the Nation. None of these bills were passed.

INDEPENDENT STUDIES EVALUATING

FEDERAL WEATHER MODIFICATION RESEARCH

For nearly a decade a number of scientific panels, committees, and other groups have reviewed, evaluated, and reported on the status of and problems associated with Government atmospheric sciences programs. In nearly every case the reports, including the most recent issued June 29, 1973, by NACOA have not only cited a need for a national program with centralized, single agency responsibility, authority, and control, but also highlighted problems in coordinating multiagency activities and the lack of progress because of fragmented and subcritical research programs. Several of these reports are discussed below.

"Government Weather Programs (Military and Civilian Operations and Research)"

This report, issued in 1965, was prepared by the Military Operations Subcommittee under the direction of the Chairman, House Committee on Government Operations. Its purpose was to inform the Congress, executive branch agencies, scientific and technical communities, and the general public about the scope and complexities of governmental programs related to weather services and research in the atmospheric sciences.

The report noted that the Congress is familiar with the difficulties of achieving efficient coordination of programs, but multiagency programs present special problems. It stated that:

"Each agency that carries on only part of a Government research program has a difficult task to justify its own particular operations, but it is also hard put to avoid actual duplication of work due to overlapping or parallel activities of other participating agencies. The coordination which can be accomplished by each agency to avoid this is laborious and limited. And while the agencies may be conscientious in trying to avoid waste, they are charged with specific missions.

"Coordination among agencies or bureaus of each executive de-
partment is difficult enough, but a field such as the one discussed
in this report includes participation not only by several Cabinet
departments, but by independent agencies and offices. The
weather activities carried on by each may touch the major mission
responsibilities of the agency, even though these activities are
only a small part of its total effort. If missions are affected,
the agency must strike a balance between insuring, as far as it
can, that its work goes ahead successfully, and sharing the pro-
gram area with other interested agencies.

"Within the executive branch, the Bureau of the Budget [now
OMB], the Office of Science and Technology, the Federal Council
for Science and Technology, and similar groups may try to pre-
pare a more unified 'program package' in an area such as weather
research. But short of a Presidential directive to do so, these
offices cannot continually monitor particular programs, and they
obviously cannot give full-time attention to all programs at once.
"The problem lies in finding economical means for continuous
coordination among agencies. Committees, boards, panels, and
groups may be formed, but a solution to policy problems, it is
frequently said, is not found by forming a committee. Besides,
what can be done to force agencies, particularly executive de-
partments, to comply with committee recommendations, when
departmental missions appear to conflict with generalized in-
terdepartmentally agreed policy?'

The report noted a large Federal funding for atmospheric sciences research and meteorological services and that problems of administration, coordination, and financial control of the multiagency programs were becoming increasingly apparent. It raised a series of questions in 18 subject areas of potential congressional concern, such as national programs, Federal coordination, and fragmentation of atmospheric sciences research and meteorological services.

"Weather and Climate Modification Report of the Special Commission on Weather Modification"

Also in 1965 a Special Commission on Weather Modification, authorized by the National Science Board, issued its report to the Director, NSF. The Commission, consisting of members primarily from the academic community, had been requested to examine the physical, biological, legal, social, and political aspects of weather modification and make recommendations for future policies and programs.

In commenting on how Federal weather modification activities are administered, the Commission identified duplication in research activities and coordination responsibilities as problem areas. The report stated that, with more agencies in weather modification research, there is a need to establish a Federal organization to accomplish what cannot be done by diverse research activities. The Commission said that, as long as weather modification activities were mainly basic research, duplication was not a major problem, but certain aspects had reached the applied research and operations phase and regulatory activity was not far away. It also said, because no single agency has been assigned the responsibility for developing the technology of weather modification, a definite need to do so existed.

The Commission recommended that the Office of Science and Technology establish

"'***a special mechanism for the coordination of weather and
climate modification programs and for recommending such steps
as may be appropriate for effecting a unity of governmental policy
in this field.

Also, it recommended that the mission of developing and testing methods for modifying the weather should be assigned to one agency in the executive branch to correct overlap and lack of concerted effort among the various agencies.

"Weather and Climate Modification

Problems and Prospects

The Committee on Atmospheric Sciences published this report to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), in 1966. It was the result of a 2year study by a panel of the Committee which reviewed the present status and activities in this field and its potential and limits for the future.

56-398 O 75 - 20

The panel identified four problem areas in administration and management of weather modification activities.

1. The level of effort was not commensurate with the demonstrated opportunities for further research likely to have early practical implications.

2. The major portion of research resources (money and manpower) was being dissipated by supporting subcritical efforts.

3. Scientific groups were severely hampered by lack of a central management organization with authority and skill to consummate interagency negotiations and operations.

4. ICAS, which in principle has responsibility for coordinating efforts in weather modification, has no power to initiate action within any agency.

The panel concluded that:

--The present support and administrative mechanisms do not
provide adequate means for setting priorities among the many
large field experiments and projects that will eventually be
needed.

--The present fragmentation of effort in weather modification research and development is unusual in that many of the fragments are below critical size or quality needed for effective work.

--Major responsibility for weather modification should be centered in a single agency.

"Weather-Modification Progress and

the Need for Interactive Research'

This report, published in October 1968, was prepared by the Weather Modification Research Project Staff, Rand Corporation, under a contract with NSF. The report concluded:

"The structure of the national weather-modification program has
not--in one vital respect--been strengthened since the time of our
previous study in 1962. We referred to the specific weakness then
as a lack of a 'cohesive' approach to weather modification. The NAS
Panel on Weather and Climate Modification in 1966 called the same
problem a 'fragmentation of effort. We reiterate it now in terms
of the need for more 'interactive research'.'

"In 1962 we have concluded, and again in 1968 we are forced
to conclude, that the subject of weather modification could