« 이전계속 »
what more direct and tighter control. This is the reason for the change in the setup.
Senator JOHNSON. You started out feeling that your present type of organization was the best method of handling it, but you were persuaded otherwise?
Dr. DRYDEN. That is correct, sir.
MEMBERSHIP ON NEW SPACE BOARD
Senator JOHNSON. Do you think the provisions in section 4 for representation on the Board are wisely drawn in requiring only one Government member, or do you think that we ought to spell it out in more detail?
Dr. DRYDEN. I did not read it as having only one Government member, sir.
Senator Johnson. It doesn't require more than one, does it?
Dr. DRYDEN. No more than eight. I think that may very well be made more specific. I did not read this as an intention, and in none of the discussions has there been any idea that there would be only one Government member.
Senator JOHNSON. You had the idea that a number of agencies would be represented, didn't you?
Dr. DRYDEN. Yes, and the bill provides that the present Board would become the first Board of the new Agency.
Senator JOHNSON. Do you have any objection to the language being as specific in the bill as you are in your testimony?
Dr. DRYDEN. None whatsoever.
Senator JOHNSON. Would you recommend spelling out in the bill the agencies to be represented on the Board as specifically as you spelled them out in your statement?
Dr. DRYDEN. I see no objection to it. I did not recommend it because, as I indicated in the statement, I think the desire was to permit the adjustment from time to time to meet changing needs.
Might I illustrate with the previous history of NACA? When we wish to add Army members, it is necessary to go through the legislative process of changing the Organic Act to change the membership. In its ħistory, there has been frequent need for this. I see no objection to spelling it out in detail.
The only disadvantage I see is we may be back in a year or two to make some specific changes in the list.
Senator JOHNSON. Would you read that language and tell me where more than one Government member is required?
Dr. DRYDEN. I didn't say I thought that. I said in the discussion of this section I heard no ideas that would suggest that was contemplated.
Senator JOHNSON. Would you agree, then, that under the language
Dr. DRYDEN. I read it as permitting a certain degree of flexibility and flexibility, of course, could be carried to the point of only one Government member, as you read it.
CONSULTATION WITH THE BOARD
Senator Johnson. Do you consider it desirable for the Director to have to consult the Advisory Board on purely administrative matters such as is indicated in paragraphs 3 and 4 of subsection 5 (c)?
Dr. DRYDEN. I think there is very great advantage to this. I might say I did suggest as a result of discussion with the chairman of the House committee, Mr. McCormack, that the words, "prior to" be omitted on page 5, section (c), and replaced by the word "on.”
In other words, “prior to” does suggest that the director might be prevented from taking action by the necessity of consulting the boards prior to the steps.
I do want to bring out clearly what I think the functions of the Advisory Board are and the purpose of having such a Board. The members are not in the direct executive line, but we have found from long experience to have available for consultation on an advisory board the representatives of the agencies that we principally do businesss with-representation from the fields of science with which the agency is concerned-has a very great value.
I might illustrate the first point by a recent incident in which we had been asked by the Civil Aeronautics Administration for help in connection with regulations for new jet transports. They suggested that we borrow from the Air Force a tanker like the Boeing 707 to make some experiments.
General Le May was sitting in the committee for General White, and in 5 minutes, this transfer was arranged because we had on the Board for consultation people who had authority within the agencies with which we deal.
In a similar way, in dealing with scientific and technical matters, it has been very useful to have their advice. Our Board has met once per month, and we have found it very useful to have the advice of people who knew things going on within the field.
The second function of the Board-if they agree with the actions of the Director, their support has been most useful in dealing with the Budget Bureau and with the Congress, because members of the Board are unpaid, they are not full-time Government employees. If I appear before you as Director of the NACA, I am merely a Government man trying to build up the agency. If I have the support of the Advisory Board when I appear before you, this is very valuable.
A third important function of the Advisory Board is keeping in touch with the functions of the agency, of observing the agency, so that its operations are in a goldfish bowl among competent people. Such an Advisory Board protects the Congress and the President in maintaining a continual watch on the operations of the agency.
Senator JOHNSON. And you feel very strongly that an advisory board such as is proposed in this bill, in this very important field, is to be preferred to a board with full directive powers?
Dr. DRYDEN. I think so for this reason. We are writing the law for the future. As of the present time, the relationships of the Director of the NACA to the Board are very satisfactory on both sides. The Board has delegated a great deal of power to the Director subject to postaudit. This has made it possible to take action, for example, on requests for cooperation with the services, and other matters, without waiting for a Board meeting, because the power is delegated. In the same way, the Board has restricted itself to general policy matters.
In the case of the budget, they have fixed the general budgetary policy. This arrangement has been very satisfactory, but I think we can see that there is a possibility when the field is changed to a field involving operations and procurement activities, that such a setup might be abused and cause trouble.
DETERMINATION OF SPACE POLICY AND DECISIONS ON PLACEMENT
Senator JOHNSON. Would you consider it desirable to give the proposed Space Board the power to establish national space policy and the power to determine where a particular project should be assigned for primary control purposes?
Dr. DRYDEN. I think, sir, that the national space policy will be set by Congress so far as the general policy is concerned. I can't conceive of so important a matter being handled at a lower level.
Now, within the administration, this is a matter for the organization of the executive department. I would defer to the opinion of the President and his advisers as to how space policy should be set up.
Senator JOHNSON. How would you differentiate between space weapons and space civilian matters?
Dr. DRYDEN. This is largely a matter of function and purpose. The weapon is something with which you fight a war and with which you cause damage. You provide information which will help you cause damage. Peaceful uses are: Weather observation, communications, the scientific measurements that you can take in space and so on. I agree that there will be questions of interpretation at the borderline, but I think in general the distinction is so clear that reasonable people can come to agreement.
Senator JOHNSON. How would you differentiate?
Dr. DRYDEN. A weapon is something with which you cause damage to other people, to impose your will by force. A peaceful use is one for scientific purposes, for commercial purposes, for communication.
Senator JOHNSON. And you would not contemplate that any of those peaceful uses would be within the Defense Department?
Dr. DryDEN. That is my understanding of the language of the bill, sir.
Senator JOHNSON. Now, you don't believe in a board with full directive powers under this measure and you have a provision that each agency must concur and the President must agree before something can be transferred into a space agency from an agency that is now doing it. Under this bill that you have approved and recommended to the Congress, who is going to make the decision as to who controls what?
Dr. DRYDEN. There is a provision for the transition period. At the present time, the situation is that the Defense Department has been authorized by the Congress to carry on the civil space function. · Senator JOHNSON. I understand that. Now who, under this bill, is going to decide what is civilian and what is military?
Dr. DRYDEN. If this bill is passed?
Senator JOHNSON. Let's assume it is passed. Answer the question on that basis.
Dr. DRYDEN. It will be resolved, in the first instance, by negotiations between the new Agency and the Department of Defense.
Senator JOHNSON. Who is going to make the decision? That is all I'm asking you.
Dr. DRYDEN. If there is a controversy, it goes up the line to the President, like any other controversy between agencies.
Senator JOHNSON. So the President is going to decide what is civilian and what is military in each instance?
Dr. DRYDEN. I don't think it is going to go to the President in each instance.
Senator JOHNSON. Then it will go to the President where there is a difference of opinion?
Dr. DRYDEN. I think those will be relatively few.
Senator Johnson. I didn't ask you how many you thought there would be. I just asked you who will decide the issue when there is a dispute.
Dr. DRYDEN. It will be decided, as other disputes between Government agencies are decided, up the line to the President. The heads of other departments report to the President of the United States. That is the next level of authority.
ROLE OF UNITED STATES AS SPACE LEADER
Senator Johnson. Do you have any suggestions that you would like to make to the committee about preserving the role of the United States as a leader in aeronautics and space
science? Dr. DRYDEN. Any specific suggestions? Senator JOHNSON. Yes.
Dr. DRYDEN. I think the most straightforward way is to support a forward-looking program in this new Agency.
REPRESENTATION ON NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
Senator JOHNSON. Would you favor giving the Director of this new space Agency a seat on the National Security Council?
Dr. DRYDEN. I think that that is not necessary until we see how the Agency develops. It deals with questions outside the Security Council, with the peaceful uses.
RELATIONSHIP TO ARPA
Senator JOHNSON. I have this final thought. Is the present development of nonmilitary space projects by ARPA delaying the development of a comprehensive, well-planned program, in your opinion?
Dr. DRYDEN. No, sir. We are in very close contact with ARPA. The ARPA witnesses appeared before you; we are talking about the same program. The effect of the bill is ultimately to change the top management, but it will not affect the work that is going on.
SUGGESTED CHANGES IN THE BILL Senator JOHNSON. Do you plan to ask the military and the Director of the Budget to make available to you at the earliest possible moment any corrections or changes or improvements they are going to recommend so that the committee may have your concurrence before taking final action?
Dr. DRYDEN. Yes, sir, I will do that.
Senator JOHNSON. Do you have any improvements that you desire to suggest now?
Dr. DRYDEN. Yes.
Senator JOHNSON. Other than the international cooperation paragraph you mentioned?
Dr. DRYDEN. Yes, we have made 2 or 3 other suggestions.
Section 5 (a) on page 4 of the bill, under "Functions of the Board”— as a result of discussion in the House, we proposed to take out the second sentence requiring the Board to make an independent annual report. We think that an Advisory Board can make a report any time that it likes, and it is not necessary to require it to make an annual report. The work of the Agency will be reported to the Congress through the President under another section of the bill.
We also felt that
Senator JOHNSON. So you would eliminate, beginning with the word "The” in line 19 and
Dr. DRYDEN. Lines 20 and 21; yes, sir.
Dr. DRYDEN. The next one under 5 (b), to put a period after the word "Director,” in line 23, and not to place in this language the putting of a limitation on the President as to when he shall or shall not make a nomination.
Senator JOHNSON. Would you repeat that again? What line, what page?
Dr. DRYDEN. On page 4, the last line on the page, it says: And the Director shall not be appointed until the Board shall have had a reasonable opportunity to make such recommendations. This was in the first instance copied from the National Science Board Act. We do not think that it is necessary to put such a restriction on the President.
Senator JOHNSON. All right. What do you propose?
Dr. DRYDEN. To simply omit line 24 and lines 1 and 2 on page 5. I have already suggested that in section 5 (c) in line 4 on page 5 the words, "prior to,” be replaced by “on,” to make it very plain that the Board is not to be a step which can hold up action.
Senator JOHNSON. So you would eliminate the words, “prior to."
Now, your previous recommendation would read, beginning on line 22:
The Board may make recommendation to the President with respect to the appointment of a Director.
Is that correct?
Senator JOHNSON. Why do you have to say that? It doesn't mean anything, to begin with. Why not eliminate all of it? I don't guess anybody would go to jail if he made a suggestion without its being spelled out here.