« 이전계속 »
Mr. WEISL. Isn't that the dispute, that each military department is "separately administered" although under the control of the Secretary of Defense?
Dr. DRYDEN. I'm not an expert on that particular matter.
Mr. WEISL. You have read the testimony before the House committee. The complaint of the administration is that the words giving the Secretary of Defense direction and control do not supersede the words, "separately administered,” as used in defining the power of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force. That is one of the things they want to clarify.
Here the language is less definite than that.
Dr. DRYDEN. I don't want to enter into a discussion of the organization of the Department of Defense, because I'm not an expert in that field. I do know if you want a space program which moves forward, you must clearly define the responsibility. If you leave it ambiguous, you are going to have delays.
Now, I understand the risks of 1 person, but 1 person is removable. He is not a permanent fixture; he has no real tenure status other than that by the Congress and the President.
QUESTION OF IMPORTANCE OF ADVISORY BOARD Mr. WEISL. Do you believe that the advisory board of 17 is very important to this agency?
Dr. DRYDEN. I do, and I tried in an earlier reply to give the several functions which I thought this would fulfill. They are one way of having people who know something about the space business keep an eye on the operations, and if this dictator gets a little bit off the beam, they are in a position to make a noise and do something about it very promptly.
Mr. WEISL. In view of the importance of these men, do you think that they should be confirmed by the Senate of the United States, as all other commissioners are so that Congress might have some control?
Dr. DRYDEN. There again I personally would have no objection. This is a matter for your committee to consider.
Mr. WEISL. But this bill does not provide for confirmation of this Board.
Dr. DRYDEN. This is correct.
Mr. WEISL. Would you recommend that the bill provide for confirmation of these important commissioners by the Senate?
Dr. DRYDEN. I do not specifically recommend it. I think that the level of importance is that of an advisory group to the President and to the Director. Now, whether Congress thinks that they should be confirmed by the Senate is a matter for Congress to decide. The present board, of course, is not confirmed by the Senate. It is a Presidential board-an unpaid board. Mr. WEISL. You mean of the NACA? Dr. DRYDEN. The NACA is not confirmed by the Senate. Mr. WEISL. But you have testified that NACA is not an operating agency in the sense that the new Agency would be.
Dr. DRYDEN. Not in the sense of procurement and operation of hardware. It is a research and development agency. It operates in the research field.
SETTLING MILITARY-CIVILIAN DISPUTES
dispu method within t have to be set thet weer
Mr. WEISL. In answer to the Chairman's question as to who determines what is civilian and what is military, you said, “the President."
Dr. DRYDEN. I said the disputes between the NASA and the Department of Defense have to be settled by the President. It is the only method within the executive branch that I know of for settling disputes between independent and Government departments or ågencies.
Mr. WEISL. Could not the Congress provide in the law that certain officers or certain appointed men on this Board or in this Space Agency could settle such disputes?
Dr. DRYDEN. You could provide for that, but you would then be giving the responsibility, so to speak, to an interested party affiliated with one of the parties in dispute.
Mr. WEISL. No; I'm talking about a representative of each party in dispute. As an example, why couldn't the Secretary of Defense, and the head of the National Academy of Science, or the Secretary of Defense and the head of the Space Agency, determine what is civilian and what is military, and in the event that they couldn't agree, then go to the President?
Dr. DRYDEN. That is exactly what the bill provides Mr. WEISL. It doesn't provide that. In what part of the bill is such provision made?
Dr. DRYDEN. Perhaps I am going beyond this. It seems to me when you have two independent agencies of the Government, they try to settle their differences between them before they go to the President. I would expect the Secretary of Defense and the head of this new Agency to settle their disputes as far as possible. If they cannot agree, the structure of our Government provides that they move to the next level, which is the President.
RELATIONSHIP WITH INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES Mr. WEISL. Now, this bill provides that the purpose of the bill is, in general terms, to provide for leadership by the United States in outer space exploration.
Dr. DRYDEN. That is correct.
Mr. WEISL. In order to do that, we must know what other nations are doing?
Dr. DRYDEN. Yes, sir.
Mr. WEISL. Do you know whether the intelligence agencies of the Government were consulted as to what they knew about what other governments were doing in outer space before this bill was drafted?
Dr. DRYDEN. I do not know about the members of the drafting committee. I am very intimately associated with intelligence work, and am pretty familiar with what is known through various affiliations.
Mr. WEISL. Do you believe it is important for this Agency to know what other nations are doing in outer space?
Dr. DRYDEN. Absolutely. Mr. WEISL. You do? Dr. DRYDEN. I do. Mr. WEISL. Do you think some representative of the intelligence agencies should be a member of the board?
Dr. DRYDEN. I do not think this is necessary. I say at the present time the NACA has very close ties with the intelligence agencies, and it is in very close touch with the information they have. I don't see that it aids to have a representative of the intelligence agencies on this Board. These are day-to-day operating matters.
Mr. WEISL. That is all I have to ask, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Johnson. Thank you very much, Dr. Dryden. We'll remind you to submit for the record your written recommendations in connection with any change you may wish to suggest in the bill as submitted.
You are excused Dr. Dryden.
Washington, D. C., May 14, 1958.
United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR Johnson: I wish to express my appreciation for the courtesies extended to me when I appeared as a witness before your committee in support of S. 3609.
During my testimony, I suggested certain language changes in the bill which you requested in writing. The suggested revisions follow:
Section 5 (a), page 4, strike last sentence of this subsection_(commencing on line 19 and continuing on lines 20 and 21) which reads, “The Board shall make an annual report and from time to time such other reports to the President as it deems appropriate.” It appears that the Board, being advisory, would make such reports as it considers necessary to the President and the Director.
Section 5 (b), page 4, place a period after the word “Director” on line 23 and strike line 24 on page 4 and strike lines 1 and 2 on page 5.
Section 5 (c), page 5, strike the words "prior to” of line 4, page 5, and insert in lieu thereof the word "on".
Section 6 (b) (6), page 8, insert after the words “transfer to” on line 23, page 8, the words "or receive from”. This would permit the Agency to receive equipment, aircraft, and other vehicles and to return such equipment and vehicles, and would permit other agencies to receive such equipment.
Page 13, insert a new section 7 entitled "INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION” to read as follows:
“The Agency may engage in a program of international cooperation in work done pursuant to this Act and in the peaceful application of the results thereof, pursuant to agreements negotiated by the Department of State or approved by that Department.”
Consequently, sections presently numbered 7, 8, 9, and 10 would be renumbered 8, 9, 10, and 11, respectively.
Section 7 (b), page 14, lines 12 and 13, strike the words "shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and and insert in lieu thereof the following: 'or any real or personal property or equipment in the custody of a contractor, by virtue of a contract with the Agency." This subsection deals with violations of orders promulgated. This suggested revision would also protect property in the custody of Agency contractors.
Section 10 (b), page 16, line 21, after the words “National Aeronautics and Space Agency insert the words "or his designee."
During the testimony of Mr. Maurice H. Stans, Director of the Bureau of the Budget, he made the following suggested changes in the language of S. 3609:
Section 2, page 2, lines 9 and 10, strike the words “in which case the Agency may act in cooperation with, or on behalf of, the Department of Defense, and insert in lieu thereof "in the case of which activities the Department of Defense shall be responsible.”
Section 4 (a), page 3, line 18, strike the words "not to exceed.”
Section 4 (a) (1), page 3, line 20, strike the words "no more than eight” and insert in lieu thereof the word “nine”.
Section 4 (a) (1), page 3, line 23, strike the word "one" and insert in lieu thereof the word "three". I endorse the above suggestions made by Mr. Stans. Sincerely yours,
Hugh L. DRYDEN, Director.
Senator JOHNSON. Our next witness is Dr. H. Guyford Stever, Chairman, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics Special Committee on Space Technology, and associate dean of engineering, MIT.
I ask consent to insert Dr. Stever's biography in the record at this point.
(The biography referred to is as follows:) BIOGRAPHY, DR. H. GUYFORD STEVER, AssociATE DEAN OF ENGINEERING,
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Dr. Stever was born in Corning, N. Y., on October 24, 1916. He received his AB from Colgate University in 1938 and his Ph. D. from the California Institute of Technology in 1941.
He was a staff member at MIT from 1941 to 1942, and associate professor from 1946 to 1951, associate professor from 1951 to 1955. He became professor of aeronautical engineering in 1955 and now holds the position of associate dean of engineering. He is also Chairman of the NACA Space Committee.
He was a liaison officer for the ORSD from 1942 to 1945, consultant to the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1945 and member of the Research and Development Board from 1946 to 1948. He has been a member of the Air Force Science Advisory Board since 1947 and Vice Chairman since 1956.
He is a fellow of the Institute of Aeronautical Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Physical Society, and is a member of Phi Beta Kappa, and Sigma Xi.
Senator JOHNSON. I have an important meeting at 11:30, and I have asked some of my associates to preside in the event I am called away, so Dr. Stever, I hope you will understand that it is no discourtesy to you.
Dr. STEVER. Yes.
Dr. Stever, do you care to make a statement on this bill to the committee?
Dr. STEVER. Yes, sir.
STATEMENT OF H. GUYFORD STEVER, ASSOCIATE DEAN OF
ENGINEERING, MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, AND CHAIRMAN, SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON SPACE TECHNOLOGY, NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS
Dr. STEVER. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, and counsel; in laying the groundwork for our Government's major venture in astronautics and space technology, as this committee is helping to do, the most important consideration, I believe, is that this activity will be of long duration and of growing importance. Man's interest in the physical universe outside this earth and his desire to explore this earth
Senator Johnson. Dr. Stever, I'm having a little difficulty following you.
Dr. STEVER. I'm sorry.
Man's desire to explore that universe is very old and very intense. A member of a great senate long ago, Cicero, the great Roman lawyer and statesman, was interested in this subject and, in fact, wrote about it.
Man's capability to explore physically and to send scientific apparatus well out into space is something which has been realized only in our generation. As this capability develops, I am sure his interest will grow even stronger, as it has in the past. Because of all this, I believe we must plan an organization capable of giving us strength over many years, an organization capable of marked growth. I believe that we must not be overly influenced by the desire to do something spectacular on a short-term basis. We must lay a strong foundation, both organizationally and technically.
The phases of astronautics and space exploration activities which have yielded returns are the scientific and military phases. You are well aware of the rapid exploitation of these techniques in military technology, so I will not detail them. I am confident that this military exploration should and will continue, and that from it not only will come increased military strength, but also knowledge, techniques, and equipment which can be used for our nonmilitary space activity.
Our nonmilitary space program, though not controlled by the military, should be in close contact with it for mutual exchange of ideas, data, techniques, equipment, and even bases.
With respect to scientific research, both to learn more about the physical universe outside the confines of the earth and to use this cosmic laboratory for a better understanding of the physical laws which govern physical processes here on the earth as well, these rocket techniques are unfolding a wealth of interesting possibilities. This scientific research, already well started, should grow apace.
What of the other nonmilitary aspects of astronautics and space exploration? Already we have seen some simple engineering ventures of practical use involving communication relay stations and weather observation stations on satellites. Also, physical exploration of the solar system is something to begin in a limited way. There are some other long-term and highly imaginative accomplishments of space flight which are speculated on by some. Personally, I believe that there will evolve many important uses of these techniques of space flight as we develop our capabilities in the field, though I am not one to attempt to predict these in detail at the present time.
Much has been made of the argument as to whether we should immediately start sending men into space either on satellites or on moon rockets. On manned space flight, it is my feeling that we still have a long way to go on two counts. In the first place, we will not be sure until we have performed a substantial amount of experimentation how difficult it is to put a man out there and return him safely. In the second place, we are not yet sure why we want a man to go. Certainly, much of our scientific experimentation and, in fact, some rather distant space exploration can be done without involving manned space flight. I do believe that there are enough possibilities in the long-term future, both in military and nonmilitary ventures, for a man to be needed in space flight, that preliminary experimentation is justified. Of course, the country that first puts a man out there will gain prestige. However, if the choice is necessary, I would sacrifice early prestige for long-term strength.
There are several kinds of activities which might be conducted simultaneously in order to develop our capabilities optimally. In scientific laboratories, we must conduct research and develop equipment to perform the scientific experiments in space. In engineering laboratories, we must work on the techniques and the technical field which we must master before we can perform vastly more complicated flight into space. The flight work which we conduct must have at