« 이전계속 »
staffs might have a week in which to examine the bill prior to the reconvening of Congress. In view of the urgent need for the Nation to move ahead with its space program, the President insisted that the Congress receive the administration's bill at the earliest possible date.
Many bills which are complex are found to require some perfecting amendments in the course of consideration by the Congress. The Bureau of the Budget and the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics are eager to assist in any way to help clarify or otherwise improve the present text. It is my view, however, that the House and Senate hearings to date confirm the essential soundness of the concepts on which the bill is based. Furthermore, it is my conviction that the organizational and administrative provisions of the bill are in general well conceived and should be retained by the Congress.
In proposing this legislation, the administration was guided by a number of important considerations. Since these go to the heart of the matter, I should like to list them for the committee and comment briefly on each.
First, it was desired that the agency charged with the general furtherance of research into the problems of flight and astronautics be a civilian agency under civilian control. The President, in his special message on space science and exploration transmitted to the Congress on April 2, 1958, set forth this objective in the following terms:
I recommend that aeronautical and space science activities sponsored by the United States be conducted under the direction of a civilian agency, except for those projects primarily associated with military requirements. I have reached this conclusion because space exploration holds promise of adding importantly to our knowledge of the earth, the solar system, and the universe, and because it is of great importance to have the fullest cooperation of the scientific community at home and abroad in moving forward in the fields of space science and technology. Moreover, a civilian setting for the administration of space function will emphasize the concern of our Nation that outer space be devoted to peaceful and scientific purposes.
I am gratified that almost without exception testimony before the House and Senate committees has endorsed the principle of civilian control over these aspects of space science and exploration aimed at furthering the general knowledge of mankind. The President has recognized from the outset, and the bill reflects this awareness, that certain space programs should be conducted under the Department of Defense because of their importance to the security of the Nation. On this there also seems to be no significant debate.
The issue which has come before this committee is that of determining where the line should be drawn between space programs and projects appropriate for the civilian agency and those more suitable for administration by the Department of Defense. S. 3609 attempts to resolve this problem in a number of ways. The bill's policy section specifically provides that aeronautics and space activities "peculiar to or primarily associated with weapons systems or military operations” shall not be under the control of the civilian Agency, although provision is made for the conduct by the civilian Space Agency of research on strictly military projects on behalf of the Department of Defense. As a number of witnesses, such as General Doolittle and Mr. Quarles, have pointed out, there will be a gray area where there is doubt as to whether an activity "may be peculiar to or primarily associated with
weapons systems or military operations.” In such cases the assignment of responsibility will have to be determined by the normal processes of interagency cooperation. In some instances it will be necessary for the President, aided by Dr. Killian and other advisers, to resolve questions of agency jurisdiction.
The Bureau of the Budget has found that it is almost impossible in legislation to establish precise divisions between agencies with closely related programs. I don't think that it can be done here, especially when the future scope and dimensions of the program are so uncertain. The alternative would be to place all space activities in either the Department of Defense or the new National Aeronautics and Space Agency. I doubt that the Congress will wish to do either of those things.
I should like next to call attention to section 8 of the bill which provides for the transfer of related functions to the Agency. The purpose of that provision is to enable the agencies involved, with the approval of the President, to make those adjustments in their respective responsibilities as may be desirable. This provision will be especially important in the months to come, because the urgent need to move ahead with the space program has resulted in projects clearly civilian in nature being undertaken by the Department of Defense. These projects will in most instances be turned over to the civilian Space Agency as rapidly as it can be equipped to receive them, but this must be done on the basis of carefully worked out plans designed to minimize delay, duplication, or interagency conflict. Since the approval of the agencies surrendering functions is required, there is a guaranty that the National Aeronautics and Space Agency cannot on its own authority invade the proper spheres of other agencies or otherwise interfere with their responsibilities.
The second major objective sought by the legislation is to build upon existing institutions and to avoid increasing the total number of Federal agencies involved in aeronautics and space matters. The bill accomplishes this aim by utilizing the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics as the nucleus of the new agency. As General Doolittle and Dr. Dryden have pointed out in previous testimony, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics has elaborate facilities adapted to work in space research. Its large and competent staff of scientists, engineers, and technicians is already conducting investigations of problems requiring solution if man is successfully to unlock the secrets of space. Because there is no clear dividing line between aeronautics and astronautics, it is but logical that the highly respected National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics should evolve into a Space Agency as man develops the capability to navigate outside the earth's atmosphere. Again I am gratified by the general recognition that the President's decision to build upon the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics is a wise one.
The third objective of the legislation is to strengthen the present organization of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics in order to equip it to direct a large scale and urgent program with maximum effectiveness. The President has emphasized that he considers it vital that the new Agency be headed by a single official whom he and the Congress can bold accountable for results. In compliance with the President's instructions, the bill as transmitted to the Congress provides that a Director appointed by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate, shall head the Agency and shall exercise its functions. All administrative authority is thus placed in a single official appointed by and directly responsible to the President. This is the traditional way in which Federal agencies charged with large operating programs are headed. The Bureau of the Budget believes it would be a serious mistake to depart from this principle of a single responsible executive.
Some confusion has arisen concerning the provision in the bill for a 17-member National Aeronautics and Space Board appointed by the President. It is true that this Board is given the right to be consulted on major matters of policy, program, and Agency organization, and that it is authorized to make reports directly to the President. The text of the bill makes it clear, however, that while the Board has a right to be consulted and to be heard, it is a strictly advisory group. The Director alone, under the President, will be responsible for actions taken by the Agency.
The purpose of providing for a National Aeronautics and Space Board was to retain the best features of the present committee of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, which is held in such high regard by everyone familiar with its work. This Board will facilitate cooperation between the Agency and other Federal agencies and with the scientific community in the conduct of the space program. The Board will also be of material assistance to the Director in discharging his responsibilities and to the President as an independent source of advice on space matters.
All members appointed to the Board from private life must be eminent in science, engineering, technology, education, or public affairs and must be selected on the basis of established records of civilian achievement. The conflict-of-interest laws of the United States will be fully applicable to them in their service on the Board.
The fourth objective of this legislation is to equip the National Aeronautics and Space Agency with those authorities which it will require to move ahead swiftly and effectively in a field in which many novel problems must be expected. I shall not attempt in my testimony to discuss these powers in full, but I should like to refer to several which General Doolittle and Dr. Dryden, as well as the Bureau of the Budget, believe to be of special importance if the Agency is to perform its functions with maximum effectiveness.
The authority to fix compensation at rates which are reasonably comparable with prevailing rates paid by non-Federal employers for similar work is very important for recruitment of the Agency's staff. Competitive compensation will enable the Agency to make effective use of research contractors and at the same time maintain the quality and morale of personnel employed in its Government-operated laboratories. Pay rates under this provision would be established and adjusted in accordance with regulations issued by the President. The Congress can be assured that the President's regulations will be designed to avoid serious disadvantage to other agencies not equipped with comparable authority. Furthermore, the actual rates set will be comparable to those of non-Federal employers only to the extent consistent with the public interest. It is not expected that the public interest will permit any of the employees of the agency to be paid more than the director himself, whose salary is set by the bill at $22,500 per annum. Approximately half the employees of the
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics are "blue collar employees” and are now compensated on a prevailing rate basis. This additional authority will, therefore, permit an internally consistent pay system to be developed for the new Agency.
The importance of the authority of the Agency to enter into contracts has been covered in earlier testimony. Present law imposes on the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics a limitation of $500,000 on contract research. This limitation should be removed and the contract authority of the National Aeronautics and Space Agency should be made sufficiently broad to enable it to make full use of the resources of non-Federal research organizations.
The authority to enter into cooperative agreements with the military services for the detail of military personnel to the Agency will help make possible the conduct of projects under the Agency's technical direction and at the same time enable appropriate military personnel to participate in the work performed. It is expected that both the Agency and the Department of Defense will gain substantially from such arrangements.
In a research agency it is essential that opportunities be afforded scientific and technical personnel to undertake further study at Government expense outside the Agency.
Adequate authority to arrange for and finance such training is included in the bill.
The question has been asked as to why the National Aeronautics and Space Act is required at all. It has been suggested that additional funds and possibly a few specific grants of authority would suffice to equip the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics to carry out a space program. Such an approach would not meet the needs of the Nation's space program. Present legislation governing the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics is fragmentary and has been accumulated piece by piece over the years. The name of the Agency has long since ceased to be applicable. The internal organization of the Agency should be strenghthened. The Agency should be equipped with broad and carefully considered powers to operate in the field of its responsibility. Special arrangements for interagency cooperation and the transfers of related functions are needed. The Congress of the United States and the President should join in adopting through this bill a comprehensive statement of the policy objectives of our Nation in the pursuit of space science and in the exploration of space. Comprehensive legislation is needed both to establish the machinery and authority to do the job ahead of us and to reassure the people of the United States and of the world that our country will move forward resolutely to maintain its leadership in the challenging field of space exploration. I therefore recommend that the Congress enact this bill in such form as to carry out the President's proposals.
Mr. Chairman, I have submitted a number of proposed amendments, as I stated earlier, that the administration endorses as changes to this bill in order to clarify some of the questions that have arisen in the course of the hearing.
(The proposed amendments referred to are as follows:)
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO S. 3609, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT
1. In section 2 on page 2, lines 9 and 10, delete the phrase "in which case the agency may act in cooperation with, or on behalf of, the Department of Defense." and insert in lieu thereof the phrase "in the case of which activities the Department of Defense shall be responsible.”'
2. In section 4 (a) on page 3, line 18, delete the phrase "not to exceed”.
3. In section 4 (a) (1) on page 3, line 20, delete the phrase “no more than eight”, and insert in lieu thereof the word “Nine”.
4. In section 4 (a) (1) on page 3, line 23, delete the word "one" and insert in lieu thereof the word “three". 5. At the end of section 6 on page 13, line 7, insert a new section reading:
“INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION “Sec. 7. 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.” And renumber subsequent sections.
Senator JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Director. Have you concluded?
Mr. Stans. Yes.
Senator JOHNSON. Mr. Russell, Mr. Green, Mr. McClellan, Mr. Magnuson, Mr. Anderson?
“CONFICT OF INTEREST STATUTES"
Mr. ANDERSON. Well, I first want to get to the question of this organization, but I was attracted on page 8 in the next to the bottom paragraph by this statement:
The conflict of interest laws in the United States will be fully applicable to them in their service on the Board.
Can you cite us a conflict of interest law of the United States?
Mr. ŠTANS. Senator, as I explained before you came in, I have with me the technicians who drafted the bill, and I'll ask Mr. McClure, counsel, to answer that question for you.
Senator ANDERSON. I would be happy to have you do so, because I just asked the Attorney General of the United States a short time ago if there was such a thing as a conflict of interest law. I have his opinion, and I would like to have Mr. McClure's opinion.
Mr. MCCLURE. Senator, there are seven principal prohibitions which are generally referred to as conflict of interest statutes. Would you like to have me give you the citations?
Senator ANDERSON. If you will give me a memo on them, because I didn't think there was a specific conflict of interest law.
Mr. McCLURE. They are not cited as conflict-of-interest statutes, Senator, but as is often the case nowadays in legislation, they say early in the bill, "This bill shall hereinafter be cited as a conflict-ofinterest statute.” There are no such statutes, to my knowledge, that are officially so named. But they are commonly known as conflict-ofinterest statutes. I'll indicate those, if you would care to have them.
Senator ANDERSON. Merely for the record. (The citations referred to are as follows:)