Till; I'MTKI) STVFRS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A<;EN( V
llii
Statutes and Legislative History
Executive Orders
Regulations
Guidelines and Reports
\
UJ
-------
-------
340R73115
THE UNITED STATES. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(KuaoD
Statutes and Legislative History
Executive Orders
Regulations
Guidelines and Reports
\
01
JANUARY 1973
Protect'°"
South Dearborn vStreet
Illinois 60604
Administrator
-------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402
Price $6.65 per 3 volume set. Sold in sets only.
Stock Number 5500-0067
-------
FOREWORD
It has been said that America is like a gigantic boiler in that
once the fire is lighted, there are no limits to the power it can
generate. Environmentally, the fire has been lit!
With a mandate from the President and an aroused public
concern over the environment, we are experiencing a new Amer-
ican Revolution, a revolution in our way of life. The era which
began with the industrial revolution is over and things will never
be quite the same again. We are moving slowly, perhaps even
grudgingly at times, but inexorably into an age when social,
spiritual and aesthetic values will be prized more than production
and consumption. We have reached a point where we must bal-
ance civilization and nature through our technology.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, formed by Re-
organization Plan No. 3 of 1970, was a major commitment to this
new ethic. It exists and acts in the public's name to ensure that
due regard is given to the environmental consequences of actions
by public and private institutions.
In a large measure, this is a regulatory role, one that en-
compasses basic, applied, and effects research; setting and en-
forcing standards; monitoring; and making delicate risk-benefit
decisions aimed at creating the kind of world the public desires.
The Agency was not created to harass industry or to act as a
shield behind which man could wreak havoc on nature. The
greatest disservice the Environmental Protection Agency could
do to American industry is to be a poor regulator. The environ-
ment would suffer, public trust would diminish, and instead of
free enterprise, environmental anarchy would result.
It was once sufficient that the regulatory process produce wise
and well-founded courses of action. The public, largely indifferent
to regulatory activities, accepted agency actions as being for the
"public convenience and necessity." Credibility gaps and cynicism
make it essential not only that today's decisions be wise and
well-founded but that the public know this to be true. Certitude,
not faith, is de rigueur.
In order to participate intelligently in regulatory proceedings,
the citizen should have access to the information available to the
agency. EPA's policy is to make the fullest possible disclosure of
iii
-------
information, without unjustifiable expense or delay, to any in-
terested party. With this in mind, the EPA Compilation of Legal
Authority was produced not only for internal operations of EPA,
but as a service to the public, as we strive together to lead the
way, through the law, to preserving the earth as a place both
habitable by and hospitable to man.
WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
IV
-------
PREFACE
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 transferred 15 governmental
units with their functions and legal authority to create the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Since only the major laws were
cited in the Plan, the Administrator, William D. Ruckelshaus,
requested that a compilation of EPA legal authority be researched
and published.
The publication has the primary function of providing a work-
ing document for the Agency itself. Secondarily, it will serve as
a research tool for the public.
A permanent office in the Office of Legislation has been estab-
lished to keep the publication updated by supplements.
It is the hope of EPA that this set will assist in the awesome
task of developing a better environment.
MARY LANE REED WARD GENTRY, J.D.
Assistant Director for Field Operations
Office of Legislation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The idea of producing a compilation of the legal authority of
EPA was conceived and commissioned by William D. Ruckelshaus,
Administrator of EPA. The production of this compilation in-
volved the cooperation and effort of numerous sources, both
within and outside the Agency. The departmental libraries at
Justice and Interior were used extensively; therefore we ex-
press our appreciation to Marvin P. Hogan, Librarian, Depart-
ment of Justice; Arley E. Long, Land & Natural Resources
Division Librarian, Department of Justice; Frederic E. Murray,
Assistant Director, Library Services, Department of the Interior.
For exceptional assistance and cooperation, my gratitude to:
Gary Baise, formerly Assistant to the Administrator, currently
Director, Office of Legislation, who first began with me on this
project; A. James Barnes, Assistant to the Administrator; K.
Kirke Harper, Jr., Special Assistant for Executive Communica-
tions; John Dezzutti, Administrative Assistant, Office of Execu-
tive Communications; Roland 0. Sorensen, Chief, Printing
Management Branch, and Jacqueline Gouge and Thomas Green,
Printing Management Staff; Ruth Simpkins, Janis Collier, Win.
Lee Rawls, Peter J. McKenna, James G. Chandler, Jeffrey D.
Light, Randy Mott, Thomas H. Rawls, John D. Whittaker, Linda
L. Payne, Dana W. Smith, and John M. Himmelberg, a beautiful
staff who gave unlimited effort; and to many others behind the
scenes who rendered varied assistance.
MARY LANE REED WARD GENTRY, J.D.
Assistant Director for Field Operations
Office of Legislation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
vi
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
The goal of this text is to create a useful compilation of the
legal authority under which the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency operates. These documents are for the general use of
personnel of the EPA in assisting them in attaining the pur-
poses set out by the President in creating the Agency. This work
is not intended and should not be used for legal citations or any
use other than as reference of a general nature. The author dis-
claims all responsibility for liabilities growing out of the use of
these materials contrary to their intended purpose. Moreover, it
should be noted that portions of the Congressional Record from
the 92nd Congress were extracted from the "unofficial" daily ver-
sion and are subject to subsequent modification.
EPA Legal Compilation consists of the Statutes with their
legislative history, Executive Orders, Regulations, Guidelines and
Reports. To facilitate the usefulness of this composite, the Legal
Compilation is divided into the eight following chapters:
A. General E. Pesticides
B. Air F. Radiation
C. Water G. Noise
D. Solid Waste H. International
RADIATION
The chapter labeled "Radiation" and color coded tan contains
the legal authority of the Agency as it applies to radiation pol-
lution abatement. It is well to note that any law which is appli-
cable to more than one chapter of the Compilation will appear in
each of the chapters; however, its legislative history will be cross
referenced into the "General" chapter where it is printed in full.
SUBCHAPTERS
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
For convenience, the Statutes are listed throughout the Com-
pilation by a one-point system, i.e., 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc., and Legisla-
tive History begins wherever a letter follows the one-point
system. Thusly, any l.la, l.lb, 1.2a, etc., denotes the public laws
comprising the 1.1, 1.2 statute. Each public law is followed by its
vii
-------
viii INSTRUCTIONS
legislative history. The legislative history in each case consists of
the House Report, Senate Report, Conference Report (where
applicable), the Congressional Record beginning with the time
the bill was reported from committee.
Example:
1.1 1954 Atomic Energy Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§2013 (d), 2021, 2051,
2073 (b), (e), 2092, 2093, 2099, 2111, 2112, 2132, 2133, 2134, 2139, 2153,
2201, 2210 (1970).
l.la Atomic Energy Act of 1946, August 1, 1946, P.L. 79-585, 60 Stat.
755.
(1) Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1211, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946).
(2) House Committee on Military Affairs, H.R. REP. No. 2478,
79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946).
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2670, 79th Cong.,
2d Sess. (1946).
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 93 (1946) :
(a) June 1: Passed Senate, pp. 6076-6098;
(b) July 16: House disagrees to Senate bill, pp. 9135-
9144;
(c) July 17, 18, 19, 20: House debates and amends Senate
bill, pp. 9249-9275, 9340-9386, 9463-9477, 9545-9563;
(d) July 22: Senate disagrees with House bill, asks for
conference, pp. 9609-9611;
This example not only demonstrates the pattern followed for
legislative history, but indicates the procedure where only one
section of a public law appears. You will note that the Congres-
sional Record cited pages are only those pages dealing with the
discussion and/or action taken pertinent to the section of law
applicable to EPA. In the event there is no discussion of the
pertinent section, only action or passage, then the asterisk (*) is
used to so indicate, and no text is reprinted in the Compilation.
In regard to the situation where only one section of a public law is
applicable, then only the parts of the report dealing with same are
printed in the Compilation.
SECONDARY STATUTES
Many statutes make reference to other laws and rather than
have this manual serve only for major statutes, these secondary
statutes have been included where practical. These secondary
statutes are indicated in the table of contents to each chapter by
a bracketed cite to the particular section of the major act which
made the reference.
CITATIONS
The United States Code, being the official citation, is used
throughout the Statute section of the Compilation.
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
IX
TABLE OF STATUTORY SOURCE
Statutes
1.1 1954 Atomic Energy Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. §§2013(d),
2012, 2051, 2073(b), (e), 2092,
2093, 2099, 2111, 2112, 2131, 2133,
2134, 2139, 2153, 2201, 2210
(1970).
1.2 Public Health Service Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. §§203, 215,
241, 242(b), (c), (d), (f), (i),
(j), 243, 244, 244a, 245, 246, 247
(1970).
1.3 Public Contracts, Advertisements
for Proposals for Purchases and
Contracts for Supplies or
Services for Government Depart-
ments; Application to Govern-
ment Sales and Contracts to Sell
and to Government Corporations,
as amended, 41 U.S.C. §5 (1958).
1.4 Research and Development Act,
Contracts, as amended, 10 U.S.C.
§§2353, 2354 (1956).
1.5 International Health Research
Act, 22 U.S.C. §2101 (1960).
1.6 Per Diem, Travel and Transpor-
tation Expenses; Experts and
Consultants; Individuals Serving
Without Pay, as amended, 5
U.S.C. §5703 (1966).
1.7 The Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. §3254f
(1970).
1.8 National Environmental Policy
Act, 42 U.S.C. §§4332(2) (c),
4344(5) (1970).
Source
Direct reference in Reorg. Plan
No. 3 of 1970.
Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1970.
Referred to in Public Health
Service Act at §242c(e).
Referred to in Public Health
Service Act at §241 (h).
Referenced to in the Public
Health Service Act at §242f(a).
Referenced to in Public Health
Service Act at §242f (b) (5), (6).
Section cited refers directly to
national disposal sites for storage
and disposal of hazardous waste
including radioactivity.
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1970.
EXECUTIVE ORDERS
The Executive Orders are listed by a two-point system (2.1, 2.2,
etc.). Executive Orders found in General are ones applying to
more than one area of the pollution chapters.
REGULATIONS
The Regulations are noted by a three-point system (3.1, 3.2,
etc.). Included in the Regulations are those not only promulgated
by the Environmental Protection Agency, but those under which
the Agency has direct contact.
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
This subchapter is noted by a four-point system (4.1, 4.2, etc.).
In this subchapter is found the statutorily required reports of
EPA, published guidelines of EPA, selected reports other than
EPA's and interdepartmental agreements of note.
UPDATING
Periodically, a supplement will be sent to the interagency dis-
tribution and made available through the U.S. Government Print-
ing Office in order to provide an accurate working set of EPA
Legal- Compilation.
-------
F. RADIATION
Volume I
Page
1. STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 1
1.1 1954 Atomic Energy Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§2013 (d),
2021, 2051, 2073(b), (e), 2092, 2093, 2099, 2111, 2112, 2132,
2133, 2134, 2139, 2153, 2201, 2210 (1970) 3
l.la Atomic Energy Act of 1946, August 1, 1946, P.L. 79-585,
60 Stat. 755-756, 758-766, 770-771, 774 38
(1) Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy, S.
REP. No. 1211, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946) 53
(2) House Committee on Military Affairs, 3.R. REP.
No. 2478, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946) 77
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2670,
79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946) 85
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 93 (1946):
(a) June 1: Passed Senate, pp. 6082-6085, 6087-
6088, 6094-6098 96
(b) July 16: House disagrees to Senate bill, pp.
9135-9136, 9140-9141 109
(c) July 17,18, 19, 20: House debates and amends
Senate bill, pp. 9253-9254, 9256, 9263-9270,
9272-9275, 9343-9346, 9355-9367, 9381-9386,
9464-9470, 9552-9662 115
(d) July 22: Senate disagrees with House bill,
asks for conference, p. 9611 209
(e) July 26: House agrees to conference report,
pp. 10192-10199 209
(f) July 26: Senate agrees to conference report,
p. 10168 225
l.lb Atomic Energy Act of 1954, August 30, 1954, P.L.
83-703, §§1, 2, 3, 31, 53, 62, 63, 69, 81, 102, 103, 104, 109,
123, 161, 68 Stat. 921, 927, 930, 948 225
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP. No.
2181, 83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954) 245
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1699, 83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954) 298
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2639,
83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954) 299
(4) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2666,
83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954) 300
(5) Congressional Record, Vol. 100 (1954):
(a) July 23, 26: Debated, passed House, pp.
11655-11656,11683, 11688-11691,11698-11699,
11713-11715, 11731, 12025 300
xi
-------
xii CONTENTS
Page
(b) July 13-27: Debated, amended, passed Sen-
ate, pp. 10368-10370, 10484-10485, 10563-
10565, 10800-10801, 10804-10806, 10837-
10842, 11527, 11553-11554, 11568, 11826,
12132-12133, 12174, 12242 326
(c) Aug. 9: House agrees to conference report,
pp. 13780-13787 376
(d) Aug. 13: Senate rejects conference report,
pp. 14338, 14340-14341, 14343-14347, 14349-
14350, 14352-14353, 14355-14356 391
(e) Aug. 16, 17: Senate and House agree to con-
ference report, respectively, pp. 14603-14606,
14867-14873 416
l.lc Amendments to Atomic Energy Act of 1954, July 14,
1956, P.L. 84-722, 70 Stat. 553 436
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 2431, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956) 437
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
2384, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956) 444
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 102 (1956) :
(a) June 26: Passed House, pp. 11004-11005 452
(b) July 3: Passed Senate, p. 11719 453
l.ld 1956 Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
August 6, 1956, P.L. 84-1006, §§2, 3, 4, 12, 13, 70 Stat.
1069, 1071 454
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
2530, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956) 455
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP. No.
2695, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956) 459
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 102 (1956) :
(a) July 18: Passed Senate, p. 13255 459
(b) July 26: Passed House, pp. 14888-14891 460
l.le 1957 Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
August 21, 1957, P.L. 85-162, Title II, §§201, 204, 71
Stat. 410 464
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP. No.
978, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 465
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
791, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 466
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1204,
85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 466
-------
CONTENTS xiii
Volume II
Page
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 103 (1957) :
(a) Aug. 9: Amended and passed House, p.
14261* 467
(b) Aug. 16: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
15056, 15057 467
(c) Aug. 20: Conference report submitted in Sen-
ate and agreed to, p. 15316 470
(d) Aug. 20: Conference report submitted in
House and agreed to, p. 15392 470
l.lf Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Sep-
tember 2, 1957, P.L. 85-256, §§2, 4, 71 Stat. 576 470
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
296, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 474
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
435, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 475
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 103 (1957) :
(a) July 1: Passed House, p. 10725 475
(b) Aug. 16: Passed Senate, p. 15059* 476
(c) Aug. 19: House concurred in Senate amend-
ment, p. 15183- 476
l.lg Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, September 4, 1957, P.L. 85-287, §4, 71 Stat.
613 476
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 977, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957). 476
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
790, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 477
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 103 (1957) :
(a) Aug. 26: Passed House, p. 15969 477
(b) Aug. 29: Passed Senate, p. 16496* 479
l.lh Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, July 2, 1958, P.L. 85-479, §§3, 4, 72 Stat. 277. 479
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP. No.
1849, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 480
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1654, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 496
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2051,
85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 497
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 104 (1958) :
(a) June 19: Debated and passed House, pp.
11779, 11781-11782, 11784 498
(b) June 23: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
11926-11928 505
(c) June 27: Conference report submitted in
House and agreed to, p. 12560* 510
(d) June 30: Conference report submitted in Sen-
ate and agreed to, p. 12587* 510
l.li Government Employees Training Act, July 7, 1958, P.L.
85-507, §21 (b) (1), 72 Stat. 337 510
-------
xiv CONTENTS
Page
(1) Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, S. REP.
No. 213, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957) 511
(2) Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, H.R.
REP. No. 1951, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 513
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 103 (1957), April 12: Objected to,
amended and passed Senate, pp. 5580-^5581,
5607 515
(b) Vol. 104 (1958), June 26: Amended and
passed House, p. 12384 520
(c) Vol. 104 (1958), June 27: Senate concurs with
House amendment, p. 12464.* 522
l.lj Amendment to Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
August 8, 1958, P.L. 85-602, §§2, 2 [3], 72 Stat. 525. ... 522
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1883, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 526
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 2253, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 530
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 104 (1958):
(a) July 28: Passed Senate, p. 15233 530
(b) July 29: Passed House, p. 15459 531
l.lk Amendments to Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, August 19, 1958, P.L. 85-681, §§2, 4, 6, 7, 72
Stat. 632 533
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 2272, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 535
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1944, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 548
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 104 (1958) :
(a) July 29: Passed House, p. 15488 549
.(b) Aug. 5: Passed Senate, p. 16189.* 551
l.l/ Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, August 23, 1958, P.L. 85-744, 72 Stat. 837. .. 551
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 2250, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 552
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1882, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 559
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2585,
85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958) 560
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 104 (1958) :
(a) July 29: Passed House, p. 15457* 564
(b) Aug. 5: Amended and passed Senate, p. 16188 564
(c) Aug. 14: Conference report submitted in
House and agreed to, p. 17641* 564
(d) Aug. 14: Conference report submitted in Sen-
ate and agreed to, p. 17569.* 564
l.lm Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, September 21, 1959, P.L. 86-300, §1, 73 Stat.
574 565
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
871, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959) 565
-------
CONTENTS xv
Page
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 1124, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959) 571
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 105 (1959):
(a) Sept. 9: Passed Senate, p. 18732* 574
(b) Sept. 11: Passed House, p. 19169.* 574
l.ln Amendments to Atomic Energy Act of 1954, September
23, 1959, P.L. 86-373, §1, 73 Stat. 688 574
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
870, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959) 579
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 1125, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959) 599
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 105 (1959) :
(a) Sept. 11: Passed Senate, pp. 19042-19046 ... 614
(b) Sept. 11: Passed House, pp. 19169-19170. ... 622
l.lo Amendment to Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
September 6, 1961, P.L. 87-206, §§13, 15, 75 Stat. 478. . 625
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP. No.
963, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961) 625
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
746, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961) 632
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 107 (1961) :
(a) Aug. 22: Passed House, p. 16611* 633
(b) Aug. 24: Passed Senate, p. 16957.* 633
l.lp To Amend the Tariff Act of 1930, and Certain Related
Laws, May 24, 1962, P.L. 87-456, Title III, §303 (c), 76
Stat. 78 633
(1) House Committee on Ways and Means, H.R. REP.
No. 1415, 87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962) 634
(2) Senate Committee on Finance, S. REP. No. 1317,
87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962) 635
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 108 (1968):
(a) March 14: Passed House, p. 4067 • 635
(b) April 17: Amended and passed Senate, p.
6794* 635
(c) May 9: House concurs with Senate amend-
ment, p. 8010.* 636
l.lq To Amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
August 29, 1962, P.L. 87-615, §§6, 7, 9, 12, 76 Stat. 410. 636
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1677, 87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962) 637
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 1966, 87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962) 642
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 108 (1962) :
(a) Aug. 7: Passed Senate, p. 15746 643
(b) Aug. 15: Passed House, p. 16551.* 645
l.lr To Adjust Postal Rates, October 11, 1962, P.L. 87-793,
§1001 (g), 76 Stat. 864 645
(1) House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
H.R. REP. No. 1155, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961). 646
(2) Senate Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
S. REP. No. 2120, 87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962). ... 647
-------
xvi CONTENTS
Page
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2525,
87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962) 648
(4) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2532,
87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962) 649
(5) Congressional Record, Vol. 108 (1962):
(a) Jan. 24: Passed House, p. 827* 650
(b) Sept. 27: Amended and passed Senate, p.
21014* 650
(c) Oct. 3: Senate agrees to conference report,
p. 22027* 650
(d) Oct. 4: Senate agrees to conference report,
p. 22232* 650
(e) Oct. 5: House agrees to conference report,
p. 22602 650
l.ls To Amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
August 1, 1964, P.L. 88-394, §§2, 3, 78 Stat. 376 652
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1128, 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964) 653
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 1525, 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964) 660
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 110 (1964) :
(a) July 8: Debated, passed Senate, pp. 16100-
16101 664
(b) July 21: Debated, passed House, pp. 16474,
16476, 16478-16479 667
l.lt 1964 Amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
August 26, 1964, P.L. 88-489, §§3, 5-8, 15, 16, 78 Stat.
602 670
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1325, 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964) 674
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 1702, 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964) 682
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 110 (1964) :
(a) Aug. 6: Passed Senate, p. 18434* 684
(b) Aug. 18: Passed House, p. 20145.* 684
l.lu To Amend Section 170 of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, September 29, 1965, P.L. 89-210,
§§1-5, 79 Stat. 855 684
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
650, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965) 687
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 883, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965) 711
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965) :
(a) Aug. 31: Passed Senate, p. 22281? 711
(b) Sept. 16: Debated and passed House, pp.
24035-24049 711
l.lv To Amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
October 13, 1966, P.L. 89-645, §§1 (b), 2, 3, 80 Stat. 891. 742
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
1605, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 745
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 2043, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966) 788
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 112 (1966):
(a) Sept. 22: Passed Senate, pp. 23633-23634 .... 789
-------
CONTENTS xvii
Page
(b) Sept. 30: Passed House, pp. 24635-24637. ... 792
l.lw To Amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
December 14, 1967, P.L. 90-190, §§9,10, 11, 81 Stat. 577. 798
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
743, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 800
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 911, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967) 809
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 113 (1967):
(a) Nov. 15: Passed Senate, p. 32583* 810
(b) Nov. 30: Passed House, pp. 34398-34399,
34403 810
l.lx Atomic Energy Act Amendments, December 19, 1970,
P.L. 91-560, §§1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 84 Stat. 1472, 1474 816
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 91-1470, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 817
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
91-1247, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 868
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970) :
(a) Sept. 30: Considered and passed House, pp.
H9442, H9452 869
(b) Dec. 2: Considered, amended and passed Sen-
ate, pp. S19252-S19257 895
(c) Dec. 3: House agrees to Senate amendments,
pp. H11086-H11087 908
l.ly Atomic Energy Commission Appropriation Authori-
zation, August 11, 1971, P.L. 92-84, Title II, §201, 85
Stat. 307 911
(1) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, H.R. REP.
No. 92-325, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 911
(2) Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, S. REP. No.
92-249, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) 913
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971) :
(a) July 15: Considered and passed House, pp.
H6764, H6801 914
(b) July 20: Considered and passed Senate,
amended, p. S11502* 914
(c) July 27: House concurred in Senate amend-
ments with amendment, p. H7189" 914
(d) July 31: Senate concurred in House amend-
ment, p. S12694.* 914
1.2 Public Health Service Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§203,
215, 241, 242b, 242c, 242d, 242f, 242i, 242j, 243, 244, 244a,
245, 246, 247 (1970) 915
(See, "General 1.12a-1.12ah" for legislative history)
1.3 Public Contracts, Advertisements for Proposals for Pur-
chases and Contracts for Supplies or Services for Govern-
ment Departments; Application for Government Sales and
Contracts to Sell and to Government Corporations, as
amended, 41 U.S.C. §5 (1958) 946
[Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §242c(e)]
(See, "General 1.14a-1.14c" for legislative history)
1.4 Research and Development Act, Contracts, as amended, 10
U.S.C. §§2353, 2354 (1965) 947
[Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §241 (h)]
-------
xviii CONTENTS
Volume III
Page
1.4a Armed Forces Research and Development, July 16,
1952, P.L. 82-577, §§4, 5, 66 Stat. 725 949
(1) House Committee on Armed Services, H.R. REP.
No. 548, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. (1951) 951
(2) Senate Committee on Armed Services, S. REP.
No. 936, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. (1951) 952
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 97 (1951), Aug. 2: Passed House, p.
9433 955
(b) Vol. 98 (1952), July 3: Amended and passed
Senate, pp. 9053-9054* 955
(c) Vol. 98 (1952), July 4: House concurs in
Senate amendments, pp. 9374-9375.* 955
1.4b Armed Services Procurement Amendments of 1956,
August 10, 1956, P.L. 84-1028, §§2353, 2354, 70A
Stat. 134 955
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. REP.
No. 970, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955) 957
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No.
2484, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956) 960
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 101 (1955), Aug. 1: Amended and
passed House, pp. 12718-12719* 962
(b) Vol. 102 (1956), July 23: Amended and
passed Senate, p. 13953* 962
(c) Vol. 102 (1956), July 25: House concurs in
Senate amendments, p. 14455.* 962
1.5 International Health Research Act, 22 U.S.C. §2101 (1960). 963
[Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §242f(a)]
1.5a Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, September 4, 1961,
P.L. 87-195, Pt. I, §241, 75 Stat. 433 964
(1) Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, S. REP.
No. 612, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961) 964
(2) House Committee on Foreign Affairs, H.R. REP.
No. 851, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961) 965
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1088,
87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961) 971
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 107 (1961):
(a) Aug. 16: Passed Senate, p. 16411* 972
(b) Aug. 17: Amended and passed House, p.
16501* 972
(c) Aug. 31: Senate agrees to conference re-
port, p. 17712* 972
(d) Aug. 31: House agrees to conference re-
port, p. 17862.* 972
1.5b Foreign Assistance Act of 1963, December 16, 1963,
P.L. 88-205, Pt. I, §105, 77 Stat. 382 972
(1) House Committee on Foreign Affairs, H.R. REP.
No. 646, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963) 973
-------
CONTENTS xix
Page
(2) Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, S. REP.
No. 588, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963) 973
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1006,
88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963) 975
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 109 (1963) :
(a) Aug. 23: Passed House, p. 15678* 976
(b) Oct. 24, Nov. 15: Debated, amended and
passed Senate, p. 21978 976
(c) Dec. 9: Conference report submitted in
House and agreed to, p. 23850* 977
(d) Dec. 13: Conference report agreed to in
Senate, pp. 24453-24454 977
1.6 Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Expenses; Experts
and Consultants; Individuals Serving Without Pay, as
amended, 5 U.S.C. §5703 (1966) 979
[Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §242f (b) (5), (6)]
(See, "General 1.15a-1.15d(3) (c)" for legislative history)
1.7 The Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
§3254f (1970) 980
1.7a The Resource Recovery Act of 1970, October 26, 1970,
P.L. 91-512, Title I, §104 (b), 84 Stat. 1233 981
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 91-1155, 91st Cong., 2d
Sess. (1970) 982
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-1034, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 983
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-
1579, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 985
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970) :
(a) June 23: Passed House, p. 20893* 986
(b) Aug. 3: Considered, amended and passed
Senate, p. 26942* 986
(c) Oct. 7: Senate agreed to conference report,
pp. 35511, 35516* 986
(d) Oct. 13: House agreed to conference report
p. 36587.* 986
1.8 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C.
§§4332 (2) (c), 4344(5) (1970) 987
(See, "General 1.2a-1.2a(4) (e)" for legislative history)
2. EXECUTIVE ORDERS 989
2.1 E.G. 10831, Establishment of the Federal Radiation Council,
August 14, 1959, 24 Fed. Reg. 6669 (1959) 991
3. REGULATIONS 993
EPA's Office of Radiation Programs has not promulgated any
regulations. Guidelines for Uranium Miner Exposure are found
under the "Guidelines and Reports" section. Reorganization Plan
No. 3 of 1970 transferred to EPA certain powers previously held
by the Atomic Energy Commission. EPA is currently establish-
ing a viable "interface" with the AEC. AEC regulations which
EPA is reviewing are those that deal with releases of radiation
to the environment and are currently found under Title 10 of the
-------
xx CONTENTS
Pane
Code of Federal Regulations. Chapters of particular interest
are ch. 20 ("Standards for Protection Against Radiation"), and
ch. 30 ("Rules of General Applicability to Licensing of Byprod-
uct Material") 995
4. GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 997
4.1 Background Material for the Development of Radiation Pro-
tection Standards, Staff Report of the Federal Radiation
Council 999
4.la Background Material for the Development of Radiation
Protection Standards, Report No. 1, Staff Report of the
Federal Radiation Council, May 13, 1960 999
4.1a(l) Radiation Protection Guidance for Federal
Agencies (Memorandum for the President),
Federal Radiation Council, May 18, 1960, 25
Fed. Reg. 4402 (1960) 1053
4.1b Background Material for the Development of Radiation
Protection Standards, Report No. 2, Staff Report of the
Federal Radiation Council, September 1961 1059
4.1b(l) Radiation Protection Guidance for Federal
Agencies (Memorandum for the President),
Federal Radiation Council, September 26, 1961,
26 Fed. Reg. 9057 (1961) 1087
4.1c Health Implications of Fallout From Nuclear Weapons
Testing Through 1961, Report No. 3 of the Federal
Radiation Council, May 1962 1093
4.1d Estimates and Evaluation of Fallout in the United
States from Nuclear Weapons Testing Conducted
Through 1962, Report No. 4 of the Federal Radiation
Council, May 1963 1100
4.1e Background Material for the Development of Radiation
Protection Standards, Report No. 5, Staff Report of the
Federal Radiation Council, July 1964 1134
4.1e(l) Radiation Protection Guidance for Federal
Agencies (Memorandum to the President),
Federal Radiation Council, August 22, 1964, 29
Fed. Reg. 12056 (1964) 1149
4.1f Revised Fallout Estimates for 1964-65 and Verification
of the 1963 Predictions, Report No. 6, Staff Report of
the Federal Radiation Council, May 1965 1152
4.1g Background Material for the Development of Radiation
Protection Standards, Protective Action Guides for
Strontium-89, Strontium-90 and Cesium-137, Report
No. 7, Staff Report of the Federal Radiation Council,
May 1965 1174
4.1g(l) Radiation Protection Guidance for Federal
Agencies (Memorandum to the President),
Federal Radiation Council, May 22, 1965, 30
Fed. Reg. 6953 (1965) 1212
4.1h Guidance for the Control of Radiation Hazards in Ura-
nium Mining, Report No. 8, Staff Report of the Federal
Radiation Council, September 1967 1221
-------
CONTENTS xxi
Page
4.1h(l) Radiation Protection Guidance for Federal
Agencies (Memorandum to the President),
Federal Radiation Council, August 1, 1967, 32
Fed. Reg. 11183 (1967) 1273
4.2 Selected Reports 1277
4.2a Pathological Effects of Thyroid Irradiation, Federal
Radiation Council, Revised Report—December 1966. 1277
4.2b Radiation Exposure of Uranium Miners, Report of an
Advisory Committee from the Division of Medical
Sciences: National Academy of Sciences—National
Research Council—National Academy of Engineering,
Federal Radiation Council, August 1968 1292
4.2c Implication to Man of Irradiation by Internally De-
posited Strontium-89, Strontium-90, and Cesium-137,
Report of an Advisory Committee from the Division of
Medical Sciences: National Academy of Sciences—
National Research Council, Federal Radiation Council,
December 1964 1324
4.2d An Estimate of Radiation Doses Received by Individ-
uals Living in the Vicinity of a Nuclear Reprocessing
Plant in 1968, Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, May 1970 1362
4.2e Liquid Waste Effluents from a Nuclear Fuel Reprocess-
ing Plant, Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, November 1970 1380
4.3 Uranium Miners Exposure Guidelines 1419
4.3a Radiation Protection Guidelines, Federal Radiation
Council, January 15, 1969, 34 Fed. Reg. 576 (1969). .. 1419
4.3b Radiation Protection Guidelines, Federal Radiation
Council, December 18, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 19218 (1970). 1420
4.3c Radiation Protection Guidance, Underground Mining
of Uranium Ore, Environmental Protection Agency,
May 25, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 9480 (1971) 1422
4.3d Radiation Protection Guidance, Underground Mining
of Uranium Ore, Environmental Protection Agency,
July 9, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 1292 (1971) T 1430
-------
-------
Statutes
and
Legislative
History
-------
-------
1.1 1954 ATOMIC ENERGY ACT, AS AMENDED
42 U.S.C. §§2013(d), 2021, 2051, 2073(b), (e), 2092, 2093, 2099, 2111, 2112,
2132, 2133, 2134, 2139, 2153, 2201, 2210, (1970)
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954
§2013. Purpose of chapter
It is the purpose of this chapter to effectuate the policies set
forth above by providing for—
(a) a program of conducting, assisting1, and fostering research
and development in order to encourage maximum scientific and
industrial progress;
(b) a program for the dissemination of unclassified scientific
and technical information and for the control, dissemination, and
declassification of Restricted Data, subject to appropriate safe-
guards, so as to encourage scientific and industrial progress;
(c) a program for Government control of the possession, use,
and production of atomic energy and special nuclear material,
whether owned by the Government or others, so directed as to
make the maximum contribution to the common defense and se-
curity and the national welfare, and to provide continued as-
surance of the Government's ability to enter into and enforce
agreements with nations or groups of nations for the control of
special nuclear materials and atomic weapons;
(d) a program to encourage widespread participation in the
development and utilization of atomic energy for peaceful pur-
poses to the maximum extent consistent with the common defense
and security and with the health and safety of the public;
(e) a program of international cooperation to promote the
common defense and security and to make available to cooperating
nations the benefits of peaceful applications of atomic energy as
widely as expanding technology and considerations of the common
defense and security will permit; and
(f) a program of administration which will be consistent with
the foregoing policies and programs, with international arrange-
ments, and with agreements for cooperation, which will enable
the Congress to be currently informed so as to take further legis-
lative action as may be appropriate.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §3, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 922, and amended Aug. 26, 1964, Pub.L. 88-489, §3, 78 Stat.
602.
§2021. Cooperation with States—Purpose
(a) It is the purpose of this section—
(1) to recognize the interests of the States in the peaceful
uses of atomic energy, and to clarify the respective responsi-
bilities under this chapter of the States and the Commission
-------
4 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
with respect to the regulation of byproduct, source, and spe-
cial nuclear materials;
(2) to recognize the need, and establish programs for, co-
operation between the States and the Commission with respect
to control of radiation hazards associated with use of such
materials;
(3) to promote an orderly regulatory pattern between the
Commission and State governments with respect to nuclear
development and use and regulation of byproduct, source, and
special nuclear materials;
(4) to establish procedures and criteria for discontinuance
of certain of the Commission's regulatory responsibilities
with respect to byproduct, source, and special nuclear ma-
terials, and the assumption thereof by the States;
(5) to provide for coordination of the development of
radiation standards for the guidance of Federal agencies and
cooperation with the States; and
(6) to recognize that, as the States improve their capabili-
ties to regulate effectively such materials, additional legisla-
tion may be desirable.
AGREEMENTS WITH STATES
(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, the
Commission is authorized to enter into agreements with the Gov-
ernor of any State providing for discontinuance of the regulatory
authority of the Commission under subchapters V, VI, and VII
of this chapter, and section 2201 of this title, with respect to any
one or more of the following materials within the State—
(1) byproduct materials;
(2) source materials;
(3) special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to
form a critical mass.
During the duration of such an agreement it is recognized that
the State shall have authority to regulate the materials covered by
the agreement for the protection of the public health and safety
from radiation hazards.
COMMISSION REGULATION OF CERTAIN ACTIVITIES
(c) No agreement entered into pursuant to subsection (b) of
this section shall provide for discontinuance of any authority and
the Commission shall retain authority and responsibility with re-
spect to regulation of—
(1) the construction and operation of any production or
utilization facility;
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 5
(2) the export from or import into the United States of
byproduct, source, or special nuclear material, or of any
production or utilization facility;
(3) the disposal into the ocean or sea of byproduct, source,
or special nuclear waste materials as denned in regulations or
orders of the Commission;
(4) the disposal of such other byproduct, source, or special
nuclear material as the Commission determines by regulation
or order should, because of the hazards or potential hazards
thereof, not be so disposed of without a license from the
Commission.
Notwithstanding any agreement between the Commission and any
State pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, the Commission is
authorized by rule, regulation, or order to require that the manu-
facturer, processor, or producer of any equipment, device, com-
modity, or other product containing source, byproduct, or special
nuclear material shall not transfer possession or control of such
product except pursuant to a license issued by the Commission.
CONDITIONS
(d) The Commission shall enter into an agreement under sub-
section (b) of this section with any State if—
(1) The Governor of that State certifies that the State has
a program for the control of radiation hazards adequate to
protect the public health and safety with respect to the mate-
rials within the State covered by the proposed agreement, and
that the State desires to assume regulatory responsibility for
such materials; and
(2) the Commission finds that the State program is com-
patible with the Commission's program for the regulation of
such materials, and that the State program is adequate to
protect the public health and safety with respect to the mate-
rials covered by the proposed agreement.
PUBLICATION IN FEDERAL REGISTER; COMMENT OF INTERESTED
PERSONS
(e) (1) Before any agreement under subsection (b) of this
section is signed by the Commission, the terms of the proposed
agreement and of proposed exemptions pursuant to subsection (f)
of this section shall be published once each week for four consecu-
tive weeks in the Federal Register; and such opportunity for
comment by interested persons on the proposed agreement and
exemptions shall be allowed as the Commission determines by
regulation or order to be appropriate.
-------
6 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
(2) Each proposed agreement shall include the proposed effec-
tive date of such proposed agreement or exemptions. The agree-
ment and exemptions shall be published in the Federal Register
within thirty days after signature by the Commission and the
Governor.
EXEMPTIONS
(f) The Commission is authorized and directed, by regulation
or order, to grant such exemptions from the licensing require-
ments contained in subchapters V, VI, and VII of this chapter,
and from its regulations applicable to licensees as the Commission
finds necessary or appropriate to carry out any agreement entered
into pursuant to subsection (b) of this section.
COMPATIBLE RADIATION STANDARDS
(g) The Commission is authorized and directed to cooperate
with the States in the formulation of standards for protection
against hazards of radiation to assure that State and Commission
programs for protection against hazards of radiation will be co-
ordinated and compatible.
FEDERAL RADIATION COUNCIL; REPRESENTATIVE OP PRESIDENT;
CHAIRMAN; CONSULTATIVE, ADVISORY AND MISCELLANEOUS
FUNCTIONS
(h) There is established a Federal Radiation Council, consist-
ing of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, the Chair-
man of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Labor, or their des-
ignees, and such other members as shall be appointed by the
President. The Council shall consult qualified scientists and
experts in radiation matters, including the President of the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, the Chairman of the National Com-
mittee on Radiation Protection and Measurement, and qualified
experts in the field of biology and medicine and in the field of
health physics. The Special Assistant to the President for Science
and Technology, or his designee, is authorized to attend meetings,
participate in the deliberations of, and to advise the Council. The
Chairman of the Council shall be designated by the President,
from time to time, from among the members of the Council. The
Council shall advise the President with respect to radiation mat-
ters, directly or indirectly affecting health, including guidance for
all Federal agencies in the formulation of radiation standards
and in the establishment and execution of programs of coopera-
tion with States. The Council shall also perform such other func-
tions as the President may assign to it by Executive order.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 7
INSPECTIONS AND OTHER FUNCTIONS; TRAINING AND OTHER
ASSISTANCE
(i) The Commission in carrying out its licensing and regulatory
responsibilities under this chapter is authorized to enter into
agreements with any State, or group of States, to perform inspec-
tions or other functions on a cooperative basis as the Commission
deems appropriate. The Commission is also authorized to provide
training, with or without charge, to employees of, and such other
assistance to, any State or political subdivision thereof or group
of States as the Commission deems appropriate. Any such pro-
vision or assistance by the Commission shall take into account the
additional expenses that may be incurred by a State as a con-
sequence of the State's entering into an agreement with the Com-
mission pursuant to subsection (b) of this section.
RESERVE POWER TO TERMINATE OR SUSPEND AGREEMENTS
(j) The Commission, upon its own initiative after reasonable
notice and opportunity for hearing to the State with which an
agreement under subsection (b) of this section has become effec-
tive, or upon request of the Governor of such State, may terminate
or suspend its agreement with the State and reassert the licensing
and regulatory authority vested in it under this chapter, if the
Commission finds that such termination or suspension is required
to protect the public health and safety.
STATE REGULATION OF ACTIVITIES FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES
(k) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the
authority of any State or local agency to regulate activities for
purposes other than protection against radiation hazards.
COMMISSION REGULATED ACTIVITIES; NOTICE OF FILING; HEARING
(1) With respect to each application for Commission license
authorizing an activity as to which the Commission's authority is
continued pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the Commis-
sion shall give prompt notice to the State or Str-tes in which the
activity will be conducted of the filing of the Ik'ense application;
and shall afford reasonable opportunity for f.tat* representatives
to offer evidence, interrogate witnesses, and advise the Commis-
sion as to the application without requiring; such representatives
to take a position for or against the grafting; of {he application.
LIMITATION OF AGREEMENTS ^ND EXEMPTIONS
(m) No agreement entered into uirler subsection (b) of this
section, and no exemption granted pursuant to subsection (f) of
-------
8 LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
this section, shall affect the authority of the Commission under
section 2201 (b) or (i) of this title to issue rules, regulations, or
orders to protect the common defense and security, to protect
restricted data or to guard against the loss or diversion of special
nuclear material. For purposes of section 2201 (i) of this title,
activities covered by exemptions granted pursuant to subsection
(f) of this section shall be deemed to constitute activities au-
thorized pursuant to this chapter; and special nuclear material
acquired by any person pursuant to such an exemption shall be
deemed to have been acquired pursuant to section 2073 of this
title.
DEFINITION
(n) As used in this section, the term "State" means any State,
Territory, or possession of the United States, the Canal Zone,
Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §274, as added Sept. 23, 1959, Pub.L. 86-373,
§1, 73 Stat. 688.
SUBCHAPTER III.—RESEARCH
§2051. Research assistance; fields covered; conditions
(a) The Commission is directed to exercise its powers in such
manner as to insure the continued conduct of research and devel-
opment and training activities in the fields specified below, by
private or public institutions or persons, and to assist in the ac-
quisition of an ever-expanding fund of theoretical and practical
knowledge in such fields. To this end the Commission is author-
ized and directed to make arrangements (including contracts,
agreements and loans) for the conduct of research and develop-
ment activities relating to—
(1) nuclear processes;
(2) the theory and production of atomic energy, including
processes, materials, and devices related to such production;
(3) utilization of special nuclear material and radioactive
material for medical, biological, agricultural, health, or mil-
itary purposes;
(4) utilization of special nuclear material, atomic energy,
and radioactive material and processes entailed in the utiliza-
tion or production of atomic energy or such material for all
other purposes, including industrial or commercial uses, the
generation of usable energy, and the demonstration of ad-
vances in the commercial or industrial application of atomic
energy;
(5) the protection of health and the promotion of safety
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 9
during research and production activities; and
(6) the preservation and enhancement of a viable environ-
ment by developing more efficient methods to meet the Na-
tion's energy needs.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §31, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 927, and amended Aug. 6, 1956, c. 1015, §§2, 3, 70 Stat. 1069.
Amended Dec. 19, 1970, Pub.L. 91-560, §1, 84 Stat. 1472. Amended
Aug. 11, 1971, Pub.L. 92-84, Title II, §201 (a), 85 Stat. 307.
§2073. Domestic distribution of special nuclear material—Licenses
MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR LICENSE
(a) The Commission is authorized (i) to issue licenses to trans-
fer or receive in interstate commerce, transfer, deliver, acquire,
possess, own, receive possession of or title to, import, or export
under the terms of an agreement for cooperation arranged pur-
suant to section 2153 of this title, special nuclear material, (ii) to
make special nuclear material available for the period of the
license, and, (iii) to distribute special nuclear material within the
United States to qualified applicants requesting such material—
(1) for the conduct of research and development activities
of the types specified in section 2051 of this title;
(2) for use in the conduct of research and development
activities or in medical therapy under a license issued pursu-
ant to section 2134 of this title;
(3) for use under a license issued pursuant to section 2133
of this title;
(4) for such other uses as the Commission determines to
be appropriate to carry out the purposes of this chapter.
MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR LICENSES
(b) The Commission shall establish, by rule, minimum criteria
for the issuance of specific or general licenses for the distribution
of special nuclear material depending upon the degree of impor-
tance to the common defense and security or to the health and
safety of the public of—
(1) the physical characteristics of the special nuclear ma-
terial to be distributed;
(2) the quantities of special nuclear material to be dis-
tributed; and
(3) the intended use of the special nuclear material to be
distributed.
-------
10 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
MANNER OF DISTRIBUTION; CHARGES FOR MATERIAL SOLD;
AGREEMENTS; CHARGES FOR MATERIAL LEASED
(c) (1) The Commission may distribute special nuclear mate-
rial licensed under this section by sale, lease, lease with option to
buy, grant, or through the provision of production or enrichment
services: Provided, however, That unless otherwise authorized by
law, the Commission shall not after December 31, 1970, distribute
special nuclear material except by sale or through the provision
of production or enrichment services to any person who possesses
or operates a utilization facility under a license issued pursuant
to section 2133 or 2134 (b) of this title for use in the course of
activities under such license; nor shall the Commission permit any
such person after June 30, 1973, to continue leasing for use in the
course of such activities special nuclear material previously leased
to such person by the Commission.
(2) The Commission shall establish reasonable sales prices for
the special nuclear material licensed and distributed by sale under
this section. Such sales prices shall be established on a nondis-
criminatory basis which, in the opinion of the Commission, will
provide reasonable compensation to the Government for such spe-
cial nuclear material.
(3) The Commission is authorized to enter into agreements
with licensees for such period of time as the Commission may deem
necessary or desirable to distribute to such licensees such quan-
tities of special nuclear material as may be necessary for the con-
duct of the licensed activity. In such agreements, the Commission
may agree to repurchase any special nuclear material licensed
and distributed by sale which is not consumed in the course of the
licensed activity, or any uranium remaining after irradiation of
such special nuclear material, at a repurchase price not to exceed
the Commission's sale price for comparable special nuclear mate-
rial or uranium in effect at the time of delivery of such material
to the Commission.
(4) The Commission may make a reasonable charge, deter-
mined pursuant to this section, for the use of special nuclear
material licensed and distributed by lease under subsection (a)
(1), (2) or (4) of this section and shall make a reasonable
charge determined pursuant to this section for the use of special
nuclear material licensed and distributed by lease under sub-
section (a) (3) of this section. The Commission shall establish
criteria in writing for the determination of whether special
nuclear material will be distributed by grant and for the deter-
mination of whether a charge will be made for the use of special
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 11
nuclear material licensed and distributed by lease under subsection
(a) (1), (2) or (4) of this section, considering, among other
things, whether the licensee is a nonprofit or eleemosynary institu-
tion and the purposes for which the special nuclear material will
be used.
DETERMINATION OF CHARGES
(d) In determining the reasonable charge to be made by the
Commission for the use of special nuclear material distributed
by lease to licensees of utilization or production facilities licensed
pursuant to section 2133 or 2134 of this title, in addition to con-
sideration of the cost thereof, the Commission shall take into
consideration—
(1) the use to be made of the special nuclear material;
(2) the extent to which the use of the special nuclear
material will advance the development of the peaceful uses
of atomic energy;
(3) the energy value of the special nuclear material in the
particular use for which the license is issued;
(4) whether the special nuclear material is to be used in
facilities licensed pursuant to section 2133 or 2134 of this
title. In this respect, the Commission shall, insofar as prac-
ticable, make uniform, nondiscriminatory charges for the use
of special nuclear material distributed to facilities licensed
pursuant to section 2133 of this title; and
(5) with respect to special nuclear material consumed in
a facility licensed pursuant to section 2133 of this title, the
Commission shall make a further charge equivalent to the
sale price for similar special nuclear material established by
the Commission in accordance with subsection (c) (2) of this
section, and the Commission may make such a charge with
respect to such material consumed in a facility licensed
pursuant to section 2134 of this title.
LICENSE CONDITIONS
(e) Each license issued pursuant to this section shall contain
and be subject to the following conditions—
(1) Repealed. Pub.L. 88-489, §8, Aug. 26, 1964, 78 Stat.
604.
(2) no right to the special nuclear material shall be con-
ferred by the license except as denned by the license;
(3) neither the license nor any right under the license
shall be assigned or otherwise transferred in violation of the
provisions of this chapter;
-------
12 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
(4) all special nuclear material shall be subject to the right
of recapture or control reserved by section 2138 of this title
and to all other provisions of this chapter;
(5) no special nuclear material may be used in any utiliza-
tion or production facility except in accordance with the
provisions of this chapter;
(6) special nuclear material shall be distributed only on
terms, as may be established by rule of the Commission, such
that no user will be permitted to construct an atomic weapon;
(7) special nuclear material shall be distributed only pur-
suant to such safety standards as may be established by rule
of the Commission to protect health and to minimize danger
to life or property; and
(8) except to the extent that the indemnification and lim-
itation of liability provisions of section 2210 of this title
apply, the licensee will hold the United States and the Com-
mission harmless from any damages resulting from the use or
possession of special nuclear material by the licensee.
DISTRIBUTION FOR INDEPENDENT RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES
(f) The Commission is directed to distribute within the United
States sufficient special nuclear material to permit the conduct of
widespread independent research and development activities to the
maximum extent practicable. In the event that applications for
special nuclear material exceed the amount available for distribu-
tion, preference shall be given to those activities which are most
likely, in the opinion of the Commission, to contribute to basic
research, to the development of peacetime uses of atomic energy,
or to the economic and military strength of the Nation.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §53, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 930, and amended Sept. 2, 1957, Pub.L. 85-256, §2, 71 Stat.
576; Aug. 19, 1958, Pub.L. 85-681, §§1, 2, 72 Stat. 632; Aug. 26,
1964, Pub.L. 88-489, §§5-8, 78 Stat. 603, 604; Dec. 14, 1967,
Pub.L. 90-190, §§9, 10, 81 Stat. 577.
§2092. License requirements for transfers
Unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by the
Commission, which the Commission is authorized to issue, no per-
son may transfer or receive in interstate commerce, transfer, de-
liver, receive possession of or title to, or import into or export from
the United States any source material after removal from its place
of deposit in nature, except that licenses shall not be required for
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 13
quantities of source material which, in the opinion of the Commis-
sion, are unimportant.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §62, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 932.
§2093. Domestic distribution of source material—License
(a) The Commission is authorized to issue licenses for and to
distribute source material within the United States to qualified
applicants requesting such material—
(1) for the conduct of research and development activities
of the types specified in section 2051 of this title;
(2) for use in the conduct of research and development
activities or in medical therapy under a license issued pur-
suant to section 2134 of this title;
(3) for use under a license issued pursuant to section 2133
of this title; or
(4) for any other use approved by the Commission as an
aid to science or industry.
MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR LICENSES
(b) The Commission shall establish, by rule, minimum criteria
for the issuance of specific or general licenses for the distribution
of source material depending upon the degree of importance to the
common defense and security or to the health and safety of the
public of—
(1) the physical characteristics of the source material to
be distributed;
(2) the quantities of source material to be distributed; and
(3) the intended use of the source material to be
distributed.
DETERMINATION OF CHARGES
(c) The Commission may make a reasonable charge determined
pursuant to section 2201 (m) of this title for the source material
licensed and distributed under subsection (a) (1), (a) (2), or (a)
(4)'of this section and shall make a reasonable charge determined
pursuant to section 2201 (m) of this title, for the source material
licensed and distributed under subsection (a) (3) of this section.
The Commission shall establish criteria in writing for the deter-
mination of whether a charge will be made for the source material
licensed and distributed under subsection (a) (1), (a) (2), or
(a) (4) of this section, considering, among other things, whether
the licensee is a nonprofit or eleemosynary institution and the
purposes for which the source material will be used.
-------
14 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §63, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1,
68 Stat. 933.
§2099. Prohibitions against issuance of license
The Commission shall not license any person to transfer or
deliver, receive possession of or title to, or import into or export
from the United States any source material if, in the opinion of
the Commission, the issuance of a license to such person for such
purpose would be inimical to the common defense and security or
the health and safety of the public.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §69, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat 934.
SUBCHAPTER VII.—BYPRODUCT MATERIALS
§2111. Domestic distribution; license; price limitations
No person may transfer or receive in interstate commerce,
manufacture, produce, transfer, acquire, own, possess, import, or
export any byproduct material, except to the extent authorized by
this section or by section 2112 of this title. The Commission is
authorized to issue general or specific licenses to applicants seek-
ing to use byproduct material for research or development pur-
poses, for medical therapy, industrial uses, agricultural uses, or
such other useful applications as may be developed. The Commis-
sion may distribute, sell, loan, or lease such byproduct material
as it owns to licensees with or without charge: Provided, hoivever,
That, for byproduct material to be distributed by the Commission
for a charge, the Commission shall establish prices on such equi-
table basis as, in the opinion of the Commission, (a) will provide
reasonable compensation to the Government for such material,
(b) will not discourage the use of such material or the develop-
ment of sources of supply of such material independent of the
Commission, and (c) will encourage research and development.
In distributing such material, the Commission shall give prefer-
ence to applicants proposing to use such material either in the
conduct of research and development or in medical therapy.
Licensees of the Commission may distribute byproduct material
only to applicants therefor who are licensed by the Commission
to receive such byproduct material. The Commission shall not
permit the distribution of any byproduct material to any licensee,
and shall recall or order the recall of any distributed material
from any licensee, who is not equipped to observe or who fails
to observe such safety standards to protect health as may be estab-
lished by the Commission or who uses such material in violation
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 15
of law or regulation of the Commission or in a manner other
than as disclosed in the application therefor or approved by the
Commission. The Commission is authorized to establish classes of
byproduct material and to exempt certain classes or quantities of
material or kinds of uses or users from the requirements for a
license set forth in this section when it makes a finding that the
exemption of such classes or quantities of such material or such
kinds of uses or users will not constitute an unreasonable risk to
the common defense and security and to the health and safety of
the public.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §81, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 935.
§2112. Foreign distribution of byproduct material—Cooperation with
other Nations
(a) The Commission is authorized to cooperate with any nation
by distributing byproduct material, and to distribute byproduct
material, pursuant to the terms of an agreement for cooperation
to which such nation is party and which is made in accordance
with section 2153 of this title.
DISTRIBUTION TO INDIVIDUALS
(b) The Commission is also authorized to distribute byproduct
material to any person outside the United States upon application
therefor by such person and demand such charge for such material
as would be charged for the material if it were distributed within
the United States: Provided, hoivever, That the Commission shall
not distribute any such material to any person under this section
if, in its opinion, such distribution would be inimical to the com-
mon defense and security: And provided further, That the Com-
mission may require such reports regarding the use of material
distributed pursuant to the provisions of this section as it deems
necessary.
DISTRIBUTOR'S LICENSE
(c) The Commission is authorized to license others to distribute
byproduct material to any person outside the United States under
the same conditions, except as to charges, as would be applicable
if the material were distributed by the Commission.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §82, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 935.
-------
16 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
§2132. Utilization and production facilities for industrial or com-
mercial purposes
(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this sec-
tion, or otherwise specifically authorized by law, any license here-
after issued for a utilization or production facility for industrial
or commercial purposes shall be issued pursuant to section 2133
of this title.
(b) Any license hereafter issued for a utilization or production
facility for industrial or commercial purposes, the construction or
operation of which was licensed pursuant to section 2134 (b) of
this title prior to enactment into law of this subsection, shall be
issued under section 2134(b) of this title.
(c) Any license for a utilization or production facility for
industrial or commercial purposes constructed or operated under
an arrangement with the Commission entered into under the
Cooperative Power Reactor Demonstration Program shall, except
as otherwise specifically required by applicable law, be issued
under section 2134 (b) of this title.
As amended Dec. 19, 1970, Pub.L. 91-560, §3, 84 Stat. 1472.
§2133. Commercial licenses—Conditions
(a) The Commission is authorized to issue licenses to persons
applying therefor to transfer or receive in interstate commerce,
manufacture, produce, transfer, acquire, possess, use, import, or
export under the terms of an agreement for cooperation arranged
pursuant to section 2153 of this title, utilization or production
facilities for industrial or commercial purposes. Such licenses
shall be issued in accordance with the provisions of subchapter
XV of this chapter and subject to such conditions as the Com-
mission may by rule or regulation establish to effectuate the
purposes and provisions of this chapter.
NONEXCLUSIVE BASIS
(b) The Commission shall issue such licenses on a nonexclusive
basis to persons applying therefor (1) whose proposed activities
will serve a useful purpose proportionate to the quantities of spe-
cial nuclear material or source material to be utilized; (2) who
are equipped to observe and who agree to observe such safety
standards to protect health and to minimize danger to life or
property as the Commission may by rule establish; and (3) who
agree to make available to the Commission such technical informa-
tion and data concerning activities under such licenses as the
Commission may determine necessary to promote the common
defense and security and to protect the health and safety of the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 17
public. All such information may be used by the Commission only
for the purposes of the common defense and security and to protect
the health and safety of the public.
LICENSE PERIOD
(c) Each such license shall be issued for a specified period, as
determined by the Commission, depending on the type of activity
to be licensed, but not exceeding forty years, and may be renewed
upon the expiration of such period.
LIMITATIONS
(d) No license under this section may be given to any person
for activities which are not under or within the jurisdiction of the
United States, except for the export of production or utilization
facilities under terms of an agreement for cooperation arranged
pursuant to section 2153 of this title, or except under the provi-
sions of section 2139 of this title. No license may be issued to an
alien or any corporation or other entity if the Commission knows
or has reason to believe it is owned, controlled, or dominated by
an alien, a foreign corporation, or a foreign government. In any
event, no license may be issued to any person within the United
States if, in the opinion of the Commission, the issuance of a
license to such person would be inimical to the common defense
and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §103, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 936, Aug. 6, 1956, c. 1015, §§12, 13, 70 Stat. 1071, and
amended Dec. 19, 1970, Pub.L. 91-560, §4, 84 Stat. 1472.
§2134. Medical therapy, research, and development licenses;
limitations
(a) The Commission is authorized to issue licenses to persons
applying therefor for utilization facilities for use in medical
therapy. In issuing such licenses the Commission is directed to
permit the widest amount of effective medical therapy possible
with the amount of special nuclear material available for such
purposes and to impose the minimum amount of regulation con-
sistent with its obligations under this chapter to promote the com-
mon defense and security and to protect the health and safety of
the public.
(b) As provided for in subsection (b) or (c) of section 2132 of
this title, or where specifically authorized by law, the Commission
is authorized to issue licenses under this subsection to persons
applying therefor for utilization and production facilities for
-------
18 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
industrial and commercial purposes. In issuing licenses under this
subsection, the Commission shall impose the minimum amount of
such regulations and terms of license as will permit the Commis-
sion to fulfill its obligations under this chapter.
(c) The Commission is authorized to issue licenses to persons
applying therefor for utilization and production facilities useful
in the conduct of research and development activities of the types
specified in section 2051 of this title and which are not facilities of
the type specified in subsection (b) of this section. The Commis-
sion is directed to impose only such minimum amount of regulation
of the licensee as the Commission finds will permit the Commission
to fulfill its obligations under this chapter to promote the common
defense and security and to protect the health and safety of the
public and will permit the conduct of widespread and diverse
research and development.
(d) No license under this section may be given to any person
for activities which are not under or within the jurisdiction of the
United States, except for the export of production or utilization
facilities under terms of an agreement for cooperation arranged
pursuant to section 2153 of this title or except under the provi-
sions of section 2139 of this title. No license may be issued to any
corporation or other entity if the Commission knows or has rea-
son to believe it is owned, controlled, or dominated by an alien, a
foreign corporation, or a foreign government. In any event, no
license may be issued to any person within the United States if,
in the opinion of the Commission, the issuance of a license to such
person would be inimical to the common defense and security or to
the health and safety of the public.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §104, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1,
68 Stat, 937, and amended Dec. 19, 1970, Pub.L. 91-560, §5, 84
Stat. 1472.
§2139. General licenses; export licenses
With respect to those utilization and production facilities which
are so determined by the Commission pursuant to section 2014 (v)
(2) or 2014 (cc) (2) of this title the Commission may (a) issue
general licenses for activities required to be licensed under section
2131 of this title, if the Commission determines in writing that
such general licensing will not constitute an unreasonable risk to
the common defense and security, and (b) issue licenses for the
export of such facilities, if the Commission determines in writing
that each export will not constitute an unreasonable risk to the
common defense and security.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §109, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 19
68 Stat. 939, and amended Aug. 29, 1962, Pub.L. 87-615, §9, 76
Stat. 411; Oct. 13, 1966, Pub.L. 89-645, §l(b), 80 Stat. 891.
§2153. Cooperation with other nations
No cooperation with any nation or regional defense organiza-
tion pursuant to sections 2073, 2074, 2077, 2094, 2112, 2121, 2133,
2134, or 2164 of this title shall be undertaken until—
SUBMISSION OF AGREEMENTS TO PRESIDENT
(a) the Commission or, in the case of those agreements
for cooperation arranged pursuant to section 2121 (c) or
2164 (b) of this title which are to be implemented by the
Department of Defense, the Department of Defense has sub-
mitted to the President the proposed agreement for coopera-
tion, together with its recommendations thereon, which
proposed agreement shall include (1) the terms, conditions,
duration, nature, and scope of the cooperation; (2) a guar-
anty by the cooperating party that security safeguards and
standards as set forth in the agreement for cooperation will
be maintained; (3) except in the case of those agreements
for cooperation arranged pursuant to section 2121 (c) of this
title a guaranty by the cooperating party that any material
to be transferred pursuant to such agreement will not be used
for atomic weapons, or for research on or development of
atomic weapons or for any other military purpose; and (4) a
guaranty by the cooperating party that any material or any
Restricted Data to be transferred pursuant to the agreement
for cooperation will not be transferred to unauthorized per-
sons or beyond the jurisdiction of the cooperating party,
except as specified in the agreement for cooperation;
PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL AND AUTHORIZATION
(b) the President has approved and authorized the execu-
tion of the proposed agreement for cooperation, and has made
a determination in writing that the performance of the pro-
posed agreement will promote and will not constitute an
unreasonable risk to the common defense and security;
SUBMISSION TO JOINT COMMITTEE; WAITING PERIOD
(c) the proposed agreement for cooperation, together with
the approval and the determination of the President, has been
submitted to the Joint Committee and a period of thirty days
has elapsed while Congress is in session (in computing such
thirty days, there shall be excluded the days on which either
-------
20 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
House is not in session because of an adjournment of more
than three days): Provided, however, That the Joint Com-
mittee, after having received such agreement for cooperation,
may by resolution in writing waive the conditions of all or
any portion of such thirty-day period; and
SUBMISSION TO THE CONGRESS
(d) the proposed agreement for cooperation, together with
the approval and determination of the President, if arranged
pursuant to section 2121 (c), 2164 (b), or 2164 (c) of this title,
has been submitted to the Congress and referred to the Joint
Committee and a period of sixty days has elapsed while Con-
gress is in session, but any such proposed agreement for
cooperation shall not become effective if during such sixty-
day period the Congress passes a concurrent resolution
stating in substance that it does not favor the proposed
agreement for cooperation: Provided, however, That during
the Eighty-fifth Congress such period shall be thirty days (in
computing such sixty days, or thirty days, as the case may
be, there shall be excluded the days on which either House is
not in session because of an adjournment of more than three
days).
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §123, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1,
68 Stat. 940, and amended July 2, 1958, Pub.L. 85-479, §§3, 4, 72
Stat. 277; Aug. 19, 1958, Pub.L. 85-681, §4, 72 Stat. 632; Aug. 26,
1964, Pub.L. 88-489, §15, 78 Stat. 606.
SUBCHAPTER XIII.—GENERAL AUTHORITY OF COMMISSION
§2201. General duties of Commission
In the performance of its functions the Commission is au-
thorized to—
ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY BOARDS
(a) establish advisory boards to advise with and make
recommendations to the Commission on legislation, policies,
administration, research, and other matters, provided that the
Commission issues regulations setting forth the scope, pro-
cedure, and limitations of the authority of each such board;
STANDARDS GOVERNING USE AND POSSESSION OF MATERIAL
(b) establish by rule, regulation, or order, such standards
and instructions to govern the possession and use of special
nuclear material, source material, and byproduct material as
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 21
the Commission may deem necessary or desirable to promote
the common defense and security or to protect health or to
minimize danger to life or property;
STUDIES AND INVESTIGATIONS
(c) make such studies and investigations, obtain such in-
formation, and hold such meetings or hearings as the Com-
mission may deem necessary or proper to assist it in
exercising any authority provided in this chapter, or in the ad-
ministration or enforcement of this chapter, or any regula-
tions or orders issued thereunder. For such purposes the
Commission is authorized to administer oaths and affirma-
tions, and by subpena to require any person to appear and
testify, or to appear and produce documents, or both, at any
designated place. Witnesses subpenaed under this subsection
shall be paid the same fees and mileage as are paid witnesses
in the district courts of the United States;
EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL
(d) appoint and fix the compensation of such officers and
employees as may be necessary to carry out the functions of
the Commission. Such officers and employees shall be ap-
pointed in accordance with the civil-service laws and their
compensation fixed in accordance with the Classification Act
of 1949, as amended, except that, to the extent the Commis-
sion deems such action necessary to the discharge of its
responsibilities, personnel may be employed and their com-
pensation fixed without regard to such laws: Provided, how-
ever, That no officer or employee (except such officers and
employees whose compensation is fixed by law, and scientific
and technical personnel up to a limit of the highest rate of
grade 18 of the General Schedule of the Classification Act of
1949, as amended) whose position would be subject to the
Classification Act of 1949, as amended, if such Act were ap-
plicable to such position, shall be paid a salary at a rate in
excess of the rate payable under such Act for positions of
equivalent difficulty or responsibility. Such rates of compen-
sation may be adopted by the Commission as may be au-
thorized by the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, as of
the same date such rates are authorized for positions subject
to such Act. The Commission shall make adequate provision
for administrative review of any determination to dismiss
any employee;
-------
22 LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
ACQUISITION OF MATERIAL, PROPERTY, ETC.; NEGOTIATION OF
COMMERCIAL LEASES
(e) acquire such material, property, equipment, and facili-
ties, establish or construct such buildings and facilities, and
modify such buildings and facilities from time to time, as
it may deem necessary, and construct, acquire, provide, or
arrange for such facilities and services (at project sites
where such facilities and services are not available) for the
housing, health, safety, welfare, and recreation of personnel
employed by the Commission as it may deem necessary, sub-
ject to the provisions of section 2224 of this title: Provided,
however, That in the communities owned by the Commission,
the Commission is authorized to grant privileges, leases and
permits upon adjusted terms which (at the time of the initial
grant of any privilege grant, lease, or permit, or renewal
thereof, or in order to avoid inequities or undue hardship
prior to the sale by the United States of property affected
by such grant) are fair and reasonable to responsible per-
sons to operate commercial businesses without advertising
and without advertising l and without securing competitive
bids, but taking into consideration, in addition to the price,
and among other things (1) the quality and type of services
required by the residents of the community, (2) the experi-
ence of each concession applicant in the community and its
surrounding area, (3) the ability of the concession applicant
to meet the needs of the community, and (4) the contribution
the concession applicant has made or will make to the other
activities and general welfare of the community;
UTILIZATION OF OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES
(f) with the consent of the agency concerned, utilize or
employ the services or personnel of any Government agency
or any State or local government, or voluntary or uncom-
pensated personnel, to perform such functions on its behalf
as may appear desirable;
ACQUISITION OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY
(g) acquire, purchase, lease, and hold real and personal
property, including patents, as agent of and on behalf of the
United States, subject to the provisions of section 2224 of this
title, and to sell, lease, grant, and dispose of such real and
personal property as provided in this chapter;
1 So in original.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 23
CONSIDERATION OF LICENSE APPLICATIONS
(h) consider in a single application one or more of the
activities for which a license is required by this chapter,
combine in a single license one or more of such activities, and
permit the applicant or licensee to incorporate by reference
pertinent information already filed with the Commission;
REGULATIONS GOVERNING RESTRICTED DATA
(i) prescribe such regulations or orders as it may deem
necessary (1) to protect Restricted Data received by any per-
son in connection with any activity authorized pursuant to
this chapter (2) to guard against the loss or diversion of any
special nuclear material acquired by any person pursuant to
section 2073 of this title or produced by any person in connec-
tion with any activity authorized pursuant to this chapter,
and to prevent any use or disposition thereof which the Com-
mission may determine to be inimical to the common defense
and security, and (3) to govern any activity authorized pur-
suant to this chapter, including standards and restrictions
governing the design, location, and operation of facilities used
in the conduct of such activity, in order to protect health and
to minimize danger to life or property;
DISPOSITION OF SURPLUS MATERIALS
(j) without regard to the provisions of the Federal Prop-
erty and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended,
except section 488 of Title 40, or any other law, make such
disposition as it may deem desirable of (1) radioactive mate-
rials, and (2) any other property, the special disposition of
which is, in the opinion of the Commission, in the interest of
the national security: Provided, however, That the property
furnished to licensees in accordance with the provisions of
subsection (m) of this section shall not be deemed to be prop-
erty disposed of by the Commission pursuant to this sub-
section;
CARRYING OF FIREARMS
(k) authorize such of its members, officers, and employees
as it deems necessary in the interest of the common defense
and security to carry firearms while in the discharge of their
official duties. The Commission may also authorize such of
those employees of its contractors engaged in the protection
of property owned by the United States and located at facil-
-------
24 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
ities owned by or contracted to the United States as it deems
necessary in the interests of the common defense and security
to carry firearms while in the discharge of their official duties;
(1) Repealed. Pub.L. 87-456, Title III, §303 (c), May 24,
1962, 76 Stat. 78.
AGREEMENTS REGARDING PRODUCTION
(m) enter into agreements with persons licensed under
section 2133, 2134, 2073 (a) (4), or 2093 (a) (4) of this title for
such periods of time as the Commission may deem necessary
or desirable (1) to provide for the processing, fabricating,
separating, or refining in facilities owned by the Commission
of source, byproduct, or other material or special nuclear
material owned by or made available to such licensees and
which is utilized or produced in the conduct of the licensed
activity, and (2) to sell, lease, or otherwise make available to
such licensees such quantities of source or byproduct material,
and other material not defined as special nuclear material
pursuant to this chapter, as may be necessary for the conduct
of the licensed activity: Provided, however, That any such
agreement may be canceled by the licensee at any time upon
payment of such reasonable cancellation charges as may be
agreed upon by the licensee and the Commission: And pro-
vided further, That the Commission shall establish prices to
be paid by licensees for material or services to be furnished
by the Commission pursuant to this subsection, which prices
shall be established on such a nondiscriminatory basis as, in
the opinion of the Commission, will provide reasonable com-
pensation to the Government for such material or services and
will not discourage the development of sources of supply
independent of the Commission;
DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS
(n) delegate to the General Manager or other officers of
the Commission any of those functions assigned to it under
this chapter except those specified in sections 2071, 2077 (b),
2091, 2138, 2153, 2165 (b) of this title (with respect to the
determination of those persons to whom the Commission may
reveal Restricted Data in the national interest), 2165(f) of
this title and subsection (a) of this section;
REPORTS
(o) require by rule, regulation, or order, such reports, and
the keeping of such records with respect to, and to provide
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 25
for such inspections of, activities and studies of types specified
in section 2051 of this title and of activities under licenses
issued pursuant to sections 2073, 2093, 2111, 2133, and 2134
of this title, as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of
this chapter, including section 2135 of this title; and
RULES AND REGULATIONS
(p) make, promulgate, issue, rescind, and amend such
rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
purposes of this chapter.
EASEMENTS FOR RIGHTS-OF-WAY
(q) The Commission is authorized and empowered, under
such terms and conditions as are deemed advisable by it, to
grant easements for rights-of-way over, across, in, and upon
acquired lands under its jurisdiction and control, and public
lands permanently withdrawn or reserved for the use of the
Commission, to any State, political subdivision thereof, or
municipality, or to any individual, partnership, or corporation
of any State, Territory, or possession of the United States,
for (a) railroad tracks; (b) oil pipe lines; (c) substations for
electric power transmission lines, telephone lines, and tele-
graph lines, and pumping stations for gas, water, sewer, and
oil pipe lines; (d) canals; (e) ditches; (f) flumes; (g) tun-
nels; (h) dams and reservoirs in connection with fish and
wildlife programs, fish hatcheries, and other fish-cultured im-
provements; (i) roads and streets; and (j) for any other
purpose or purposes deemed advisable by the Commission:
Provided, That such rights-of-way shall be granted only upon
a finding by the Commission that the same will not be in-
compatible with the public interest: Provided further, That
such rights-of-way shall not include any more land than is
reasonably necessary for the purpose for which granted: And
provided further, That all or any part of such rights-of-way
may be annulled and forfeited by the Commission for failure
to comply with the terms and conditions of any grant here-
under or for nonuse for a period of two consecutive years or
abandonment of rights granted under authority hereof.
Copies of all instruments granting easements over public
lands pursuant to this section shall be furnished to the Sec-
retary of the Interior,
-------
26 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
SALE OP UTILITIES AND RELATED SERVICES
(r) Under such regulations and for such periods and at
such prices the Commission may prescribe, the Commission
may sell or contract to sell to purchasers within Commission-
owned communities or in the immediate vicinity of the Com-
mission community, as the case may be, any of the following
utilities and related services, if it is determined that they are
not available from another local source and that the sale is in
the interest of the national defense or in the public interest:
(1) Electric power.
(2) Steam.
(3) Compressed air.
(4) Water.
(5) Sewage and garbage disposal.
(6) Natural, manufactured, or mixed gas.
(7) Ice.
(8) Mechanical refrigeration.
(9) Telephone service.
Proceeds of sales under this subsection shall be credited to
the appropriation currently available for the supply of that
utility or service. To meet local needs the Commission may
make minor expansions and extensions of any distributing
system or facility within or in the immediate vicinity of a
Commission-owned community through which a utility or
service is furnished under this subsection.
SUCCESSION OF AUTHORITY
(s) establish a plan for a succession of authority which
will assure the continuity of direction of the Commission's
operations in the event of a national disaster due to enemy
activity. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chap-
ter, the person or persons succeeding to command in the event
of disaster in accordance with the plan established pursuant
to this subsection shall be vested with all of the authority of
the Commission: Provided, That any such succession to au-
thority, and vesting of authority shall be effective only in the
event and as long as a quorum of three or more members of
the Commission is unable to convene and exercise direction
during the disaster period: Provided further, That the dis-
aster period includes the period when attack on the United
States is imminent and the post-attack period necessary to
reestablish normal lines of command;
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 27
CONTRACTS
(t) enter into contracts for the processing, fabricating,
separating, or refining in facilities owned by the Commission
of source, byproduct or other material, or special nuclear
material, in accordance with and within the period of an
agreement for cooperation while comparable services are
available to persons licensed under section 2133 or 2134 of
this title: Provided, That the prices for services under such
contracts shall be no less than the prices currently charged
by the Commission pursuant to subsection (m) of this section;
ADDITIONAL CONTRACTS; GUIDING PRINCIPLES; APPROPRIATIONS
(u) (1) enter into contracts for such periods of time as
the Commission may deem necessary or desirable, but not to
exceed five years from the date of execution of the contract,
for the purchase or acquisition or reactor services or services
related to or required by the operation of reactors;
(2) (A) enter into contracts for such periods of time as the
Commission may deem necessary or desirable for the pur-
chase or acquisition of any supplies, equipment, materials, or
services required by the Commission whenever the Commis-
sion determines that: (i) it is advantageous to the Govern-
ment to make such purchase~or acquisition from commercial
sources; (ii) the furnishing of such supplies, equipment, ma-
terials, or services will require the construction or acquisition
of special facilities by the vendors or suppliers thereof; (iii)
the amortization chargeable to the Commission constitutes
an appreciable portion of the cost of contract performance,
excluding cost of materials; and (iv) the contract for such
period is more advantageous to the Government than a sim-
ilar contract not executed under the authority of this sub-
section. Such contracts shall be entered into for periods not
to exceed five years each from the date of initial delivery of
such supplies, equipment, materials, or services or ten years
from the date of execution of the contracts excluding periods
of renewal under option.
(B) In entering into such contracts the Commission shall
be guided by the following principles: (i) the percentage of
the total cost of special facilities devoted to contract per-
formance and chargeable to the Commission should not ex-
ceed the ratio between the period of contract deliveries and
the anticipated useful life of such special facilities; (ii) the
desirability of obtaining options to renew the contract for
-------
28 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
reasonable periods at prices not to include charges for special
facilities already amortized; and (iii) the desirability of re-
serving in the Commission the right to take title to the special
facilities under appropriate circumstances; and
(3) include in contracts made under this subsection provi-
sions which limit the obligation of funds to estimated annual
deliveries and services and the unamortized balance of such
amounts due for special facilities as the parties shall agree is
chargeable to the performance of the contract. Any appro-
priation available at the time of termination or thereafter
made available to the Commission for operating expenses
shall be available for payment of such costs which may arise
from termination as the contract may provide. The term
"special facilities" as used in this subsection means any land
and any depreciable buildings, structures, utilities, machinery,
equipment, and fixtures necessary for the production or
furnishing of such supplies, equipment, materials, or services
and not available to the vendors or suppliers for the per-
formance of the contract.
CONTRACTS FOR PRODUCTION OR ENRICHMENT OF SPECIAL NU-
CLEAR MATERIAL; DOMESTIC LICENSEES; OTHER NATIONS;
PRICES; MATERIALS OF FOREIGN ORIGIN; CRITERIA FOR AVAIL-
ABILITY OF SERVICES UNDER THIS SUBSECTION; CONGRES-
SIONAL REVIEW
(v) (A) enter into contracts with persons licensed under
sections 2073, 2093, 2133 or 2134 of this title for such periods
of time as the Commission may deem necessary or desirable
to provide, after December 31, 1968, for the producing or
enriching of special nuclear material in facilities owned by
the Commission; and
(B) enter into contracts to provide, after December 31,
1968, for the producing or enriching of special nuclear mate-
rial in facilities owned by the Commission in accordance
with and within the period of an agreement for cooperation
arranged pursuant to section 2153 of this title while com-
parable services are made available pursuant to paragraph
(A) of this subsection:
Provided, That (i) prices for services under paragraph (A) of
this subsection shall be established on a nondiscriminatory basis;
(ii) prices for services under paragraph (B) of this subsection
shall be no less than prices under paragraph (A) of this subsec-
tion; and (iii) any prices established under this subsection shall
be on a basis of recovery of the Government's costs over a reason-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 29
able period of time: And provided further, That the Commission,
to the extent necessary to assure the maintenance of a viable
domestic uranium industry, shall not offer such services for source
or special nuclear materials of foreign origin intended for use in
a utilization facility within or under the jurisdiction of the United
States. The Commission shall establish criteria in writing setting
forth the terms and conditions under which services provided
under this subsection shall be made available including the extent
to which such services will be made available for source or special
nuclear material of foreign origin intended for use in a utilization
facility within or under the jurisdiction of the United States:
Provided, That before the Commission establishes such criteria,
the proposed criteria shall be submitted to the Joint Committee,
and a period of forty-five days shall elapse while Congress is in
session (in computing the forty-five days there shall be excluded
the days in which either House is not in session because of
adjournment for more than three days) unless the Joint Com-
mittee by resolution in writing waives the conditions of, or all or
any portion of, such forty-five-day period.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §161, as added Aug. 30, 1954, c. 1073, §1, 68
Stat. 948, and amended July 14, 1956, c. 608, 70 Stat. 553; Aug. 6,
1956, c. 1015, §4, 70 Stat. 1069; Aug. 21, 1957, Pub.L. 85-162,
Title II, §§201, 204, 71 Stat. 410; Sept. 4, 1957, Pub.L. 85-287, §4,
71 Stat. 613; July 7, 1958, Pub.L. 85-507, §21 (b) (1), 72 Stat.
337; Aug. 19, 1958, Pub.L. 85-681, §§6, 7, 72 Stat. 633; Sept. 21,
1959, Pub.L. 86-300, §1, 73 Stat. 574; Sept. 6, 1961, Pub.L. 87-
206, §13, 75 Stat. 478; May 24, 1962, Pub.L. 87-456, Title III,
§303(c), 76 Stat. 78; Aug. 29, 1962, Pub.L. 87-615, §12, 76 Stat.
411; Oct. 11, 1962, Pub.L. 87-793, §1001 (g), 76 Stat. 864; Aug. 26,
1964, Pub.L. 88-489, §16, 78 Stat. 606; Dec. 14, 1967, Pub.L. 90-
190, §11, 81 Stat. 578; Oct. 15, 1970, Pub.L. 91-452, Title II, §237,
84 Stat. 930; and amended Dec. 19, 1970, Pub.L. 91-560, §§7, 8,
84 Stat. 1474.
§2210. Indemnification and limitation of liability—Financial protec-
tion for public liability claims; indemnification agreement; waiver
of immunity
(a) Each license issued under section 2133 or 2134 of this title
and each construction permit issued under section 2235 of this
title shall, and each license issued under section 2073, 2093, or
2111 of this title may, have as a condition of the license a require-
ment that the licensee have and maintain financial protection of
such type and in such amounts as the Commission shall require in
accordance with subsection (b) of this section to cover public li-
-------
30 LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
ability claims. Whenever such financial protection is required, it
shall be a further condition of the license that the licensee execute
and maintain an indemnification agreement in accordance with
subsection (c) of this section. The Commission may require, as a
further condition of issuing a license, that an applicant waive any
immunity from public liability conferred by Federal or State law.
AMOUNT AND TYPES OP FINANCIAL PROTECTION
vb) The amount of financial protection required shall be the
amount of liability insurance available from private sources, ex-
cept that the Commission may establish a lesser amount on the
basis of criteria set forth in writing, which it may revise from
time to time, taking into consideration such factors as the follow-
ing: (1) the cost and terms of private insurance, (2) the type,
size, and location of the licensed activity and other factors per-
taining to the hazard, and (3) the nature and purpose of the
licensed activity: Provided, That for facilities designed for pro-
ducing substantial amounts of electricity and having a rated
capacity of 100,000 electrical kilowatts or more, the amount of
financial protection required shall be the maximum amount avail-
able from private sources. Such financial protection may include
private insurance, private contractual indemnities, self insurance,
other proof of financial responsibility, or a combination of such
measures.
INDEMNIFICATION FROM PUBLIC LIABILITY IN EXCESS OF LEVEL OF
FINANCIAL PROTECTION; AGGREGATE INDEMNITY
(c) The Commission shall, with respect to licenses issued be-
tween August 30, 1954, and August 1, 1977, for which it requires
financial protection, agree to indemnify and hold harmless the
licensee and other persons indemnified, as their interest may ap-
pear, from public liability arising from nuclear incidents which
is in excess of the level of financial protection required of the
licensee. The aggregate indemnity for all persons indemnified in
connection with each nuclear incident shall not exceed $500,-
000,000 including the reasonable costs of investigating and settling
claims and defending suits for damage: Provided, however, That
this amount of indemnity shall be reduced by the amount that the
financial protection required shall exceed $60,000,000. Such a
contract of indemnification shall cover public liability arising out
of or in connection with the licensed activity. With respect to any
production or utilization facility for which a construction permit
is issued between August 30, 1954, and August 1, 1977, the re-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 31
quirements of this subsection shall apply to any license issued for
such facility subsequent to August 1, 1977.
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION
OF PRODUCTION OR UTILIZATION FACILITIES, OR OTHER ACTIVITIES;
APPLICABILITY TO CONTRACTS; SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
(d) In addition to any other authority the Commission may
have, the Commission is authorized until August 1, 1977, to enter
into agreements of indemnification with its contractors for the
construction or operation of production or utilization facilities or
other activities under contracts for the benefit of the United
States involving activities under the risk of public liability for a
substantial nuclear incident. In such agreements of indemnifica-
tion the Commission may require its contractor to provide and
maintain financial protection of such a type and in such amounts
as the Commission shall determine to be appropriate to cover
public liability arising out of or in connection with the contractual
activity, and shall indemnify the persons indemnified against such
claims above the amount of the financial protection required, in
the amount of $500,000,000, including the reasonable costs of in-
vestigating and settling claims and defending suits for damage in
the aggregate for all persons indemnified in connection with such
contract and for each nuclear incident: Provided, That this amount
of indemnity shall be reduced by the amount that the financial
protection required shall exceed $60,000,000: Provided further,
That in the case of nuclear incidents occurring outside the United
States, the amount of the indemnity provided by the Commission
shall not exceed $100,000,000. The provisions of this subsection
may be applicable to lump sum as well as cost type contracts and
to contracts and projects financed in whole or in part by the
Commission. A contractor with whom an agreement of indem-
nification has been executed and who is engaged in activities
connected with the underground detonation of a nuclear explosive
device shall be liable, to the extent so indemnified under this sec-
tion, for injuries or damage sustained as a result of such detona-
tion in the same manner and to the same extent as would a
private person acting as principal, and no immunity or defense
founded in the Federal, State, or municipal character of the con-
tractor or of the work to be performed under the contract shall
be effective to bar such liability.
AGGREGATE LIABILITY FOR A SINGLE NUCLEAR INCIDENT
(e) The aggregate liability for a single nuclear incident of
persons indemnified, including the reasonable costs of investigat-
-------
32 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
ing and settling claims and defending suits for damage, shall not
exceed the sum of $500,000,000 together with the amount of
financial protection required of the licensee or contractor: Pro-
vided, hoivever, That such aggregate liability shall in no event
exceed the sum of $560,000,000: Provided further, That with
respect to any nuclear incident occurring outside of the United
States to which an agreement of indemnification entered into
under the provisions of subsection (d) of this section is applicable,
such aggregate liability shall not exceed the amount of $100,000,-
000 together with the amount of financial protection required of
the contractor.
COLLECTION AND AMOUNT OP FEE
(f) The Commission is authorized to collect a fee from all
persons with whom an indemnification agreement is executed
under this section. This fee shall be $30 per year per thousand
kilowatts of thermal energy capacity for facilities licensed under
section 2133 of this title. For facilities licensed under section 2134
of this title, and for construction permits under section 2235 of
this title, the Commission is authorized to reduce the fee set forth
above. The Commission shall establish criteria in writing for
determination of the fee for facilities licensed under section 2134
of this title, taking into consideration such factors as (1) the
type, size, and location of facility involved, and other factors
pertaining to the hazard, and (2) the nature and purpose of the
facility. For other licenses, the Commission shall collect such
nominal fees as it deems appropriate. No fee under this subsec-
tion shall be less than $100 per year.
USE OF FACILITIES AND SERVICES OF PRIVATE INSURANCE
ORGANIZATIONS
(g) In administering the provisions of this section, the Com-
mission shall use, to the maximum extent practicable, the facilities
and services of private insurance organizations, and the Commis-
sion may contract to pay a reasonable compensation for such
services. Any contract made under the provisions of this subsec-
tion may be made without regard to the provisions of section 5
of Title 41 upon a showing by the Commission that advertising
is not reasonably practicable and advance payments may be made.
CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT OF INDEMNIFICATION; SETTLEMENT OF
CLAIMS
(h) The agreement of indemnification may contain such terms
as the Commission deems appropriate to carry out the purposes
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 33
of this section. Such agreement shall provide that, when the
Commission makes a determination that the United States will
probably be required to make indemnity payments under this
section, the Commission shall collaborate with any person indem-
nified and may approve the payment of any claim under the
agreement of indemnification, appear through the Attorney Gen-
eral on behalf of the person indemnified, take charge of such
action, and settle or defend any such action. The Commission
shall have final authority on behalf of the United States to settle
or approve the settlement of any such claim on a fair and reason-
able basis with due regard for the purposes of this chapter. Such
settlement may include reasonable expenses in connection with
the claim incurred by the person indemnified.
SURVEY OF CAUSES AND EXTENT OF DAMAGE; REPORT TO JOINT
COMMITTEE
(i) After any nuclear incident which will probably require pay-
ments by the United States under this section, the Commission
shall make a survey of the causes and extent of damage which
shall forthwith be reported to the Joint Committee, and, except
as forbidden by the provisions of sections 2161 to 2166 of this title
or any other law or Executive order, all final findings shall be
made available to the public, to the parties involved and to the
courts. The Commission shall report to the Joint Committee by
April 1, 1958, and every year thereafter on the operations under
this section.
CONTRACTS IN ADVANCE OF APPROPRIATIONS
(j) In administering the provisions of this section, the Com-
mission may make contracts in advance of appropriations and
incur obligations without regard to section 665 of Title 31.
EXEMPTION FROM FINANCIAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENT; INDEM-
NIFICATION FROM PUBLIC LIABILITY IN EXCESS OF $250,000;
AGGREGATE INDEMNITY; WAIVER
(k) With respect to any license issued pursuant to section 2073,
2093, 2111, 2134(a), or 2134(c) of this title, for the conduct of
educational activities to a person found by the Commission to be
a nonprofit educational institution, the Commission shall exempt
such license from the financial protection requirement of subsec-
tion (a) of this section. With respect to licenses issued between
August 30, 1954, and August 1, 1977, for which the Commission
grants such exemption:
(1) the Commission shall agree to indemnify and hold
-------
34 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
harmless the licensee and other persons indemnified, as their
interests may appear, from public liability in excess of
$250,000 arising from nuclear incidents. The aggregate in-
demnity for all persons indemnified in connection with each
nuclear incident shall not exceed $500,000,000, including the
reasonable cost of investigating and settling claims and
defending suits for damage;
(2) such contracts of indemnification shall cover public
liability arising out of or in connection with the licensed activ-
ity; and shall include damage to property of persons indemni-
fied, except property which is located at the site of and used
in connection with the activity where the nuclear incident
occurs; and
(3) such contracts of indemnification, when entered into
with a licensee having immunity from public liability because
it is a State agency, shall provide also that the Commission
shall make payments under the contract on account of activi-
ties of the licensee in the same manner and to the same extent
as the Commission would be required to do if the licensee
were not such a State agency.
Any licensee may waive an exemption to which it is entitled under
this subsection. With respect to any production or utilization
facility for which a construction permit is issued between August
30, 1954, and August 1, 1977, the requirements of this subsection
shall apply to any license issued for such facility subsequent to
August 1, 1977.
INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH NUCLEAR
SHIP SAVANNAH
(1) The Commission is authorized until August 1, 1977, to enter
into an agreement of indemnification with any person engaged in
the design, development, construction, operation, repair, and main-
tenance or use of the nuclear-powered ship authorized by section
1206 of Title 46, and designated the "nuclear ship Savannah". In
any such agreement of indemnification the Commission may re-
quire such person to provide and maintain financial protection of
such a type and in such amounts as the Commission shall deter-
mine to be appropriate to cover public liability arising from a
nuclear incident in connection with such design, development, con-
struction, operation, repair, maintenance or use and shall indem-
nify the person indemnified against such claims above the amount
of the financial protection required, in the amount of $500,000,000
including the reasonable costs of investigating and settling claims
and defending suits for damage in the aggregate for all persons
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 35
indemnified in connection with each nuclear incident: Provided,
That this amount of indemnity shall be reduced by the amount
that the financial protection required shall exceed $60,000,000.
AGREEMENTS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING,
INVESTIGATION, AND SETTLEMENT OF PUBLIC LIABILITY CLAIMS;
EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
(m) The Commission is authorized to enter into agreements
with other indemnitors to establish coordinated procedures for the
prompt handling, investigation, and settlement of claims for public
liability. The Commission and other indemnitors may make pay-
ments to, or for the aid of, claimants for the purpose of providing
immediate assistance following a nuclear incident. Any funds
appropriated to the Commission shall be available for such pay-
ments. Such payments may be made without securing releases,
shall not constitute an admission of the liability of any person
indemnified or of any indemnitor, and shall operate as a satis-
faction to the extent thereof of any final settlement or judgment.
WAIVER OF DEFENSES; JURISDICTION AND VENUE OF PUBLIC LIABILITY
ACTIONS; REMOVAL OR TRANSFER OF ACTIONS; PROCESS
(n) (1) With respect to any extraordinary nuclear occurrence
to which an insurance policy or contract furnished as proof of fi-
nancial protection or an indemnity agreement applies and which—
(a) arises out of or results from or occurs in the course of
the construction, possession, or operation of a production or
utilization facility, or
(b) arises out of or results from or occurs in the course of
transportation of source material, byproduct material, or
special nuclear material to or from a production or utilization
facility, or
(c) during the course of the contract activity arises out of
or results from the possession, operation, or use by a Com-
mission contractor or subcontractor of a devise utilizing spe-
cial nuclear material or byproduct material,
the Commission may incorporate provisions in indemnity agree-
ments with licensees and contractors under this section, and may
require provisions to be incorporated in insurance policies or con-
tracts furnished as proof of financial protection, which waive (i)
any issue or defense as to conduct of the claimant or fault of
persons indemnified, (ii) any issue or defense as to charitable or
governmental immunity, and (iii) any issue or defense based on
any statute of limitations if suit is instituted within three years
from the date on which the claimant first knew, or reasonably
-------
36 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
could have known, of his injury or damage and the cause thereof,
but in no event more than ten years after the date of the nuclear
incident. The waiver of any such issue or defense shall be effective
regardless of whether such issue or defense may otherwise be
deemed jurisdictional or relating to an element in the cause of
action. When so incorporated, such waivers shall be judicially
enforcible in accordance with their terms by the claimant against
the person indemnified. Such waivers shall not preclude a defense
based upon a failure to take reasonable steps to mitigate damages,
nor shall such waivers apply to injury or damage to a claimant or
to a claimant's property which is intentionally sustained by the
claimant or which results from a nuclear incident intentionally
and wrongfully caused by the claimant. The waivers authorized
in this subsection shall, as to indemnitors, be effective only with
respect to those obligations set forth in the insurance policies or
the contracts furnished as proof of financial protection and in the
indemnity agreements. Such waivers shall not apply to, or preju-
dice the prosecution or defense of, any claim or portion of claim
which is not within the protection afforded under (i) the terms of
insurance policies or contracts furnished as proof of financial
protection, or indemnity agreements, and (ii) the limit of liability
provisions of subsection (e) of this section.
(2) With respect to any public liability action arising out of or
resulting from an extraordinary nuclear occurrence, the United
States district court in the district where the extraordinary nu-
clear occurrence takes place, or in the case of an extraordinary
nuclear occurrence taking place outside the United States, the
United States District Court for the District of Columbia, shall
have original jurisdiction without regard to the citizenship of any
party or the amount in controversy. Upon motion of the defend-
ant or of the Commission, any such action pending in any State
court or United States district court shall be removed or trans-
ferred to the United States district court having venue under this
subsection. Process of such district court shall be effective
throughout the United States.
PERCENTAGE LIMITATION; DISTRIBUTION PLANS; CLAIM DISPOSITION
AND FUND DISTRIBUTION PLANS; ALLOCATION FOR PERSONAL IN-
JURY, PROPERTY DAMAGE, AND POSSIBLE LATENT INJURY CLAIMS;
APPROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, OR MODIFICATION; ADOPTION OF OTHER
PLAN; ORDERS FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF PRO-
VISIONS; AREA ORDERS EFFECTIVE
(o) Whenever the United States district court in the district
where a nuclear incident occurs, or the United States District
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 37
Court for the District of Columbia in case of a nuclear incident
occurring outside the United States, determines upon the petition
of any indemnitor or other interested person that public liability
from a single nuclear incident may exceed the limit of liability
under subsection (e) of this section:
(1) Total payments made by or for all indemnitors as a
result of such nuclear incident shall not exceed 15 per centum
of such limit of liability without the prior approval of such
court;
(2) The court shall not authorize payments in excess of 15
centum of such limit of liability unless the court determines
that such payments are or will be in accordance with a plan
of distribution which has been approved by the court or such
payments are not likely to prejudice the subsequent adoption
and implementation by the court of a plan of distribution
pursuant to subparagraph (3) of this subsection (o); and
(3) The Commission shall, and any other indemnitor or
other interested person may, submit to such district court a
plan for the disposition of pending claims and for the distri-
bution of remaining funds available. Such a plan shall in-
clude an allocation of appropriate amounts for personal
injury claims, property damage claims, and possible latent in-
jury claims which may not be discovered until a later time.
Such court shall have all power necessary to approve, dis-
approve, or modify plans proposed, or to adopt another plan;
and to determine the proportionate share of funds available
for each claimant. The Commission, any other indemnitor,
and any person indemnified shall be entitled to such orders
as may be appropriate to implement and enforce the pro-
visions of this section, including orders limiting the liability
of the persons indemnified, orders approving or modifying
the plan,
orders staying the payment of claims and the execution of
court judgments, orders apportioning the payments to be
made to claimants, and orders permitting partial payments
to be made before final determination of the total claims. The
orders of such court shall be effective throughout the United
States.
Aug. 1, 1946, c. 724, §170, as added Sept. 2, 1957, Pub.L. 85-256,
§4, 71 Stat. 576, and amended Aug. 8, 1958, Pub.L. 85-602, §§2,
2[3], 72 Stat. 525; Aug. 23, 1958, Pub.L. 85-744, 72 Stat. 837;
Sept. 6, 1961, Pub.L. 87-206, §15, 75 Stat. 479; Aug. 29, 1962,
Pub.L. 87-615, §§6, 7, 76 Stat. 410; Aug. 1, 1964, Pub.L. 88-394,
-------
38 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
§§2, 3, 78 Stat. 376; Sept. 29, 1965, Pub.L. 89-210, §§1-5, 79 Stat.
855-857; Oct. 13, 1966, Pub.L. 89-645, §§2, 3, 80 Stat. 891.
l.la ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946
August 1, 1946
P.L. 79-585, §§1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9,12,18, 60 Stat. 755, 758, 770, 774
AN ACT
For the development and control of atomic energy.
Be it enacted by the Semite and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
DECLARATION OF POLICY
SECTION 1. (a) FINDINGS AND DECLARATION.—Research and
experimentation in the field of nuclear chain reaction have at-
tained the stage at which the release of atomic energy on a large
scale is practical. The significance of the atomic bomb for military
purposes is evident. The effect of the use of atomic energy for
civilian purposes upon the social, economic, and political structures
of today cannot now be determined. It is a field in which un-
known factors are involved. Therefore, any legislation will neces-
sarily be subject to revision from
[P. 755]
time to time. It is reasonable to anticipate, however, that tapping
this new source of energy will cause profound changes in our pres-
ent way of life. Accordingly, it is hereby declared to be the policy
of the people of the United States that, subject at all times to
the paramount objective of assuring the common defense and
security, the development and utilization of atomic energy shall,
so far as practicable, be directed toward improving the public wel-
fare, increasing the standard of living, strengthening free com-
petition in private enterprise, and promoting world peace.
(b) PURPOSE OF ACT.—It is the purpose of this Act to effectuate
the policies set out in section 1 (a) by providing, among others, for
the following major programs relating to atomic energy:
(1) A program of assisting and fostering private research and
development to encourage maximum scientific progress;
(2) A program for the control of scientific and technical infor-
mation which will permit the dissemination of such information to
encourage scientific progress, and for the sharing on a reciprocal
basis of information concerning the practical industrial applica-
tion of atomic energy as soon as effective and enforceable safe-
guards against its use for destructive purposes can be devised;
(3) A program of federally conducted research and development
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 39
to assure the Government of adequate scientific and technical
accomplishment;
(4) A program for Government control of the production,
ownership, and use of fissionable material to assure the common
defense and security and to insure the broadest possible exploita-
tion of the fields; and
(5) A program of administration which will be consistent with
the foregoing policies and with international arrangements made
by the United States, and which will enable the Congress to be
currently informed so as to take further legislative action as may
hereafter be appropriate.
*******
[p. 756]
RESEARCH
SEC. 3. (a) RESEARCH ASSISTANCE.—The Commission is directed
to exercise its powers in such manner as to insure the continued
conduct of research and development activities in the fields speci-
fied below by private or public institutions or persons and to assist
in the acquisition of an ever-expanding fund of theoretical and
practical knowledge in such fields. To this end the Commission is
authorized and directed to make arrangements (including con-
tracts, agreements, and loans) for the conduct of research and
development activities relating to—
(1) nuclear processes;
(2) the theory and production of atomic energy, including
processes, materials, and devices related to such production;
(3) utilization of fissionable and radioactive materials for
medical, biological, health, or military purposes;
(4) utilization of fissionable and radioactive materials and
processes entailed in the production of such materials for all
other purposes, including industrial uses; and
(5) the protection of health during research and produc-
tion activities.
The Commission may make such arrangements without regard to
the provisions of section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (U. S. C.,
title 41, sec. 5) upon certification by the Commission that such
action is necessary in the interest of the common defense and
security, or upon a showing that advertising is not reasonably
practicable, and may make partial and advance payments under
such arrangements, and may make available for use in connection
therewith such of its equipment and facilities as it may deem
desirable. Such arrangements shall contain such provisions to
protect health, to minimize danger from explosion
[p. 758]
-------
40 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
and other hazards to life or property, and to require the reporting
and to permit the inspection of work performed thereunder, as
the Commission may determine; but shall not contain any pro-
visions or conditions which prevent the dissemination of scientific
or technical information, except to the extent such dissemination
is prohibited by law.
(b) RESEARCH BY THE COMMISSION.—The Commission is au-
thorized and directed to conduct, through its own facilities, activi-
ties and studies of the types specified in subsection (a) above.
PRODUCTION OF FISSIONABLE MATERIAL
SEC. 4. (a) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "pro-
duce", when used in relation to fissionable material, means to
manufacture, produce, or refine fissionable material, as distin-
guished from source materials as defined in section 5 (b) (l),or
to separate fissionable material from other substances in which
such material may be contained or to produce new fissionable
material.
(b) PROHIBITION.—It shall be unlawful for any person to own
any facilities for the production of fissionable material or for any
person to produce fissionable material, except to the extent au-
thorized by subsection (c).
(c) OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—
(1) OWNERSHIP OF PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—The Com-
mission, as agent of and on behalf of the United States, shall
be the exclusive owner of all facilities for the production of
fissionable material other than facilities which (A) are useful
in the conduct of research and development activities in the
fields specified in section 3, and (B) do not, in the opinion of
the Commission, have a potential production rate adequate
to enable the operator of such facilities to produce within a
reasonable period of time a sufficient quantity of fissionable
material to produce an atomic bomb or any other atomic
weapon.
(2) OPERATION OF THE COMMISSION'S PRODUCTION FACILI-
TIES.—The Commission is authorized and directed to produce
or to provide for the production of fissionable material in its
own facilities. To the extent deemed necessary, the Commis-
sion is authorized to make, or to continue in effect, contracts
with persons obligating them to produce fissionable material
in facilities owned by the Commission. The Commission is
also authorized to enter into research and development con-
tracts authorizing the contractor to produce fissionable ma-
terial in facilities owned by the Commission to the extent that
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 41
the production of such fissionable material may be incident to
the conduct of research and development activities under such
contracts. Any contract entered into under this section shall
contain provisions (A) prohibiting the contractor with the
Commission from subcontracting any part of the work he is
obligated to perform under the contract, except as authorized
by the Commission, and (B) obligating the contractor to make
such reports to the Commission as it may deem appropriate
with respect to his activities under the contract, to submit to
frequent inspection by employees of the Commission of all
such activities, and to comply with all safety and security
regulations which may be prescribed by the Commission. Any
contract made under the provisions of this paragraph may
be made without regard to the provisions of section 3709 of
the Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5) upon certifica-
tion by the Commission that such action is necessary in the
interest of the common defense and security, or upon a show-
ing that advertising is not reasonably practicable, and partial
and advance
[p. 759]
payments may be made under such contracts. The President
shall determine at least once each year the quantities of
fissionable material to be produced under this paragraph.
(3) OPERATION OF OTHER PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—Fission-
able material may be produced in the conduct of research and
development activities in facilities which, under paragraph
(1) above, are not required to be owned by the Commission.
(d) IRRADIATION OF MATERIALS.—For the purpose of increasing
the supply of radioactive materials, the Commission and persons
lawfully producing or utilizing fissionable material are authorized
to expose materials of any kind to the radiation incident to the
processes of producing or utilizing fissionable material.
(e) MANUFACTURE OF PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—Unless au-
thorized by a license issued by the Commission, no person may
manufacture, produce, transfer, or acquire any facilities for the
production of fissionable material. Licenses shall be issued in
accordance with such procedures as the Commission may by regula-
tion establish and shall be issued in accordance with such standards
and upon such conditions as will restrict the production and
distribution of such facilities to effectuate the policies and pur-
poses of this Act. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to
require a license for such manufacture, production, transfer, or
acquisition incident to or for the conduct of research or develop-
ment activities in the United States of the types specified in sec-
-------
42 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
tion 3, or to prohibit the Commission from manufacturing or
producing such facilities for its own use.
CONTROL OF MATERIALS
SEC. 5. (a) FISSIONABLE MATERIALS.—
(1) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "fissionable
material" means plutonium, uranium enriched in the isotope 235,
any other material which the Commission determines to be capable
of releasing substantial quantities of energy through nuclear chain
reaction of the material, or any material artificially enriched by
any of the foregoing; but does not include source materials, as
denned in section 5 (b) (1).
(2) GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP OF ALL FISSIONABLE MATERIAL.—
All right, title, and interest within or under the jurisdiction of the
United States, in or to any fissionable material, now or hereafter
produced, shall be the property of the Commission, and shall be
deemed to be vested in the Commission by virtue of this Act. Any
person owning any interest in any fissionable material at the time
of the enactment of this Act, or owning any interest in any ma-
terial at the time when such material is hereafter determined to be
a fissionable material, or who lawfully produces any fissionable
material incident to privately financed research or development
activities, shall be paid just compensation therefor. The Commis-
sion may, by action consistent with the provisions of para-
graph (4) below, authorize any such person to retain possession
of such fissionable material, but no person shall have any title in
or to any fissionable material.
(3) PROHIBITION.—It shall be unlawful for any person, after
sixty days from the effective date of this Act to (A) possess or
transfer any fissionable material, except as authorized by the
Commission, or (B) export from or import into the United States
any fissionable material, or (C) directly or indirectly engage in
the production of any fissionable material outside of the United
States.
(4) DISTRIBUTION OF FISSIONABLE MATERIAL.—Without preju-
dice to its continued ownership thereof, the Commission is au-
thorized to distribute fissionable material owned by it, with or
without charge, to applicants requesting such material (A) for the
conduct of research or development activities either independently
or under contract or
1 [p. 760]
other arrangement with the Commission, (B) for use in medical
therapy, or (C) for use pursuant to a license issued under the
authority of section 7. Such material shall be distributed in such
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 43
quantities and on such terms that no applicant will be enabled to
obtain an amount sufficient to construct a bomb or other military
weapon. The Commission is directed to distribute sufficient fission-
able material to permit the conduct of widespread independent
research and development activity, to the maximum extent practi-
cable. In determining the quantities of fissionable material to be
distributed, the Commission shall make such provisions for its
own needs and for the conservation of fissionable material as it
may determine to be necessary in the national interest for the fu-
ture development of atomic energy. The Commission shall not
distribute any material to any applicant, and shall recall any dis-
tributed material from any applicant, who is not equipped to
observe or who fails to observe such safety standards to protect
health and to minimize danger from explosion or other hazard to
life or property as may be established by the Commission, or who
uses such material in violation of law or regulation of the Com-
mission or in a manner other than as disclosed in the application
therefor.
(5) The Commission is authorized to purchase or otherwise
acquire any fissionable material or any interest therein outside the
United States, or any interest in facilities for the production of
fissionable material, or in real property on which such facilities are
located, without regard to the provisions of section 3709 of the
Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5) upon certification by the
Commission that such action is necessary in the interest of the
common defense and security, or upon a showing that advertising
is not reasonably practicable, and partial and advance payments
may be made under contracts for such purposes. The Commission
is further authorized to take, requisition, or condemn, or otherwise
acquire any interest in such facilities or real property, and just
compensation shall be made therefor.
(b) SOURCE MATERIALS.—
(1) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "source ma-
terial" means uranium, thorium, or any other material which is
determined by the Commission, with the approval of the President,
to be peculiarly essential to the production of fissionable materials;
but includes ores only if they contain one or more of the foregoing
materials in such concentration as the Commission may by regula-
tion determine from time to time.
(2) LICENSE FOR TRANSFERS REQUIRED.—Unless authorized by a
license issued by the Commission, no person may transfer or
deliver, receive possession of or title to, or export from the United
States any source material after removal from its place of deposit
in nature, except that licenses shall not be required for quantities
-------
44 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
of source materials which, in the opinion of the Commission, are
unimportant.
(3) ISSUANCE OP LICENSES.—The Commission shall establish
such standards for the issuance, refusal, or revocation of licenses
as it may deem necessary to assure adequate source materials for
production, research, or development activities pursuant to this
Act or to prevent the use of such materials in a manner inconsist-
ent with the national welfare. Licenses shall be issued in accord-
ance with such procedures as the Commission may by regulation
establish.
(4) REPORTING.—The Commission is authorized to issue such
regulations or orders requiring reports of ownership, possession,
extraction, refining, shipment, or other handling of source ma-
terials as it may deem necessary, except that such reports shall
not be required with respect to (A) any source material prior to
removal from its place of deposit in nature, or (B) quantities of
source materials which in the
[p. 761]
opinion of the Commission are unimportant or the reporting of
which will discourage independent prospecting for new deposits.
(5) ACQUISITION.—The Commission is authorized and directed
to purchase, take, requisition, condemn, or otherwise acquire, sup-
plies of source materials or any interest in real property containing
deposits of source materials to the extent it deems necessary to
effectuate the provisions of this Act. Any purchase made under
this paragraph may be made without regard to the provisions of
section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5)
upon certification by the Commission that such action is necessary
in the interest of the common defense and security, or upon a
showing that advertising is not reasonably practicable, and partial
and advance payments may be made thereunder. The Commission
may establish guaranteed prices for all source materials delivered
to it within a specified time. Just compensation shall be made for
any property taken, requisitioned, or condemned under this
paragraph.
(6) EXPLORATION.—The Commission is authorized to conduct
and enter into contracts for the conduct of exploratory operations,
investigations, and inspections to determine the location, extent,
mode of occurrence, use, or conditions of deposits or supplies of
source materials, making just compensation for any damage or
injury occasioned thereby. Such exploratory operations may be
conducted only with the consent of the owner, but such investiga-
tions and inspections may be conducted with or without such
consent.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 45
(7) PUBLIC LANDS.—All uranium, thorium, and all other ma-
terials determined pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection
to be peculiarly essential to the production of fissionable material,
contained, in whatever concentration, in deposits in the public
lands are hereby reserved for the use of the United States subject
to valid claims, rights, or privileges existing on the date of the
enactment of this Act: Provided, however, That no individual,
corporation, partnership, or association, which had any part, di-
rectly or indirectly, in the development of the atomic bomb project,
may benefit by any location, entry, or settlement upon the public
domain made after such individual, corporation, partnership, or
association took part in such project, if such individual, corpora-
tion, partnership, or association, by reason of having had such
part in the development of the atomic bomb project, acquired
confidential official information as to the existence of deposits of
such uranium, thorium, or other materials in the specific lands
upon which such location, entry, or settlement is made, and subse-
quent to the date of the enactment of this Act made such location,
entry, or settlement or caused the same to be made for his, its, or
their benefit. The Secretary of the Interior shall cause to be in-
serted in every patent, conveyance, lease, permit, or other authori-
zation hereafter granted to use the public lands or their mineral
resources, under any of which there might result the extraction of
any materials so reserved, a reservation to the United States of all
such materials, whether or not of commercial value, together with
the right of the United States through its authorized agents or
representatives at any time to enter upon the land and prospect
for, mine, and remove the same, making just compensation for any
damage or injury occasioned thereby. Any lands so patented,
conveyed, leased, or otherwise disposed of may be used, and any
rights under any such permit or authorization may be exercised,
as if no reservation of such materials had been made under this
subsection; except that, when such use results in the extraction of
any such material from the land in quantities which may not be
transferred or delivered without a license under this subsection,
such material shall be the property of the Commission and the
Commission may require delivery of such material to it by any
possessor thereof after such material has been separated
[p. 762]
as such from the ores in which it was contained. If the Commis-
sion requires the delivery of such material to it, it shall pay to
the person mining or extracting the same, or to such other person
as the Commission determines to be entitled thereto, such sums,
including profits, as the Commission deems fair -and reasonable for
-------
46 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the discovery, mining, development, production, extraction, and
other services performed with respect to such materials prior to
such delivery, but such payment shall not include any amount on
account of the value of such material before removal from its
place of deposit in nature. If the Commission does not require
delivery of such material to it, the reservation made pursuant to
this paragraph shall be of no further force or effect.
(c) BYPRODUCT MATERIALS.—
(1) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "byproduct
material" means any radioactive material (except fissionable ma-
terial) yielded in or made radioactive by exposure to the radiation
incident to the processes of producing or utilizing fissionable
material.
(2) DISTRIBUTION.—The Commission is authorized to distrib-
ute, with or without charge, byproduct materials to applicants
seeking such materials for research or development activity, med-
ical therapy, industrial uses, or such other useful applications as
may be developed. In distributing such materials, the Commission
shall give preference to applicants proposing to use such materials
in the conduct of research and development activity or medical
therapy. The Commission shall not distribute any byproduct ma-
terials to any applicant, and shall recall any distributed materials
from any applicant, who is not equipped to observe or who fails to
observe such safety standards to protect health as may be estab-
lished by the Commission or who uses such materials in violation
of law or regulation of the Commission or in a manner other than
as disclosed in the application therefor.
(d) GENERAL PROVISIONS.—The Commission shall not—
(1) distribute any fissionable material to (A) any person
for a use which is not under or within the jurisdiction of the
United States, (B) any foreign government, or (C) any per-
son within the United States if, in the opinion of the Com-
mission, the distribution of such fissionable material to such
person would be inimical to the common defense and security.
(2) license any person to transfer or deliver, receive pos-
session of or title to, or export from the United States any
source material if, in the opinion of the Commission, the
issuance of a license to such person for such purpose would be
inimical to the common defense and security.
* * * * $ # #
[p. 763]
SEC. 7. (a) LICENSE REQUIRED.—It shall be unlawful, except as
provided in sections 5 (a) (4) (A) or (B) or 6 (a), for any person
to manufacture, produce, or export any equipment or device utiliz-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 47
ing fissionable material or atomic energy or to utilize fissionable
material or atomic energy with or without such equipment or de-
vice, except under and in accordance with a license issued by the
Commission authorizing such manufacture, production, export, or
utilization. No license may permit any such activity if fissionable
material is produced incident to such activity, except as provided
in sections 3 and 4. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to
require a license for the conduct of research or development ac-
tivities relating to the manufacture of such equipment or devices
or the utilization of fissionable material or atomic energy, or
for the manufacture or use of equipment or devices for medical
therapy.
(b) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Whenever in its opinion any indus-
trial, commercial, or other nonmilitary use of fissionable material
or atomic energy has been sufficiently developed to be of practical
value, the Commission shall prepare a report to the President
stating all the facts with respect to such use, the Commission's
estimate of the social, political, economic, and international effects
of such use and the Commission's recommendations for necessary
or desirable supplemental legislation. The President shall then
transmit this report to the Congress together with his recommen-
dations. No license for any manufacture, production, export, or
use shall be issued by the Commission under this section until after
(1) a report with respect to such manufacture, production, export,
or use has been filed with the Congress; and (2) a period of ninety
days in which the Congress was in session has elapsed after the
report has been so filed. In computing such period of ninety days,
there shall be excluded the days on which either House is not in
session because of an adjournment of more than three days.
(c) ISSUANCE OF LICENSES.—After such ninety-day period, un-
less hereafter prohibited by law, the Commission may license such
manufacture, production, export, or use in accordance with such
procedures and subject to such conditions as it may by regulation
establish to effectuate the provisions of this Act. The Commission
is authorized and directed to issue licenses on a nonexclusive basis
and to supply to the extent available appropriate quantities of fis-
sionable material to licensees (1) whose proposed activities will
serve some useful purpose proportionate to the quantities of fis-
sionable material to be consumed; (2) who are equipped to observe
such safety standards to protect health and to minimize danger
from explosion or other hazard to life or property as the Commis-
sion may establish; and (3) who agree to make available to the
Commission such technical information and data concerning their
activities pursuant to such licenses as the Commission may de-
-------
48 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
termine necessary to encourage similar activities by as many
licensees as possible. Each such license shall be issued for a spec-
ified period, shall be revocable at any time by the Commission in
accordance with such procedures as the Commission may establish,
and may be renewed upon the expiration of such period. Where
[p. 764]
activities under any license might serve to maintain or to foster
the growth of monopoly, restraint of trade, unlawful competition,
or other trade position inimical to the entry of new, freely com-
petitive enterprises in the field, the Commission is authorized and
directed to refuse to issue such license or to establish such condi-
tions to prevent these results as the Commission, in consultation
with the Attorney General, may determine. The Commission shall
report promptly to the Attorney General any information it may
have with respect to any utilization of fissionable material or
atomic energy which appears to have these results. No license
may be given to any person for activities which are not under or
within the jurisdiction of the United States, to any foreign govern-
ment, or to any person within the United States if, in the opinion
of the Commission, the issuance of a license to such person would
be inimical to the common defense and security.
(d) BYPRODUCT POWER.—If energy which may be utilized is
produced in the production of fissionable material, such energy
may be used by the Commission, transferred to other Government
agencies, or sold to public or private utilities under contracts pro-
viding for reasonable resale prices.
INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
SEC. 8. (a) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "inter-
national arrangement" shall mean any treaty approved by the
Senate or international agreement hereafter approved by the Con-
gress, during the time such treaty or agreement is in full force
and effect.
(b) EFFECT OF INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—Any provision
of this Act or any action of the Commission to the extent that it
conflicts with the provisions of any international arrangement
made after the date of enactment of this Act shall be deemed to be
of no further force or effect.
(c) POLICIES CONTAINED IN INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—
In the performance of its functions under this Act, the Commis-
sion shall give maximum effect to the policies contained in any
such international arrangement.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 49
PROPERTY OF THE COMMISSION
SEC. 9. (a) The President shall direct the transfer to the Com-
mission of all interests owned by the United States or any Govern-
ment agency in the following property:
(1) All fissionable material; all atomic weapons and parts there-
of; all facilities, equipment, and materials for the processing, pro-
duction, or utilization of fissionable material or atomic energy; all
processes and technical information of any kind, and the source
thereof (including data, drawings, specifications, patents, patent
applications, and other sources (relating to the processing, produc-
tion, or utilization of fissionable material or atomic energy; and
all contracts, agreements, leases, patents, applications for patents,
inventions and discoveries (whether patented or unpatented),
and other rights of any kind concerning any such items;
(2) All facilities, equipment, and materials, devoted primarily
to atomic energy research and development; and
(3) Such other property owned by or in the custody or control
of the Manhattan Engineer District or other Government agencies
as the President may determine.
(b) In order to render financial assistance to those States and
localities in which the activities of the Commission are carried on
and in which the Commission has acquired property previously
subject to State and local taxation, the Commission is authorized
to make payments to State and local governments in lieu of prop-
erty taxes. Such
[p. 765]
payments may be in the amounts, at the times, and upon the terms
the Commission deems appropriate, but the Commission shall be
guided by the policy of not making payments in excess of the taxes
which would have been payable for such property in the condition
in wThich it was acquired, except in cases where special burdens
have been cast upon the State or local government by activities of
the Commission, the Manhattan Engineer District or their agents.
In any such case, any benefit accruing to the State or local govern-
ment by reason of such activities shall be considered in determining
the amount of the payment. The Commission, and the property,
activities, and income of the Commission, are hereby expressly
exempted from taxation in any manner or form by any State,
county, municipality, or any subdivision thereof.
*******
[p. 766]
-------
50 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
GENERAL AUTHORITY
SEC. 12. (a) In the performance of its functions the Commission
is authorized to—
(1) establish advisory boards to advise with and make rec-
ommendations to the Commission on legislation, policies,
administration, research, and other matters;
(2) establish by regulation or order such standards and
instructions to govern the possession and use of fissionable
and byproduct materials as the Commission may deem neces-
sary or desirable to protect health or to minimize danger from
explosions and other hazards to life or property;
(3) make such studies and investigations, obtain such in-
formation, and hold such hearings as the Commission may
deem
[p. 770]
necessary or proper to assist it in exercising any authority
provided in this Act, or in the administration or enforcement
of this Act, or any regulations or orders issued thereunder.
For such purposes the Commission is authorized to administer
oaths and affirmations, and by subpena to require any person
to appear and testify, or to appear and produce documents,
or both, at any designated place. No person shall be excused
from complying with any requirements under this paragraph
because of his privilege against self-incrimination, but the
immunity provisions of the Compulsory Testimony Act of
February 11, 1893 (U.S.C., title 49, sec. 46), shall apply with
respect to any individual who specifically claims such privilege.
Witnesses subpenaed under this subsection shall be paid the
same fees and mileage as are paid witnesses in the district
courts of the United States;
(4) appoint and fix the compensation of such officers and
employees as may be necessary to carry out the functions of
the Commission. Such officers and employees shall be ap-
pointed in accordance with the civil-service laws and their
compensation fixed in accordance with the Classification Act
of 1923, as amended, except that to the extent the Commission
deems such action necessary to the discharge of its responsi-
bilities, personnel may be employed and their compensation
fixed without regard to such laws. The Commission shall
make adequate provision for administrative review of any
determination to dismiss any employee;
(5) acquire such materials, property, equipment, and fa-
cilities, establish or construct such buildings and facilities,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 51
and modify such buildings and facilities from time to time as
it may deem necessary, and construct, acquire, provide, or ar-
range for such facilities and services (at project sites where
such facilities and services are not available) for the housing,
health, safety, welfare, and recreation of personnel employed
by the Commission as it may deem necessary;
(6) with the consent of the agency concerned, utilize or
employ the services or personnel of any Government agency
or any State or local government, or voluntary or uncompen-
sated personnel, to perform such functions on its behalf as
may appear desirable;
(7) acquire, purchase, lease, and hold real and personal
property as agent of and on behalf of the United States and to
sell, lease, grant, and dispose of such real and personal prop-
erty as provided in this Act; and
(8) without regard to the provisions of the Surplus Prop-
erty Act of 1944 or any other law, make such disposition as it
may deem desirable of (A) radioactive materials, and (B)
any other property the special disposition of which is, in the
opinion of the Commission, in the interest of the national
security.
(b) SECURITY. — The President may, in advance, exempt any
specific action of the Commission in a particular matter from the
provisions of law relating to contracts whenever he determines
that such action is essential in the interest of the common defense
and security.
(c) ADVISORY COMMITTEES. — The members of the General Ad-
visory Committee established pursuant to section 2(b) and the
members of advisory boards established pursuant to subsection
(a) (1) of this section may serve as such without regard to the
provisions of sections 109 and 113 of the Criminal Code (18 U.S.C.,
sees. 198 and 203) or section 19 (e) of the Contract Settlement
Act of 1944, except insofar as such sections may prohibit any such
member from receiving compensation in respect of any particular
matter which directly involves the Commission or in which the
Commission is directly interested.
[p.
DEFINITIONS
SEC. 18. As used in this Act —
(a) The term "atomic energy" shall be construed to mean all
forms of energy released in the course of or as a result of nuclear
fission or nuclear transformation.
-------
52 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
(b) The term "Government agency" means any executive de-
partment, commission, independent establishment, corporation
wholly or partly owned by the United States which is an instru-
mentality of the United States, board, bureau, division, service,
office, officer, authority, administration, or other establishment, in
the executive branch of the Government.
(c) The term "person" means any individual, corporation,
partnership, firm, association, trust, estate, public or private in-
stitution, group, the United States or any agency thereof, any
government other than the United States, any political subdivision
of any such government, and any legal successor, representative,
agent, or agency of the foregoing, or other entity, but shall not
include the Commission or officers or employees of the Commission
in the exercise of duly authorized functions.
(d) The term "United States," when used in a geographical
sense, includes all Territories and possessions of the United States
and the Canal Zone.
(e) The term "research and development" means theoretical
analysis, exploration, and experimentation, and the extension of
investigative findings and theories of a scientific or technical
nature into practical application for experimental and demonstra-
tion purposes, including the experimental production and testing
of models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes.
(f) The term "equipment or device utilizing fissionable mate-
rial or atomic energy" shall be construed to mean any equipment
or device capable of making use of fissionable material or pecu-
liarly adapted for making use of atomic energy and any important
component part especially designed for such equipment or devices,
as determined by the Commission.
(g) The term "facilities for the production of fissionable mate-
rial" shall be construed to mean any equipment or device capable
of such production and any important component part especially
designed for such equipment or devices, as determined by the
Commission.
[p. 774]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 53
l.la(l) SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON
ATOMIC ENERGY
S. REP. No. 1211, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946).
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946
APRIL 19 (legislative day, MARCH 5), 1946.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. McMAHON, from the Special Committee on Atomic Energy,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 1717]
The Special Committee on Atomic Energy, to whom were re-
ferred various bills for the control of atomic energy, report back to
the Senate S. 1717 with amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
PART I. HISTORY OF THE LEGISLATION
Within 3 months after atomic bombs were dropped on Hiro-
shima and Nagasaki, a series of measures was introduced in the
Senate to meet the alarming and unprecedented problems created
by this revolutionary development of science. Some of the meas-
ures sought to establish permanent domestic machinery for the
control of atomic energy; some to meet the international problems;
others provided simply for studies of the issues involved.
DOMESTIC CONTROL BILLS
On September 6, Senator McMahon introduced S. 1359, estab-
lishing an Atomic Energy Control Board composed of five Cabinet
officers, the Chairman of the Federal Power Commission, and a
public member to serve as Chairman. This bill charged the Board
with the responsibility of developing atomic energy domestically
and controlling its use. It contained also a provision for sharing
information with other
[p. 1]
members of the Security Council of the United Nations on a
reciprocal basis, subject to the establishment of a system for the
international inspection of munitions production.
-------
54 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
S. 1463, introduced by Senator Johnson of Colorado on October
3, a bill originating in the War Department, provided for a part-
time commission of nine members, with broad controls over the
domestic development of atomic energy. Military officials were
permitted to serve as members of the Commission or as the full-
time administrator or deputy administrator.
S. 1557, introduced on November 6 by Senator Ball, provided for
the establishment of a part-time commission of nine members, four
of whom would be Cabinet members. Broad authority and general
controls similar to those conferred on the managerial boards by
S. 1463 and S. 1359 were vested in the Commission.
INTERNATIONAL MEASURES
On October 29, Senator O'Mahoney introduced Senate Concur-
rent Resolution 38; calling for a universal international agreement
to outlaw the atomic bomb. Senator McKellar, on November 8,
introduced Senate Resolution 186, which took cognizance of the
threat of the atomic bomb and requested that the President enter
into international negotiations to outlaw the bomb and to
strengthen the United Nations organization. S. 1359, discussed
above, contained special provisions to meet the international
problem.
SPECIAL STUDIES
On September 6, Senator Vandenberg introduced Senate Con-
current Resolution 28 to establish a joint congressional committee
to make a full and complete study of the development, control, and
use of atomic energy. This measure passed the Senate but was not
acted upon in the House. Senate Joint Resolution 93, intro-
duced September 12, by Senator Thomas of Utah, provided for a
commission consisting of Members of Congress, public members,
and a Supreme Court Justice. This Commission was to be charged
with the duty of formulating immediate policies on atomic energy
and recommending legislation to the Congress. Senate Resolution
179, introduced on October 29, by Senator McMahon, proposed the
establishment of a Senate Special Committee on Atomic Energy
to—
make a full, complete, and continuing study and investigation with respect
to problems relating to the development, use, and control of atomic energy.
The committee was to report on bills and resolutions relating to
atomic energy referred to it from the Senate and to make recom-
mendations as to legislation.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 55
PRESIDENTIAL MESSAGE, OCTOBER 3, 1945
On October 3, 1945, the President sent a message to the Con-
gress stressing the necessity of legislation. This message empha-
sized the need for a national policy for the control of atomic energy
to assure its use for peaceful ends and for the safety of the Nation.
The President outlined provisions to be included in the legisla-
tion as follows:
[p. 2]
1. An atomic energy commission whose members should be ap-
pointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
2. Control by the Commission over all atomic energy installa-
tions, with authority to acquire source materials, i.e., uranium
ores, and other property needed in the development of atomic
energy.
3. Encouragement by the Commission of research, development,
and exploitation in the field of atomic energy, with the power to
license property and facilities for these purposes.
4. A prohibition on the export or import of source materials ex-
cept under the direction of the Commission.
5. Security regulations and penalties for their violation to be
prescribed by the Commission.
The President also advocated international agreements renounc-
ing the use of the atomic bomb but encouraging the development of
atomic energy for peacetime purposes. The basic scientific knowl-
edge on atomic energy, the message said, is already widely
disseminated. An armament race could end only in disaster. Dis-
cussions with Great Britain and Canada were proposed by the
President as a forerunner to adequate international control under
the auspices of the United Nations.
CREATION OF SPECIAL SENATE COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
On October 29, 1945, the Senate adopted Senate Resolution 179,
establishing the Special Committee on Atomic Energy. The text
of the resolution is as follows:
Resolved, That a special committee on atomic energy, to be composed of eleven
Members of the Senate appointed by the President pro tempore of the Senate,
of whom one shall be designated as chairman by the President pro tempore, is
authorized and directed to make a full, complete, and continuing study and
investigation with respect to problems relating to the development, use, and
control of atomic energy. All bills and resolutions introduced in the Senate,
and all bills and resolutions from the House of Representatives, proposing legis-
lation relating to the development, use, and control of atomic energy shall be
referred to the special committee. The special committee is authorized to report
to the Senate at the earliest practicable date by bill or otherwise with recom-
mendations upon any matters covered by this resolution. The existence of this
committee shall terminate at the end of the Seventy-ninth Congress.
-------
56 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
For the purposes of this resolution the committee, or any duly authorized
subcommittee thereof, is authorized to hold such hearings, to sit and act at such
times and places during the sessions, recesses, and adjourned periods of the
Senate in the Seventy-ninth Congress, to employ such experts, and such clerical,
stenographic, and other assistants, to require by subpena or otherwise the at-
tendance of such witnesses and the production of such correspondence, books,
papers, and documents, to administer such oaths, to take such testimony, and
to make such expenditures, as it deems advisable. The cost of stenographic
services to report such hearings shall not be in excess of 25 cents per hundred
words. The expenses of the committee, which shall not exceed $25,000, shall be
paid from the contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers approved by the
chairman.
GENERAL HEARINGS
At its first meeting the committee determined to begin its work,
not with a consideration of specific legislation but with public
hearings of a general nature, in which the scientific background
and the essential technical facts of atomic energy might be made
known to the committee and to the public.
[P. 3]
In particular, the committee wanted information which would
help to answer these questions:
1. What had been the real effects of the atomic bombs dropped
on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What were the destructive poten-
tialities of atomic bombs, at present and in the foreseeable future?
2. How difficult had it been to make the atomic bomb? How
easy would it be for other countries to make it?
3. What defense could be devised against the atomic bomb?
4. What secrets did this country hold in connection with the
production of atomic bombs? Could these secrets be kept, and if
so, how long?
5. What peacetime benefits would come from atomic energy?
6. How was the Manhattan district project run? How had it
originated? Who had contributed to it? How could it best be
operated in the future?
To answer these questions the committee called a large number
of witnesses. Since most of the questions were of technical na-
ture, many of the witnesses were scientists who had worked on the
atomic bomb. Whenever possible, witnesses were heard in public
sessions; but where testimony subject to security considerations
was required, it was given in executive session. The most pains-
taking precautions were taken to assure the maintenance of se-
crecy with respect to testimony given in executive sessions,
In addition to the scientists, military officials, industrialists, and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 57
others who had been closely connected with the Manhattan district
project were heard.
[P. 4]
The information developed at the hearings went far toward an-
swering questions which the committee had set. The public
hearings have been printed and merit the careful attention of any-
one with a serious interest in the atomic energy problems before
the Congress. What follows is a terse summary of the main lines
of the testimony:
1. The atomic bomb is a weapon of appalling destructiveness.
While quantitative comparisons with other explosives can be made,
the arithmetical ratios describe inadequately the profound changes
in all relations between nations foreshadowed by the existence of
the atomic bomb. The bomb and the improvements on it, which
will certainly be made, mean that another war in which atomic
bombs are used will threaten the existence not only of cities and
nations, but of civilization itself.
2. Other countries of the world will be able to make atomic
bombs. The monopoly which we hold at present is precarious and
certain to be short-lived. Estimates differ as to when this or that
country will be able to produce atomic bombs, but it is clear that
any nation which is relatively industrialized has a good chance of
producing bombs within the next 5 to 15 years. The degree of
industrialization will determine how soon bombs can be made in
quantity rather than the possibility of mastering the art of making
an atomic bomb.
3. No real military defense against the atomic bomb has been
devised, and none is in sight. The destructiveness of atomic
bombs is so engulfing that any defense which is not almost literally
airtight will not protect our country against devastation.
4. Some protection may accrue from the faithful adherence to
international agreements for the prevention of atomic bomb manu-
facture. Such agreements raise technical problems of inspection
and control which are inordinately difficult but not beyond solution.
The political problems depend for their solution on widespread
good faith and the will to peace among all nations. Thus, it turns
out that the real protection against the atomic bomb lies in the
prevention of war.
5. The secrets which we hold are matters of science and engi-
neering that other nations can and will discover. In large part
they are secrets of nature, and the book of nature is open to care-
ful, painstaking readers the world over. We can give ourselves a
-------
58 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
certain temporary protection by retaining the secrets we now have.
But that protection grows weaker day by day, and our research
must be vigorously encouraged, supported, and pursued if we are
to maintain our place among other nations, to say nothing of re-
taining our advantage.
6. The peacetime benefits of atomic energy promise to be great
indeed, particularly in medicine, biology, and many branches of
research. These benefits are immediate in their promise but will
require extended and unfettered development for full realization.
The vast possibilities of utilizing atomic energy as a source of
power depend on (1) further research and development, and (2)
study of the economic and international implications of the estab-
lishment of plants producing and using fissionable material. In
this connection, the point has been repeatedly emphasized that
plants which produce
[p. 5]
power also produce material which constitutes the explosive
element of bombs. This fact raises domestic and international
issues of profound significance.
7. Military control of atomic energy development, though neces-
sary and useful during the war, is a form of direction to which
scientists in peacetime will not willingly submit. The continuation
of such control will probably discourage further development and
research. And on that development depends not only peaceful
progress, but the maintenance of a position in the military arts
essential to the national defense. On the other hand, the armed
services are entitled to extensive participation in this development,
insofar as it relates to the military applications of atomic energy.
It is their right also to have a voice in protecting the military
secrets of atomic weapons.
On the basis of these data the outlines of legislation to deal with
atomic energy began to emerge. At the conclusion of the first
group of hearings it seemed evident that certain facts relating to
atomic energy, including all technical data on the design and con-
struction of the atomic bomb itself, ought to be kept secret, at least
until effective and reciprocal international safeguards could be
devised. This was the principle enunciated in the joint declaration
of President Truman, Prime Minister Attlee, and Prime Minister
Mackenzie King on November 15, 1945. At the same time, it was
realized that the keeping of these secrets was only a temporary
thing. Legislation should facilitate as far as possible (1) inter-
national agreements on atomic energy which would themselves be
a step toward international understanding and good will, and (2)
the rapid scientific development of atomic energy, which would
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 59
promote both the industrial prosperity of the world and the im-
provement of our own instruments of national defense.
Specifically, the testimony heard before the Christmas recess
suggested answers to the main problems which had been raised by
the three bills introduced before the hearings were begun. It
suggested that the development of atomic energy, which was of
paramount importance, could best be done by a full-time civilian
commission. This Commission would require broad powers to
stimulate private research and development and should be able
actively to promote military as well as industrial and scientific
research. The Commission should be required to own all materials
from which an atomic bomb might be made and to operate all
plants where these materials were manufactured. Legislation
should make adequate provision for the protection of information
of direct military value to a foreign power and for the role of the
armed services in relation to military applications of atomic en-
ergy. However, since the only real solution to the whole problem
lies in continued world peace, legislation should be directed in
specific terms toward that end and should contain a practical
expression of our desire for international cooperation.
INTRODUCTION OF S. 1717
S. 1717 was introduced in the Senate on December 20 by Senator
McMahon. As originally introduced it contained many provisions
reflecting the principles developed at the committee's hearings. It
provided for a full-time civilian commission, and charged the Com-
[p. 6]
mission with the responsibility of owning all fissionable materials
and operating all facilities for their production. It gave certain
guaranties to free scientific research, made provision for licensing
devices utilizing atomic energy, and contained supporting provi-
sions relating to source materials, patents, bombs, and other
matters.
LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT
On February 1, 1946, the President in a letter addressed to the
chairman indicated five points which he considered desirable in
atomic energy legislation. These points were:
1. A commission of three full-time civilian members.
2. Exclusive production and ownership by the Government of
the materials releasing atomic energy (fissionable material).
3. Compulsory, nonexclusive licensing of private patents on de-
vices utilizing atomic energy.
-------
60 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
4. Guaranties to free scientific research.
5. Provisions to facilitate the establishment and enforcement of
international agreements.
HEARINGS ON DOMESTIC LEGISLATION
Every phase of atomic energy legislation was discussed in the
hearings after the Christmas recess.
Witnesses were invited to give their views on the composition of
the Commission—whether it should be full-time or part-time,
whether there should be military representation, whether it was
probable that men of the highest caliber would be available for
service with the Commission.
Industrialists and engineers who had participated in the oper-
ations of the Manhattan district project gave the committee their
judgment on such points as Government versus private ownership
and operation of plants producing fissionable materials, ownership
and custody of fissionable materials, organizational structure to
assure maximum operating efficiency, etc. Experts testified on
suitable methods of controlling source materials for the production
of fissionable materials, on effective means of developing and con-
trolling atomic energy power plants and other devices utilizing this
energy. Testimony was offered by eminent counsel on framing
patent procedures so as to assure the maintenance of security, the
preservation of incentive, the vigorous and fruitful development of
atomic energy in all its phases.
The committee heard Cabinet members, the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget and other qualified Government officials on
numerous aspects of the bill, especially administrative issues.
Testimony was offered on methods of controlling the dissemination
of information. Questions relating to the general authority and
broad powers of the Commission were considered. The views of
the Military Departments were solicited on problems relating to
liaison and the military applications of atomic energy.
*******
[p. ?]
Finally, after 4 weeks of hearings, the committee went into exec-
utive session to consider the legislation itself. The bill introduced
by the chairman, S. 1717, was quickly adopted as a working basis.
The committee went over this bill word by word, altering, adding,
and striking out various portions. Drawing heavily on the infor-
mation
[P. 8]
and advice developed during both sets of hearings, the committee
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 61
members considered also the issues raised in public debate. At
one point the public hearings were reopened to hear several wit-
nesses on certain specific provisions of the bill. Aware of the
unique role scientists had played throughout and recognizing the
value of their counsel, the committee incorporated in the bill certain
additions and changes recommended by leading scientific groups.
The bill was under discussion in executive session for several
weeks of daily sessions, all initial differences of opinion on major
elements were satisfactorily resolved, and no section was adopted
except by unanimous consent. Thus the bill, as amended, in its
entirety has the unanimous approval of the committee. It re-
flects the deliberate judgment of all the committee members as
to the best instrument they are able to devise in the discharge of
their grave responsibility.
PART II. ANALYSIS OF S. 1717 BY SECTIONS
Section 1. Declaration of policy
(a) FINDINGS AND DECLARATION.—Research and experimentation in the field
of nuclear chain reaction have attained the stage at which the release of atomic
energy on a large scale is practical. The significance of the atomic bomb for
military purposes is evident. The effect of the use of atomic energy for civilian
purposes upon the social, economic, and political structures of today cannot
now be determined. It is a field in which unknown factors are involved. There-
fore, any legislation will necessarily be subject to revision from time to time. It
is reasonable to anticipate, however, that tapping this new source of energy
will cause profound changes in our present way of life. Accordingly, it is
hereby declared to be the policy of the people of the United States that, subject
at all times to the paramount objective of assuring the common defense and
security, the development and utilization of atomic energy shall, so far as prac-
ticable, be directed toward improving the public welfare, increasing the stand-
ard of living, strengthening free competition in private enterprise, and
promoting world peace.
(b) PURPOSE OF ACT.—It is the purpose of this Act to effectuate the policies
set out in section 1 (a) by providing, among others, for the following major
programs relating to atomic energy:
(1) A program of assisting and fostering private research and development
to encourage maximum scientific progress;
(2) A program for the control of scientific and technical information which
will permit the dissemination of such information to encourage scientific prog-
ress, and for the sharing on a reciprocal basis of information concerning the
practical industrial application of atomic energy as soon as effective and en-
forceable safeguards against its use for destructive purposes can be devised;
(3) A program of federally conducted research and development to assure
the Government of adequate scientific and technical accomplishment;
(4) A program for Government control of the production, ownership, and
use of fissionable material to assure the common defense and security and to
insure the broadest possible exploitation of the field; and
(5) A program of administration which will be consistent with the fore-
going policies and with international arrangements made by the United States,
-------
62 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
and which will enable the Congress to be currently informed so as to take fur-
ther legislative action as may hereafter be appropriate.
Subject to the paramount objective of assuring the national de-
fense and security, it is the purpose of the bill to direct the de-
velopment of atomic energy in such a way as to improve the public
welfare, increase the standard of living, strengthen free competi-
tion in private enterprise, and promote world peace. To carry
out these purposes, the bill provides for Government control over
atomic energy and for Government programs of information,
production, research, and development. It provides a program
of administration to exercise this control and carry out this de-
velopment, subject to international agreements of the
[p. 9]
United States and to such further legislation as the Congress may
enact. It is recognized that many unforeseeable developments may
arise in this field requiring changes in the legislation from time
to time.
*******
[P. 10]
Section 3. Research
(a) RESEARCH ASSISTANCE.—The Commission is directed to exercise its
powers in such manner as to insure the continued conduct of research and
development activities in the fields specified below by private or public in-
stitutions or persons and to assist in the acquisition of an ever-expanding fund
of theoretical and practical knowledge in such fields. To this end the Com-
mission is authorized and directed to make arrangements (including contracts,
agreements, grants-in-aid and loans) for the conduct of research and devel-
opment activities relating to—
(1) nuclear processes;
(2) the theory and production of atomic energy, including processes,
materials, and devices related to such production;
(3) utilization of fissionable and radioactive materials for medical,
biological, health, or military purposes;
[p. 12]
(4) utilization of fissionable and radioactive materials and processes
entailed in the production of such materials for all other purposes, includ-
ing industrial uses; and
(5) the protection of health during research and production activities.
The Commission may make such arrangements without regard to the provi-
sions of section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5) upon
certification by the Commission that such action is necessary in the interest
of the common defense and security, or upon a showing that advertising is not
reasonably practicable, and may make partial -and advance payments under
such arrangements, and may make available for use in connection therewith
such of its equipment and facilities as it may deem desirable. Such arrange-
ments shall contain such provisions to protect health, to minimize danger
from explosion and other hazards to life or property, and to require the re-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 63
porting and to permit the inspection of work performed thereunder, as the
Commission may determine; but shall not contain any provisions or conditions
which prevent the dissemination of scientific or technical information, except
to the extent such dissemination is prohibited by law.
(b) RESEARCH BY THE COMMISSION.—The Commission is authorized and
directed to conduct, through its own facilities, activities and studies of the
types specified in subsection (a) above.
The committee recognizes that only by continued progress in
science can the purpose of the bill be achieved. It is firm in its
opinion that continued progress will depend, in the future as in the
past, upon the free and disinterested work of the thousands of sci-
entists and research workers in private laboratories and univer-
sities throughout our country and the world. Science is not made
by its titans alone.
In drafting the bill the committee has been particularly careful
to refrain from inserting prohibitions or restrictions of any nature
on scientific research. The committee confines the powers of the
Commission over independent research to the minimum necessary
to protect national security and to prevent hazards to the public
safety and health. The Commission is directed to assist private
and public institutions in the acquisition of an ever-expanding
fund of theoretical and practical knowledge in the following fields:
(1) nuclear processes; (2) the theory and production of atomic energy,
including processes, materials, and devices related to such production; (3)
utilization of fissionable and radioactive materials for medical, biological,
health, or military purposes; (4) utilization of fissionable and radioactive
materials and processes entailed in the production of such materials for all
other purposes, including industrial uses; and (5) the protection of health
during research and production activities.
The means of assistance provided in the bill are varied and ex-
tensive. The Commission is to make arrangements (including
contracts, loans, grants-in-aid) with private or public institutions
or persons and may place equipment and facilities at their dis-
posal. Under section 5 the Commission is directed "to distribute
sufficient fissionable material to permit the conduct of widespread
research and development activity, to the maximum extent prac-
ticable," and is directed in the distribution of byproduct material
to "give preference to applicants proposing to use such materials
in the conduct of research and development activity."
The Commission is also directed to carry on, supplementary to
these aids to private and public institutions, its own program of
research, in the fields specified above through its facilities and
under its supervision.
[p. 13]
-------
64 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Section 4. Production of fissionable material
(a) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "produce," when used in
relation to fissionable material, means to manufacture, produce, or refine
fissionable material, as distinguished from source materials as defined in
section 5 (b) (1), or to separate fissionable material from other substances
in which such material may be contained or to produce new fissionable
material.
(b) PROHIBITION.—It shall be unlawful for any person to own any facilities
for the production of fissionable material or for any person to produce fission-
able material, except to the extent authorized by subsection (c).
(c) OWNERSHIP AND OPERATION OF PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—
(1) OWNERSHIP OF PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—The Commission shall be
the exclusive owner of all facilities for the production of fissionable
material other than facilities which (A) are useful in the conduct of
research and development activities in the fields specified in section 3,
and (B) do not, in the opinion of the Commission, have a potential pro-
duction rate adequate to enable the operator of such facilities to produce
within a reasonable period of time a sufficient quantity of fissionable
material to produce an atomic bomb or any other atomic weapon.
(2) OPERATION OF THE COMMISSION'S PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—The Com-
mission is authorized to produce or to provide for the production of fis-
sionable material in its own facilities. To the extent deemed neces-
sary, the Commission is authorized to make, or to continue in effect,
contracts with persons obligating them to produce fissionable material
in facilities owned by the Commission. The Commission is also autho-
rized to enter into research and development contracts authorizing the
contractor to produce fissionable material in facilities owned by the Com-
mission to the extent that the production of such fissionable material may
be incident to the conduct of research and development activities under
such contracts. Any contract entered into under this section shall con-
tain provisions (A) prohibiting the contractor with the Commission
from subcontracting any part of the work he is obligated to perform
under the contract, and (B) obligating the contractor to make such
reports to the Commission as it may deem appropriate with respect to
his activities under the contract, to submit to frequent inspection by
employees of the Commission of all such activities, and to comply with
all safety and security regulations which may be prescribed by the
Commission. Any contract made under the provisions of this paragraph
may be made without regard to the provisions of section 3709 of the
Revised Statutes (U.S.C., title 41, sec. 5) upon certification by the Com-
mission that such action is necessary in the interest of the common
defense and security, or upon a showing that advertising is not reason-
ably practicable, and partial and advance payments may be made under
such contracts. The President shall determine at least once each year
the quantities of fissionable material to be produced under this paragraph.
(3) OPERATION OF OTHER PRODUCTION FACILITIES.—Fissionable mate-
rial may be produced in the conduct of research and development activi-
ties in facilities which, under paragraph (1) above, are not required to
be owned by the Commission.
(d) IRRADIATION OF MATERIALS.—For the purpose of increasing the sup-
ply of radioactive materials, the Commission is authorized to expose mate-
rials of any kind to the radiation incident to the processes of producing or
utilizing fissionable material.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 65
From the start of its deliberations, the committee has been con-
vinced that an absolute Government monopoly of production of
fissionable materials is indispensable to effective domestic control
of atomic energy. A number of factors point unmistakably in this
direction:
1. Fissionable material is the principal ingredient of the atomic
bomb. Thus, to permit private manufacture of fissionable ma-
terial would be to permit private manufacture of material of
enormous destructive potentialities.
2. The production of fissionable material is attended by serious
hazards to public health and safety. The responsibility for min-
imizing these hazards is clearly a governmental function.
[p. 14]
3. The future production of fissionable material is closely inter-
related with the possibility of achieving effective and reciprocal
international safeguards against the use of atomic weapons. It is
undesirable, therefore, to permit private development in an area
which may soon be placed under Government control by reason
of international agreements.
4. The production of fissionable material is technologically in
its infancy; unforeseen and unforseeable factors may play a great
part in its development. To permit decontrol and decentralization
of this activity, and weaken continuing Government supervision,
would be contrary to the principle of prudent stewardship de-
manded of the Government by considerations of national defense
and national welfare.
5. The technology of fissionable material production teaches
that even a slight interruption in the manufacturing process may
occasion great loss and damage to the entire operation. Govern-
ment control is more likely to assure continuity of operation than
is private control.
Wherever possible, the committee endeavors to reconcile Gov-
ernment monopoly of the production of fissionable material with
our traditional free-enterprise system. Thus, the bill permits
management contracts for the operation of Government-owned
plants so as to gain the full advantage of the skill and experience
of American industry. Industrial research in the field of atomic
energy is left to private initiative, even where it relates to methods
of production. Prospecting for and mining of source materials
are at every stage to be encouraged and supported.
Section 5. Control of materials
(a) FISSIONABLE MATERIALS.—
(1) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "fissionable material"
-------
66 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
means plutonium, uranium enriched in the isotope 235, any other material
which the Commission determines to be capable of releasing substantial
quantities of energy through nuclear chain reaction of the material, or any
material artificially enriched by any of the foregoing; but does not include
source materials; as denned in section 5 (b) (1).
(2) GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP OF ALL FISSIONABLE MATERIAL.—All right,
title, and interest within or under the jurisdiction of the United States, in
or to any fissionable material, now or hereafter produced, shall be the prop-
erty of the Commission, and shall be deemed to be vested in the Commission
by virtue of this Act. Any person owning any interest in any fissionable
material at the time of the enactment of this Act, or owning any interest in
any material at the time when such material is hereafter determined to be
a fissionable material, or who lawfully produces any fissionable material
incident to privately financed research or development activities, shall be
paid just compensation therefor. The Commission may, by action consistent
with the provisions of paragraph (4) below, authorize any such person to
retain possession of such fissionable material, but no person shall have any
title in or to any fissionable material.
(3) PROHIBITION.—It shall be unlawful for any person, after sixty days
from the effective date of this Act to (A) possess or transfer any fissionable
material, except as authorized by the Commission, or (B) export from or
import into the United States any fissionable material, or (C) directly or
indirectly engage in the production of any fissionable material outside of the
United States.
(4) DISTRIBUTION OF FISSIONABLE MATERIAL.—Without prejudice to its con-
tinued ownership thereof, the Commission is authorized to distribute fission-
able material, with or without charge, to applicants requesting such material
(A) for the conduct of research or development activities either independently
or under contract or other arrangement with the Commission. (B) for use
in medical therapy, or (C) for use pursuant to a license issued under the
authority of section 7. Such material shall be distributed in such quantities
and on such terms that no applicant will be enabled to obtain an amount
sufficient to construct a bomb
[p. 15]
or other military weapon. The Commission is directed to distribute sufficient
fissionable material to permit the conduct of widespread independent research
and development activity, to the maximum extent practicable. In determin-
ing the quantities of fissionable material to be distributed, the Commission
shall make such provisions for its own needs and for the conservation of fis-
sionable material as it may determine to be necessary in the national interest
for the future development of atomic energy. The Commission shall not dis-
tribute any material to any applicant, and shall recall any distributed mate-
rial from any applicant, who is not equipped to observe or who fails to observe
such safety standards to protect health and to minimize danger from explo-
sion or other hazard to life or property as may be established by the Com-
mission, or who uses such material in violation of law or regulation of the
Commission or in a manner other than as disclosed in the application therefor.
(5) The Commission is authorized to purchase or otherwise acquire any
fissionable material or any interest therein outside the United States, or any
interest in facilities for the production of fissionable material, or in real
property on which such facilities are located, without regard to the provisions
of section 3700 of the Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5) upon certi-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 67
fication by the Commission that such action is necessary in the interest of the
common defense and security, or upon a showing that advertising is not rea-
sonably practicable, and partial and advance payments may be made under
contracts for such purposes. The Commission is further authorized to take,
requisition, or condemn, or otherwise acquire any interest in such facilities
or real property, and just compensation shall be made therefor.
(b) SOURCE MATERIALS.—
(1) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "source material" means
uranium, thorium, or any other material which is determined by the Commis-
sion, with the approval of the President, to be peculiarly essential to the
production of fissionable materials; but includes ores only if they contain one
or more of the foregoing materials in such concentration as the Commission
may by regulation determine from time to time.
(2) LICENSE FOR TRANSFERS REQUIRED.—Unless authorized by a license is-
sued by the Commission, no person may transfer or deliver and no person
may receive possession of or title to any source material after removal from
its place of deposit in nature, except that licenses shall not be required for
quantities of source materials which, in the opinion of the Commission, are
unimportant.
(3) ISSUANCE OF LICENSES.—The Commission shall establish such standards
for the issuance, refusal, or revocation of licenses as it may deem necessary
to assure adequate source materials for production, research, or development
activities pursuant to this Act or to prevent the use of such materials in a
manner inconsistent with the national welfare. Licenses shall be issued in
accordance with such procedures as the Commission may by regulation
establish.
(4) REPORTING.—The Commission is authorized to issue such regulations or
orders requiring reports of ownership, possession, extraction, refining, ship-
ment, or other handling of source materials as it may deem necessary, except
that such reports shall not be required with respect to (A) any source ma-
terial prior to removal from its place of deposit in nature, or (B) quantities
of source materials which in the opinion of the Commission are unimportant
or the reporting of which will discourage independent prospecting for new
deposits.
(5) ACQUISITION.—The Commission is authorized and directed to purchase,
take, requisition, condemn, or otherwise acquire, supplies of source materials
or any interest in real property containing deposits of source materials to the
extent it deems necessary to effectuate the provisions of this Act. Any pur-
chase made under this paragraph may be made without regard to the provi-
sions of section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5) upon
certification by the Commission that such action is necessary in the interest
of the common defense and security, or upon a showing that advertising is
not reasonably practicable, and partial and advance payments may be made
thereunder. The Commission may establish guaranteed prices for all source
materials delivered to it within a specified time. Just compensation shall be
made for any property taken, requisitioned, or condemned under this
paragraph.
(6) EXPLORATION.—The Commission is authorized to conduct and enter
into contracts for the conduct of exploratory operations, investigations, and
inspections to determine the location, extent, mode of occurrence, use, or
conditions of deposits or supplies of source materials, making just compensa-
tion for any damage or injury occasioned thereby. Such exploratory opera-
tions may be conducted only with the consent of the owner, but such
-------
68 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
investigations and inspections may be conducted with or without such consent.
[p. 16]
(7) PUBLIC LANDS.—All uranium, thorium, and all other materials de-
termined pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection to be peculiarly
essential to the production of fissionable material, contained, in whatever
concentration, in deposits in the public lands are hereby reserved for the use
of the United States; except that with respect to any location, entry, or
settlement made prior to the date of enactment of this Act no reservation
shall be deemed to have been made, if such reservation would deprive any
person of any existing or inchoate rights or privileges to which he would
otherwise be entitled or would otherwise enjoy. The Secretary of the Interior
shall cause to be inserted in every patent, conveyance, lease, permit, or other
authorization hereafter granted to use the public lands or their mineral
resources, under any of which there might result the extraction of any ma-
terials so reserved, a reservation to the United States of all such materials,
whether or not of commercial value, together with the right of the United
States through its authorized agents or representatives at any time to enter
upon the land and prospect for, mine, and remove the same, making just
compensation for any damage or injury occasioned thereby. Any lands so
patented, conveyed, leased, or otherwise disposed of may be used, and any
rights under any such permit or authorization may be exercised, as if no
reservation of such materials had been made under this subsection; except
that, when such use results in the extraction of any such material from the
land in quantities which may not be transferred or delivered without a license
under this subsection, such material shall be the property of the Commission
and the Commission may require delivery of such material to it by any pos-
sessor thereof after such material has been separated as such from the ores
in which it was contained. If the Commission requires the delivery of such
material to it, it shall pay to the person mining or extracting the same, or to
such other person as the Commission determines to be entitled thereto, such
sums, including profits, as the Commission deems fair and reasonable for the
discovery, mining, development, production, extraction, and other services
performed with respect to such material prior to such delivery, but such pay-
ment shall not include any amount on account of the value of such material
before removal from its place of deposit in nature. If the Commission does
not require delivery of such material to it, the reservation made pursuant to
this paragraph shall be of no further force or effect.
(c) BYPRODUCT MATERIALS.—
(1) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "byproduct material"
means any radioactive material (except fissionable material) yielded in or
made radioactive by exposure to the radiation incident to the process of pro-
ducing or utilizing fissionable material.
(2) DISTRIBUTION.—The Commission is authorized to distribute, with or
without charge, byproduct materials to applicants seeking such materials for
research or development activity, medical therapy, industrial uses, or such
other useful applications as may be developed. In distributing such materials,
the Commission shall give preference to applicants proposing to use such ma-
terials in the conduct of research and development activity or medical therapy.
The Commission shall not distribute any byproduct materials to any appli-
cant, and shall recall any distributed materials from any applicant, who is
not equipped to observe or who fails to observe such safety standards to pro-
tect health as may be established by the Commission or who uses such ma-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 69
terials in violation of law or regulation of the Commission or in a manner
other than as disclosed in the application therefor.
(d) GENERAL PROVISIONS.—
(1) The Commission shall not distribute any fissionable or source material
to any person for a use which is not under or within the jurisdiction of the
United States or to any foreign government.
(2) The Commission shall establish by regulation a procedure by which
any person who is dissatisfied with the distribution or refusal to distribute to
him, or the recall from him, of any fissionable or byproduct materials or with
the issuance, refusal, or revocation of a license to him for the transfer or
receipt of source materials may obtain a review of such determination by a
board of appeal consisting of three members appointed by the Commission.
The Commission may in its discretion review and revise any decision of such
board of appeal.
1. Fissionable materials.—Fissionable materials are those capa-
ble of releasing substantial quantities of energy through nuclear
chain reaction. Included are U-235 and plutonium; the Commis-
sion may, by regulation, add other materials to this class. Con-
sistent with sec-
[P. 17]
tion 4, which provides for Government ownership of all produc-
tion facilities and a Government monopoly of production, the own-
ership of all fissionable material is vested in the Commision and
private ownership is forbidden. The bill provides, of course, that
just compensation shall be made to private owners.
While title is vested in the Commission, it is authorized to dis-
tribute fissionable material, with or without charge, for conducting
research and development activities, for use in medical therapy, or
for use in devices utilizing atomic energy, pursuant to licenses
under section 7. The Commission is authorized to purchase or
acquire fissionable material outside the United States but the
export of fissionable material is prohibited.
Since fissionable material is produced incident to research and
development, appropriate provision is made in the bill to permit
the conduct of such activities subject to the maintenance of se-
curity, and health and safety standards.
2. Source materials.—A source material is any material de-
termined by the Commission to be peculiarly essential to the pro-
duction of fissionable material. The relation of source material to
nuclear energy may be thus portrayed:
Source material plus processing > Fissionable material.
Fissionable material plus processing > Atomic (i. e., nuclear) energy.
Source materials include uranium and thorium and ores containing
uranium and thorium in such proportions as may be set by the
Commission.
-------
70 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
The principle of Government monopoly which the committee has
adopted as essential in reference to the production and ownership
of fissionable materials is not extended to the ownership, mining
or refining of source materials. Nevertheless, the committee
recognizes the necessity of giving to the Commission the power
to control supplies and transfers of source material by means of
licensing procedures.
While source materials in their natural state are not capable of
dangerous misuse, they are, as their name indicates, the source of
all fissionable material and must accordingly be conserved as the
Nation's most valuable mineral resource. The Commission must
be assured an adequate and continuing supply of source materials
for the operation of its production facilities for military or de-
velopmental purposes. The Commission is therefore empowered
to take, in return for just compensation, supplies of source ma-
terials wherever found, or interests in real property containing
such materials.
Deposits of source materials in the public lands are reserved to
the Government except where such reservation would deprive any
person of existing rights on a location, entry, or settlement made
prior to the enactment of the bill. The Commission is authorized
to conduct investigations and inspections on private property for
the purpose of determining the location, extent, mode of supplies
or occurrence, use, or conditions of supplies or deposits of such
materials, but may not conduct mining operations of an ex-
ploratory nature on private property without the owner's consent.
It is not the intent of the committee to authorize the Commission to
engage in mining operations in competition with private mining
activity unless such operations are necessary to insure to the
Commission a supply of source materials adequate for carrying
out its duties and responsibilities under the provisions of the bill.
[p. 18]
In framing these provisions the committee has been alive to the
necessity of encouraging the activities of independent prospectors.
The traditional rights of and incentives to prospectors are sub-
stantially preserved and they are relieved of burdensome report-
ing requirements.
3. Byproduct materials.—Testimony before the committee in-
dicates that the radioactive materials yielded in the production of
fissionable material are of enormous scientific and industrial value
and their distribution involves no danger to the national security.
The Commission is required to distribute these materials with or
without charge for research and development activities, medical
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 71
therapy, and industrial and other uses, giving priority to medical
uses and research.
*******
Section 7. Utilization of atomic energy
(a) LICENSE REQUIRED.—It shall be unlawful except as provided in sections
5 (a) (4) (A) or (B) or 6 (a), for any person to manufacture any equip-
ment or device utilizing fissionable material or atomic energy or to utilize
fissionable material or atomic energy with or without such equipment or de-
vice, except under and in accordance with a license issued by the Commission
authorizing such manufacturer
[p. 19]
or utilization. No license may permit any such activity if fissionable material
is produced incident to such activity, except as provided in sections 3 and 4.
Nothing in this section shall be deemed to require a license for the conduct
of research or development activities relating to the manufacture of such
equipment ov devices or the utilization of fissionable material or atomic
energy, or for the manufacture or use of equipment or devices for medical
therapy.
(b) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Whenever in its opinion any industrial, com-
mercial, or other nonmilitary use of fissionable material or atomic energy has
been sufficiently developed to be of practical value, the Commission shall pre-
pare a report to the President stating all the facts with respect to such use,
the Commission's estimate of the social, political, economic, and international
effects of such use and the Commission's recommendations for necessary or
desirable supplemental legislation. The President shall then transmit this re-
port to the Congress together with his recommendations. No license for any
manufacture or use shall be issued by the Commission under this section until
after (1) a report with respect to such manufacture or use has been filed with
the Congress; and (2) a period of ninety days in which the Congress was in
session has elapsed after the report has been so filed. In computing such
period of ninety days, there shall be excluded the days on which either House
is not in session because of an adjournment of more than three days.
(c) ISSUANCE OF LICENSES.—After such ninety-day period, unless here-
after prohibited by law, the Commission may license such manufacture or use
in accordance with such procedures and subject to such conditions as it may
by regulation establish to effectuate the provisions of this Act. The Com-
mission is authorized and directed to issue licenses on a nonexclusive basis
and to supply to the extent available appropriate quantities of fissionable ma-
terial to licensees (1) whose proposed activities will serve some useful pur-
pose proportionate to the quantities of fissionable material to be consumed;
(2) who are equipped to observe such safety standards to protect health and
to minimize danger from explosion or other hazard to life or property as the
Commission may establish; and (3) who agree to make available to the Com-
mission such technical information and data concerning their activities
pursuant to such licenses as the Commission may determine necessary to en-
courage similar activities by as many licensees as possible. Each such license
shall be issued for a specified period, not to exceed one year, shall be revo-
cable at any time by the Commission in accordance with such procedures as
the Commission may establish, and may be renewed upon the expiration of
such period. Where activities under any license might serve to maintain or
to foster the growth of monopoly, restraint of trade, unlawful competition,
-------
72 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
or other trade position inimical to the entry of new, freely competitive enter-
prises in the field, the Commission is authorized and directed to refuse to issue
such license or to establish such conditions to prevent these results as the
Commission, in consultation with the Attorney General, may determine. The
Commission shall report promptly to the Attorney General any information it
may have with respect to any utilization of fissionable material or atomic
energy which appears to have these results. No license may be given to any
person for activities which are not under or within the jurisdiction of the
United States or to any foreign government.
(d) BYPRODUCT POWER.—If energy which may be utilized is produced in the
production of fissionable material, such energy may be used by the Commis-
sion, transferred to other Government agencies, or sold to public or private
utilities under contracts providing for reasonable resale prices.
The committee is anxious to promote the use of atomic energy
in all possible fields for peacetime purposes. Testimony before
the committee has shown that numerous benefits, in the field of
medicine for example, are now or shortly will become available.
Other uses, as yet relatively undeveloped, promise to bring about
vast changes in the industrial technology which underlies our eco-
nomic life.
In order to stimulate development, the bill extends the principle
of free research to research on devices utilizing atomic energy.
The committee is aware, nonetheless, that the sudden introduction
of certain devices utilizing the power released by nuclear fission
might precipitate profound economic disorganization. Great in-
dustrial installations representing Nation-wide investments, em-
ploying many thousands of workers, might be rendered obsolete.
[p. 20]
Furthermore, devices utilizing atomic energy, if widely used,
would so multiply potential hazards to national health and safety
that even careful Government regulation would fail to provide
adequate safeguards.
The committee feels, therefore, that the Congress should retain
the opportunity of passing upon the introduction of atomic energy
devices before the Commission is empowered to license their use.
The bill provides:
1. Atomic energy devices can neither be manufactured nor used
without a license issued by the Commission.
2. No license for manufacture or use may be issued until the
Commission has made a report to the Congress stating all the facts
with "respect to the use of such devices, the Commission's estimate
of the social, political, economic, and international effects of such
use, and the Commission's recommendations for necessary or de-
sirable supplemental legislation."
3. No license for manufacture or use may be issued by the Com-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 73
mission until after a report has been filed with the Congress and a
period of 90 days in which the Congress was in session has elapsed
after the report has been filed.
The committee is desirous also that the provisions of the bill re-
lating to licensing of atomic energy devices shall not interfere with
the development of free competition in the use of atomic energy.
Thus the bill provides that licenses on an atomic energy device,
once issued, must be made available to all applicants who can meet
the safety and security standards of the Commission. Royalties
to be paid the patent owners of such devices are provided for in
section 11.
The following additional points are to be noted:
(a) Licenses are not required (1) for research and develop-
ment related to the manufacture of atomic energy devices; (2)
for manufacture or use of equipment or devices for medical
therapy.
(6) The bill does not permit the Commission to license the use
of devices which produce fissionable material in the course of
utilizing atomic energy.
Section 8. International arrangements
(a) DEFINITION.—As used in this Act, the term "international arrange-
ment" shall mean any treaty approved by the Senate or international agree-
ment approved by the Congress, during the time such treaty or agreement is
in full force and effect.
(b) EFFECT OF INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—Any provision of this Act
or any action of the Commission to the extent that it conflicts with the provi-
sions of any international arrangement made after the date of enactment of
this Act shall be deemed to be of no further force or effect.
(c) POLICIES CONTAINED IN INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—In the per-
formance of its functions under this Act, the Commission shall give maximum
effect to the policies contained in any such international arrangement.
The committee recognizes that the ultimate solution to the prob-
lems posed by the development of nuclear energy and atomic
weapons lies in the adoption of effective and enforceable inter-
national safeguards. The bill therefore seeks to create a system
of domestic control designed to protect the common defense and
security, without constituting an obstacle to the attainment of sat-
isfactory international controls.
To insure that provisions of S. 1717 do not interfere with the
operation of international control machinery, when established,
section 8
[p. 21]
expressly provides that to the extent any provision of the bill, or
any action of the Commission under the bill, conflicts with the
provisions of an international agreement hereafter approved by
-------
74 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the Senate or the Congress, the provision is to be considered of no
further force or effect.
The Commission is specifically instructed to perform its func-
tions so as to give maximum effect to the policies contained in
international agreements.
Section 9. Property of the Commission
(a) The President shall direct the transfer to the Commission of all inter-
ests owned by the United States or any Government agency in the following
property:
(1) All fissionable material; all atomic weapons and parts thereof; all
facilities, equipment, and materials for the processing, production, or utiliza-
tion of fissionable material or atomic energy; all processes and technical in-
formation of any kind, and the source thereof (including data, drawings,
specifications, patents, patent applications, and other sources) relating to the
processing, production, or utilization of fissionable material or atomic energy;
and all contracts, agreements, leases, patents, applications for patents, inven-
tions and discoveries (whether patented or unpatented), and other rights of
any kind concerning any such items.
(2) All facilities, equipment, and materials, devoted primarily to atomic
energy research and development; and
(3) Such other property owned by or in the custody or control of the Man-
hattan Engineer District or other Government agencies as the President may
determine.
(b) In order to render financial assistance to those States and localities in
which the activities of the Commission are carried on and in which the Com-
mission has acquired property previously subject to State and local taxation,
the Commission is authorized to make payments to State and local govern-
ments in lieu of property taxes. Such payments may be in the amounts, at the
times, and upon the terms the Commission deems appropriate, but the Com-
mission shall be guided by the policy of not making payments in excess of the
taxes which would have been payable for such property in the condition in
which it was acquired, except in cases where special burdens have been cast
upon the State or local government by activities of the Commission, the Man-
hattan Engineer District, or their agents. In any such case, any benefit ac-
cruing to the State or local government by reason of such activities shall be
considered in determining the amount of the payment. The Commission, and
the property, activities, and income of the Commission, are hereby expressly
exempted from taxation in any manner or form by any State, county, munic-
ipality, or any subdivision thereof.
The Commission is to take over all the resources of the United
States Government devoted to or related to atomic energy develop-
ment. This includes all atomic weapons, all property of the Man-
hattan Engineer District, and all patents, materials, plants and
facilities, contracts, and information relating primarily to atomic
energy. The Commission is authorized to reimburse States and
municipalities for loss in taxes incurred through its acquisition of
property.
*******
[p. 22]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 75
Section 12. General authority
In the performance of its functions the Commission is authorized to—
(1) establish advisory boards to advise with and make recommenda-
tions to the Commission on legislation, policies, administration, research,
and other matters;
(2) establish by regulation or order such standards and instructions to
govern the possession and use of fissionable and byproduct materials as
the Commission may deem necessary or desirable to protect health or to
minimize danger from explosions and other hazards to life or property;
(3) make such studies and investigations, obtain such information, and
hold such hearings as the Commission may deem necessary or proper to
assist it in exercising any authority provided in this Act, or in the ad-
ministration or enforcement of this Act, or any regulations or orders
issued thereunder. For such purposes the Commission is authorized to
administer oaths and affirmations, and by subpena to require any person
to appear and testify or to appear and produce documents, or both, at
any designated place. No person shall be excused from complying with
any requirements under this paragraph because of his privilege against
self-incrimination, but the immunity provisions of the Compulsory Tes-
timony Act of February 11, 1893 (U. S. C., title 49, sec. 46), shall apply
with respect to any individual who specifically claims such privilege.
Witnesses subpenaed under this subsection shall be paid the same fees
and mileage as are paid witnesses in the district courts of the United
States;
(4) appoint and fix the compensation of such officers and employees as
may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Commission. Such
officers and employees shall be appointed in accordance with the civil-
service laws and their compensation fixed in accordance with the Classifi-
cation Act of 1923, as amended, except that to the extent the Commission
deems such action necessary to the discharge of its responsibilitiest per-
sonnel may be employed and their compensation fixed without regard to
such laws. Attorneys appointed under this paragraph' may appear for
and represent the Commission in any case in any court. The Commission
shall make adequate provision for administrative review of any determi-
nation to dismiss any employee;
(5) acquire such materials, property, equipment, and facilities, estab-
lish or construct such buildings and facilities, and modify such buildings
and facilities from time to time as it may deem necessary, and construct,
acquire, provide, or arrange for such facilities and services (at project
sites where such facilities and services are not available) for the housing,
health, safety, welfare, and recreation of personnel employed by the Com-
mission as it may deem necessary;
(6) with the consent of the agency concerned, utilize or employ the
services or personnel of any Government agency or any State or local gov-
ernment, or voluntary or uncompensated personnel, to perform such func-
tions on its behalf as may appear desirable;
(7) acquire, purchase, lease, and hold real and personal property as
agent of and on behalf of the United States and to sell, lease, grant, and
dispose of such real and personal property as provided in this Act;
(8) contract for the expenditure of funds for the purposes specified in
section 10 (b) without regard to the provisions of section 87 of the Act of
January 12, 1895 (28 Stat. 622), and section 11 of the Act of March 1,
1919 (40 Stat. 1270; U. S. C., title 44, sec. Ill); and
-------
76 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
(9) without regard to the provisions of the Surplus Property Act of
1944 or any other law, make such disposition as it may deem desirable of
(A) radioactive materials, and (B) any other property the special dispo-
sition of which is, in the opinion of the Commission, in the interest of the
national security.
(b) SECURITY.—The President may, in advance, exempt any specific action
of the Commission in a particular matter from the provisions of law relating
to contracts whenever he determines that such action is essential in the inter-
est of the common defense and security.
This section contains various general grants of authority to the
Commission to enable it to discharge its responsibilities. These
include authority to—
(a) Establish advisory boards to make recommendations on
the Commission's various functions.
(b) Establish safety and health regulations for the possession
and use of fissionable and byproduct materials to minimize the
danger from explosion, radioactivity, and other harmful or toxic
effects incident to the presence of such materials.
(c) Make studies and investigations, and hold hearings and
summon witnesses to assist in carrying out its duties.
(d) Appoint officers and employees, use the services and em-
ployees of other agencies, and utilize voluntary or uncompensated
personnel wherever desirable. Appointments are to be made in
accordance with civil-service laws but the Commission may, when-
ever it deems the action necessary, make appointments without
regard to such laws. Reluctant as the committee is to depart
from the established framework of the civil-service laws, it con-
siders the grant of this exempting authority to the Commission
essential to assure the Commission sufficient flexibility in the con-
duct of its large-scale and varied operations, and to insure avail-
ability to the Commission of personnel of the highest caliber.
(e) Acquire materials, property, and other equipment, erect
buildings and acquire and sell real and personal property.
(/) Dispose of radioactive materials and make other special
dispositions for reasons of national security without regard to
the provisions of other laws.
As a precaution against unforeseen contingencies, the Pres-
ident is granted limited authority to exempt specific actions of the
Commission from applicable laws whenever such action is essential
for security reasons.
*******
[p. 28]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 77
Section 17. Definitions
As used in this Act—
(a) The term "atomic energy" shall include all forms of energy liberated in
the transmutation of atomic species.
(b) The term "Government agency" means any executive department, com-
mission, independent establishment, corporation wholly or partly owned by the
United States which is an instrumentality of the United States, board, bu-
reau, division, service, office, officer, authority, administration, or other estab-
lishment, in the executive branch of the Government.
(c) The term "person" means any individual, corporation, partnership,
firm, association, trust, estate, public or private institution, group, the United
States or any agency thereof, any government other than the United States,
any political subdivision of any such government, and any legal successor,
representative, agent or agency of the foregoing, or other entity, but shall not
include the Commission or officers or employees of the Commission in the ex-
ercise of duly authorized functions.
(d) The term "United States," when used in a geographical sense, includes
all Territories and possessions of the United States.
(e) The term "research and development" means theoretical analysis, ex-
ploration, and experimentation, and the extension of investigative findings and
theories of a scientific or technical nature into practical application for experi-
mental and demonstration purposes, including the experimental production
and testing of models, devices, equipment, materials, and processes.
This section states definitions of the following terms: Atomic
energy, Government agency, person, United States, research, and
development.
[p. 31]
l.la(2) HOUSE COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AFFAIRS
H.R. KEP. No. 2478, 79th Cong., 2d Sess (1946)
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946
JULY 10, 1946.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. MAY, from the Committee on Military Affairs, submitted the
following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 1717]
The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the
bill (S. 1717) for the development and control of atomic energy,
-------
78 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amend-
ments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
»F Sp Jfc -fc JJS Sjs S|?
[p. 1]
The principal issue involved in the original hearings held by this
committee on the subject of atomic energy was to what extent the
armed forces should be permitted to retain the military secret of
the atomic bomb as a military weapon and, in addition thereto,
what civilian uses of atomic energy might be made available to
the general public without divulging or disclosing the secret for-
mulas and mechanical plans for the construction of bombs as a
military weapon. Your committee, in the present bill now here-
with reported, has provided by amendment to S. 1717 that at least
one of the five members of the Commission set up to take over and
control and operate the Government plants and property devoted
to the development of atomic energy shall be a representative of
the armed forces and that the member of the Liaison Committee,
provided for in the Senate bill herewith reported, who has to do
with the military application of atomic energy, shall be a rep-
resentative of the armed forces. On these two amendments hangs
the "bone of contention". There are, however, many important
issues involved—one of which is the extent of the power and au-
thority granted in the legislation to the Commission set up therein.
It is believed by some that the powers invested in the Commission
are unprecedented and unnecessary. On this view there is di-
versity of opinion in the committee, but the bill is herewith re-
ported so that the House of Representatives may consider the same
under an open rule, which means that the House will have the
right to reconsider all amendments written into the Senate bill by
your committee, as well as any other amendments which may be
offered from the floor.
[p. 4]
*******
Section 1. Declaration of policy
Subsection (a) contains statements of fact and a declaration
that it is the policy of the people of the United States that, subject
at all times to the paramount objective in assuring the common de-
fense and security, the development and utilization of atomic
energy shall, so far as practicable, (1) be directed toward improv-
ing the public welfare, (2) increasing the standard of living, (3)
strengthening free competition in private enterprise, and (4)
promote world peace.
Subsection (b) states that it is the purpose of the legislation to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 79
effectuate the policies enumerated in the above paragraph by pro-
viding, among others, for the following major programs relating
to atomic energy:
(1) A program of assisting and fostering private research and
development to encourage maximum scientific progress;
(2) A program for the control of scientific and technical in-
formation which will permit the dissemination of such informa-
tion to encourage scientific progress, and for the sharing on a
reciprocal basis of information concerning the practical industrial
application of atomic energy as soon as effective and enforceable
safeguards against its use for destructive purposes can be devised;
(3) A program of federally conducted research and develop-
ment to assure the Government of adequate scientific and technical
accomplishment;
(4) A program for Government control of the production,
ownership, and use of fissionable material to assure the common
defense and security and to insure the broadest possible exploita-
tion of the field; and
(5) A program of administration which will be consistent with
the foregoing policies and with international arrangements made
by the United States, and which will enable the Congress to be
currently informed so as to take further legislative action as may
hereafter be appropriate.
*******
[p. 6]
Section 3. Research
Subsection (a) directs the Commission to exercise its powers in
such manner as to insure the continued conduct of research and
development activities by private or public institutions or persons
and to assist in the acquisition of an ever expanding fund of
theoretical and practical knowledge in—
(1) Nuclear processes;
(2) The theory and production of atomic energy, including
processes, materials, and devices related to such production;
(3) Utilization of fissionable and radioactive materials for
medical, biological, health, or military purposes;
(4) Utilization of fissionable and radioactive materials and
processes entailed in the production of such materials for all
other purposes, including industrial uses; and
(5) The protection of health during research and produc-
tion activities.
To this end the Commission is authorized and directed to make
arrangements (including contracts, agreements, grants-in-aid, and
-------
80 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
loans) for the conduct of research and development activities re-
lating to such fields. Such arrangements may be made without
regard to the provisions of law relating to advertising for pro-
posals respecting the same upon certification by the Commission
that such action is necessary in the interest of the common de-
fense and security, or upon a showing that advertising is not
reasonably practicable.
Subsection (b) authorizes and directs the Commission to con-
duct, through its own facilities, activities and studies of the types
specified in the above paragraph.
Section 4- Production of fissionable material
Subsection (a) defines the term "production" when used in
relation with fissionable material.
Subsection (b) makes it unlawful, except to the extent au-
thorized by subsection (c), for any person (1) to own any facil-
ities for the production of fissionable material or (2) to produce
fissionable material.
Paragraph (1) of subsection (c) provides that the Commission
shall be the exclusive owner of all facilities for the production of
fissionable material other than facilities which (1) are useful in
the conduct of research and development activities in the fields
specified in section 3, and (2) do not, in the opinion of the Com-
mission, have a potential production rate adequate to enable the
operator of such facilities to produce within a reasonable period of
time a sufficient quantity of fissionable material to produce an
atomic bomb or any other atomic weapon. Paragraph (2) of sub-
section (c) requires the Commission to produce or to provide for
the production of fissionable material in its own facilities, and
authorizes the Commission to make, or to continue in effect, con-
tracts with persons obligating them to
[p. 8]
produce fissionable material in facilities owned by the Commis-
sion. Any contract made under the provisions of this paragraph
may be made without advertising for proposals respecting the
same upon certification by the Commission that such action is
necessary in the interest of the common defense and security, or
upon a showing that advertising is not reasonably practicable.
The President is required to determine at least once each year
the quantities of fissionable material to be produced under this
paragraph. Paragraph (3) provides that fissionable material may
be produced in the conduct of research and development activities
in facilities which, under paragraph (1), are not required to be
owned by the Commission.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 81
For the purpose of increasing the supply of radioactive mate-
rials, subsection (d) of section 4 permits the Commission and cer-
tain other persons to expose materials of any kind to the radiation
incident to the processes of producing or utilizing fissionable
material.
Subsection (e) of section 4 provides that unless authorized by
a license issued by the Commission, no person may manufacture,
produce, transfer, or acquire any facilities for the production of
fissionable material, except that a license is not required where
the activity is incident to or for the conduct of research or devel-
opment activities in the United States of the types specified in
section 3.
Section 5. Control of materials
Subsection (a) relates to the control of fissionable materials.
Paragraph (1) defines the term "fissionable material". Para-
graph (2) provides for Government ownership of all fissionable
material and provides just compensation to persons from whom
ownership of fissionable material is taken. Paragraph (3) makes
it unlawful for any person, after 60 days from the effective date
of the legislation, to (A) possess or transfer any fissionable mate-
rial except as authorized by the Commission, (B) export from or
import into the United States any fissionable material, or (C) di-
rectly or indirectly engage in the production of any fissionable
material outside of the United States. Paragraph (4) authorizes
the Commission to distribute fissionable material with or without
charge for conducting research and development activities, for use
in medical therapy, or for use in devices utilizing atomic energy
pursuant to licenses under section 7. Paragraph (5) authorizes
the Commission to acquire fissionable material or interest therein
outside the United States, any interest in facilities for the pro-
duction of fissionable material, or in real property on which such
facilities are located, without advertising upon certification by
the Commission that such action is necessary in the interest of
common defense and security or upon a showing that advertising
is not reasonably practicable. Just compensation is required to
be made for such facilities or real property.
Subsection (b) of section 5 relates to control of source materials.
Paragraph (1) defines the term "source material". Paragraph
(2) requires licenses for the transfer of possession of or title to
any source material after removal from its place of deposit in
nature, except that licenses are not to be required for quantities
of source material which, in the opinion of the Commission, are
unimportant. Paragraph *(3) relates to the issuance of such
licenses by the Commission. Paragraph (4) authorizes the Com-
-------
82 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
mission to issue regulations or orders requiring reports of owner-
ship, possession, extraction, refining, or
[p. 9]
other handling of source materials as it may deem necessary ex-
cept that reports are not to be required with respect to (A) any
source material prior to removal from its place of deposit in nature
or (B) quantities which are unimportant or the reporting of which
will discourage independent prospecting for new deposits. Para-
graph (5) contains provisions authorizing the Commission to ac-
quire supplies of source materials or any interest in real property
containing deposits of source materials to the extent it deems
necessary to effectuate the provisions of the legislation. Para-
graph (6) authorizes the Commission to conduct and enter into
contracts for the conduct of exploratory operations. Paragraph
(7) reserves desposits of source material in public lands for the
use of the United States.
Subsection (c) of section 5 relates to the control of byproduct
materials. Paragraph (1) defines the term "byproduct material".
Paragraph (2) relates to the distribution of byproduct materials
by the Commission for research or development activity, medical
therapy, industrial use, or such other useful applications as may
be developed.
Subsection (d) of section 5 provides that the Commission shall
not distribute (1) any fissionable material to any person for a use
which is not under or within the jurisdiction of the United States,
to any foreign government, or to persons within the jurisdiction of
the United States where the distribution would be inimical to the
common defense and security, or (2) any source material, if, in
the opinion of the Commission, the distribution of such source
material would be inimical to the common defense and security.
As reported, this provision will permit the Commission to dis-
tribute source material for export in fabricated commercial ar-
ticles when such source material has become a component or
integral part of such fabricated articles. This subsection, in par-
agraph (2), requires the Commission to establish a procedure by
which any person who is dissatisfied with the distribution or re-
fusal to distribute to him, or the recall from him, of any fissionable
or byproduct materials, or with the issuance, refusal, or revocation
of a license to him, or the transfer or receipt of source materials
may obtain a review of such determination by a board of appeal
consisting of three members appointed by the Commission. The
Commission may in its discretion review and revise any decision
of such board of appeal.
*******
[P. 10]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 83
Section 7. Utilization of atomic energy
Subsection (a) provides that it shall be unlawful, except as
provided in section 5 (a) (4) (A) or (B) or 6 (a), for any person
to manufacture, produce, or export any equipment or device uti-
lizing fissionable material or atomic energy, or to utilize fissionable
material or atomic energy without a license.
Subsection (b) provides that no such license shall be issued by
the Commission until after (1) a report with respect to such
manufacture, production, export, or use has been filed with the
Congress, and (2) a period of 90 days in which the Congress was
in session has elapsed after the report has been so filed.
Subsection (c) provides that after the 90-day period referred to
in subsection (b), unless hereafter prohibited by law, the Com-
mission may issue licenses in accordance with such procedures and
subject to such conditions as it may by regulation establish to
effectuate the provisions of this legislation. Licenses are to be on
a nonexclusive basis and the Commission is to supply fissionable
material to licensees (1) whose proposed activities will serve some
useful purposes proportionate to the quantities of materials con-
sumed, (2) who are equipped to observe such safety standards to
protect health and to minimize danger from explosion or other
hazard to life or property as the Commission may establish, and
(3) who agree to make available to the Commission certain tech-
nical information and data. Each license is required to be issued
for a specified period of not less than 1 year. Licenses may not be
given (1) to any person or activity which is not under or within
the jurisdiction of the United States, (2) to any foreign govern-
ment, or (3) to persons within the jurisdiction of the United
States where the interests thereof would be inimicable to the com-
mon defense and security. Where activities under any license
might serve to maintain or to foster the growth of monopoly, re-
straint of trade, unlawful competitor, or other trade position
inimical to the entry of new, freely competitive enterprises in the
field, the Commission is authorized and directed to refuse to issue
such license or to establish such conditions to prevent these results
as the Commission, in consultation with the Attorney General, may
determine. The Commission is required to report promptly to the
Attorney General any information it may have with respect to
any utilization of fissionable material or atomic energy which ap-
pears to have these results.
Subsection (d) of section 7 provides that energy produced in the
production of fissionable material may be used by the Commission,
transferred to other Government agencies, or sold to public or
private utilities under contracts providing for reasonable resale
prices.
-------
84 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Section 8. International arrangements
This section provides that this act shall have no further force or
effect to the extent that it conflicts with the provisions of any
treaty approved by the Senate or international agreement here-
after approved by the Congress during the time such treaty or
agreement is in full
[P. li]
force and effect, and that the Commission in the performance
of its functions under this legislation shall give maximum effect
to the policy contained in any such treaty or agreement.
Section 9. Property of the Commission
Under this section the Commission is to take over all the re-
sources of the United States Government devoted to or related to
atomic-energy development, and is authorized to reimburse States
and municipalities for loss of taxes incurred through its acquisi-
tion of property.
*******
[p. 9]
Section 12. General authority
Subsection (a) of this section gives the Commission various
general grants of authority to enable it to discharge its
responsibilities.
Subsection (b) provides that the President may, in advance,
exempt any specific action of the Commission in a particular mat-
ter from the provisions of law relating to contracts whenever he
deems that such action is essential in the interest of the common
defense and security.
Subsection (c) provides that members of the General Advisory
Committee and members of advisory boards established by the
Commission may serve as such without regard to provisions of law
which prohibit officers and employees from being interested in
claims against the United States except insofar as such provisions
prohibit any such member from receiving compensation in respect
of any particular matter which directly involves the Commission
or in which the Commission is directly interested.
*******
[p. 13]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 85
l.la(3) COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
H.R. REP. No. 2670, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946)
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946
JULY 25, 1946.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. MAY, from the committee of conference, submitted the
following
CONFERENCE REPORT
[To accompany S. 1717]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendments of the House to the bill (S. 1717) for
the development and control of atomic energy, having met, after
full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do
recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
[p. 1]
STATEMENT OF THE MANAGERS ON THE PART
OF THE HOUSE
The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the
House to the bill (S. 1717) for the development and control of
atomic energy, submit the following statement in explanation of
the effect of the action agreed upon by the conferees and recom-
mended in the accompanying conference report:
Amendment No. 1: The House amendment required at least one
member of the Atomic Energy Commission to be a member of the
armed forces. The House recedes.
Amendment No. 2: The House amendment requires that the Di-
rector of the Division of Military Application be a member of the
armed forces. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 3: This amendment would permit not to ex-
ceed two active or retired officers of the Army or Navy to serve at
any one time as members of the Commission, and one such officer
to serve as the Director of the Division of Military Application,
without prejudice to their status as such officers. The Senate re-
cedes with an amendment which limits the application of this pro-
-------
86 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
vision to the officer serving as Director of the Division of Military
Application.
Amendment No. 4: The Senate bill authorized and directed the
Commission to make arrangements (including contracts, agree-
ments, grants-in-aid, and loans) for the conduct of research and
development activities. This amendment strikes out the words
"grants-in-aid". The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 5: The bill as it passed the Senate provided
that the Commission shall be the exclusive owner of certain facil-
ities for the production of fissionable material. This amendment
inserts after the word "Commission" the words "as agent of and
on behalf of the United States". The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 6: This amendment would permit the Com-
mission to authorize its contractors to enter into subcontracts.
The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 7: Under this amendment it is made clear that
persons lawfully producing or utilizing fissionable material may
expose materials of any kind to the radiation incident to the proc-
esses of producing or utilizing fissionable material. The Senate
recedes.
Amendment No. 8: This amendment makes it clear that the
authority of the Commission to distribute fissionable material re-
lates to material owned by it. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 9: This amendment makes it clear that licenses
are required for the exportation of source material from the
United States. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 10: This amendment struck out the Senate
language which excepted existing or inchoate rights and privileges
from the reservation for the use of the United States of source
materials in deposits in the public lands, and substituted a pro-
vision that
[P. 6]
such reservation should be subject to valid claims existing on the
date of the enactment of the act. The Senate recedes with an
amendment which modifies the House provision so as to provide
that the reservation for the use of the United States shall be sub-
ject to valid claims, rights, or privileges existing on the date of
enactment of the act.
Amendments Nos. 11 and 12: These are technical amendments
substituting the word "individual" for the word "person", and the
Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 13: The Senate bill provided that no person,
corporation, partnership, or association which had any part in the
development of the atomic-bomb project may benefit by any loca-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 87
tion, entry, or settlement upon the public domain made after hav-
ing taken such part in such project. This amendment of the House
modified this prohibition so as to make it inapplicable if the benefit
was authorized by the Commission. The Senate recedes with an
amendment which provides that the prohibition will apply only in
cases where, by reason of having taken part in the atomic-bomb
project, confidential official information was acquired as to the
existence of deposits of source materials in the specific lands upon
which the location, entry, or settlement is made, and only in cases
where the location, entry, or settlement is made subsequent to the
date of the enactment of this act.
Amendment No. 14: This amendment has two purposes. First,
to prohibit the Commission from distributing any fissionable mate-
rial to any person within the United States if, in the opinion of
the Commission, the distribution of such fissionable material to
such person would be inimical to the common defense and security.
Second, to clarify and modify the Commission's authority with
respect to source material so as to prohibit the Commission from
licensing any person to transfer or deliver, receive possession of
or title to, or export from the United States any source material if,
in the opinion of the Commission, the issuance of a license to such
person for such purpose would be inimical to the common defense
and security. The Senate recedes with an amendment to correct
the numbering and lettering of the subsection.
Amendment No. 15: This amendment strikes out provisions re-
quiring the Commission to establish by regulation a procedure by
which any person who is dissatisfied with the distribution or re-
fusal to distribute to him, or the recall from him, of any fissionable
or byproduct materials or with the issuance, refusal, or revocation
of a license to him for the transfer or receipt of source materials
may obtain a review of such determination by a board of appeal
consisting of three members appointed by the Commission. The
Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 16: This is a clerical amendment. The Senate
recedes.
Amendment No. 17: Under this amendment the President from
time to time may direct the Commission to deliver such quantities
of fissionable materials to the armed forces for such use as he
deems necessary in the interest of national defense. The Senate
recedes.
Amendment No. 18: Under this amendment the President from
time to time may direct the Commission to authorize the armed
forces to manufacture, produce, or require any equipment or de-
vice utilizing fissionable material or atomic energy as a military
-------
88 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
weapon. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 19: This amendment excepted activities au-
thorized by the Commission under section 6 (a) from the prohibition
[P- 7]
contained in section 6 (b) against manufacturing, producing,
transferring, or acquiring equipment or devices utilizing fission-
able material or atomic energy as a military weapon. Since the
Senate bill already excepts from this prohibition all activities au-
thorized by the Commission, this amendment merely duplicated in
part the exception in the Senate bill and, consequently, is unneces-
sary. The House recedes.
Amendment No. 20: This amendment, as agreed to in con-
ference, provides that licenses authorizing certain activities with
respect to fissionable material or atomic energy shall be issued for
a specified period, shall be revocable at any time by the Commis-
sion in accordance with such procedures as the Commission may
establish, and may be renewed upon expiration of such period.
The bill as it passed the Senate provided that licenses could not be
issued for a period to exceed 1 year. The House amendment pro-
vided that such licenses could not be issued for a period of less
than 1 year.
Amendment No. 21: This is a clerical amendment. The Senate
recedes.
Amendment No. 22: This amendment provides that no license
relating to the utilization of atomic energy may be given to any
person within the United States if, in the opinion of the Commis-
sion, the issuance of a license to such person would be. inimical to
common defense and security. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 23: This amendment makes clear that the
definition of "international arrangement" includes only an inter-
national agreement approved by the Congress after the Atomic
Energy Act of 1946 becomes law. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 24: This amendment, as agreed to in con-
ference, is a statement of principle to be followed by the Com-
mission that until Congress declares by joint resolution that
effective and enforceable international safeguards against the use
of atomic energy for destructive purposes have been established
there shall be no exchange of information with other nations with
respect to the use of atomic energy for industrial purposes. The
House amendment proposed to strike out the statement of prin-
ciple in the bill as it passed the Senate that such information
should be shared with other nations on a reciprocal basis as soon
as the Congress declares by joint resolution that such safeguards
have been established.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 89
Amendment No. 25: This amendment relates to the numbering
of a paragraph, and the House recedes.
Amendment No. 26: This amendment struck out the provision
of the Senate bill which specifically authorized and directed the
Commission to establish information services, publications, li-
braries, and other registers of information. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 27: This amendment relates to the lettering of
a subsection. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 28: This amendment would have required a
unanimous vote of the Commission for it to determine that any
data could be published without adversely affecting the common
defense and security. The House recedes.
Amendments Nos. 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 48, and 49: These
amendments provided that the death penalty might be imposed
upon persons convicted of violating certain provisions of the act,
with intent to injure the United States or with intent to secure an
advantage to any
[p. 8]
foreign nation, and provided that the minimum term of imprison-
ment for persons convicted of such violations should be 10 years.
The conference agreement provides that the penalty of death or
imprisonment for life may be imposed, but only upon the recom-
mendation of the jury and only in the case of offenses committed
with intent to injure the United States. The provisions for mini-
mum terms of imprisonment of 10 years are eliminated.
Amendment No. 35: The bill as it passed the Senate provided
that no person shall be prosecuted for any violation of the pro-
visions relating to restricted data unless and until the Attorney
General has advised and consulted with the Commission with
respect to such prosecution.
The House amendment struck out the Senate provision and pro-
vided that the Commission shall make no contract under sections 3
or 4, issue no license to any person, nor employ any person until
the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall have first made an in-
vestigation of the character and associations of such person and
certified that the character of such contractor, licensee, or em-
ployee is such as not to endanger the common defense or security.
The Senate recedes with an amendment which provides that (1)
no person shall be prosecuted for any violation under this section
unless and until the Attorney General of the United States has
advised the Commission with respect to such prosecution and no
such prosecution shall be commenced except upon the express di-
rection of the Attorney General of the United States; (2) no ar-
rangement shall be made under section 3, no contract shall be
-------
90 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
made or continued in effect under section 4, and no license shall
be issued under section 4 (e) or 7, unless the person dealing with
the Commission agrees in writing not to permit any individual to
have access to restricted data until the Federal Bureau of Inves-
tigation shall have made an investigation and report to the Com-
mission on the character, associations, and loyalty of such
individual and the Commission shall have determined that per-
mitting such person to have access to restricted data will not en-
danger the common defense or security; (3) except as authorized
by the Commission in case of emergency, no individual shall be
employed by the Commission until the Federal Bureau of Inves-
tigation shall have made an investigation and report to the Commis-
sion on the character, associations, and loyalty of such individual;
(4) during such period of time after the enactment of this act as
may be necessary to make such investigation, report, and determi-
nation, individuals who were permitted access to restricted data
by the Manhattan Engineer District may be permitted access to
restricted data and the Commission may employ individuals who
were employed by the Manhattan Engineer District; (5) to pro-
tect against the unlawful dissemination of restricted data and to
safeguard facilities, equipment, materials, and other property of
the Commission, the President shall have authority to utilize the
services of any Government agency to the extent he may deem
necessary or desirable; and (6) all violations of this act shall be
investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the De-
partment of Justice.
Amendment No. 36: This is a clerical amendment and the Senate
recedes.
Amendment No. 37: The Senate bill provided that no patent
should be granted after the date of enactment of the act for any
invention or discovery which is useful solely in the production of
fissionable
[p. 9]
material or in the utilization of fissionable material or atomic
energy for a military weapon and provided for the revocation
of any patent previously issued for any such invention or dis-
covery and payment of just compensation to the owner of the
patent. The Senate bill further provided (1) that no patent
granted after the date of enactment of the act should confer any
rights with respect to any invention or discovery to the extent that
it is used in the production of fissionable material, the utilization
of fissionable material or atomic energy for a military weapon, or
the conduct of research or development activities in the atomic
energy field; and (2) that any rights conferred by any patent
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 91
previously issued should be revoked to the extent that the invention
or discovery should be so used and that just compensation should
be made for the revocation of rights. The House amendment con-
tained no provisions comparable to the above-described provisions
of the Senate bill.
The Senate bill provided that any person who has made or may
make an invention or discovery useful in the production of fission-
able material or in the utilization of fissionable material or atomic
energy for a military weapon should make a report to the Com-
mission within a limited period of time describing such invention
or discovery, unless it is described in an application for patent
filed in the Patent Office within such period of time. The House
amendment contained a similar provision requiring reports to the
Commission with respect to inventions and discoveries, but such
provision was applicable only to inventions or discoveries "utiliz-
ing fissionable materials or atomic energy designed or especially
adapted for use as or in a military weapon."
The Senate bill placed a duty on the Commission to declare any
patent to be affected with the public interest if (1) the invention
or discovery covered by the patent utilizes or is essential in the
utilization of fissionable material or atomic energy, and (2) the
use of such invention or discovery by persons having licenses for
the utilization of atomic energy is necessary to effectuate the pol-
icies and purposes of the act. In any case in which a patent should
be declared to be affected with the public interest the Commission
would be licensed to use the invention or discovery and persons
having licenses from the Commission for the utilization of atomic
energy would be licensed to use it to the extent necessary in carry-
ing on their activities licensed by the Commission. The owner of
the patent would be entitled to a reasonable royalty fee for the use
of the invention or discovery, the fee to be agreed upon by the
owner and the licensee or to be fixed by the Commission in the ab-
sence of an agreement. The Senate bill contained appropriate
provisions preventing court proceedings to stay, restrain, or enjoin
the use of inventions or discoveries licensed under the provisions
of the bill and to provide for the collection through court proceed-
ings of royalty fees for the use of inventions or discoveries so
licensed. The House amendment contained no provisions com-
parable to those described in this paragraph.
The Senate bill authorized the Commission to purchase, or to
take, requisition, or condemn, and make just compensation for (1)
any invention or discovery which is useful in the production of
fissionable material or in the utilization of fissionable material or
atomic energy for a military weapon, or which utilizes or is es-
-------
92 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
sential in the utilization of fissionable material or atomic energy,
or (2) any patent or
[p. 10]
patent application covering any such invention or discovery. The
bill required the Commissioner of Patents to notify the Com-
mission of, and to provide it access to, all applications for pat-
ents which in his opinion disclose such inventions or discoveries.
The House amendment authorized the Commission to purchase,
for the manufacture or use by or for the United States Gov-
ernment, any and all rights in and to any invention or dis-
covery, or application for patent or patent thereon, relating to re-
search on or the production of fissionable material or the utilization
of fissionable material or atomic energy. The House amendment
authorized the Commission to condemn any or all rights to any
such invention or discovery which affects the national defense and
security, but provided that whenever the Commission determined
that the national defense or security were no longer involved any
and all rights in such invention or discovery would revert to the
owner, subject to a nonexclusive, irrevocable, and nontransferable
license in favor of the Government.
The House amendment provided that any person making an in-
vention or discovery relating to research on or the production of
fissionable material or the utilization of fissionable material or
atomic energy should, upon filing an application for a patent
thereon and tendering the invention or discovery to the United
States for its use, have the right to sue the United States for com-
pensation for the use of such invention or discovery in the event
he should ultimately receive a patent thereon. The Commission
was authorized to make an agreement with the inventor in settle-
ment for the use of his invention by the Government. The Senate
bill contained no comparable provisions to those described in this
paragraph.
The Senate bill provided for the designation by the Commission
of a Patent Compensation Board, consisting of two or more em-
ployees of the Commission, to consider applications filed with the
Commission for (1) the determination of reasonable royalty fees
in connection with patents declared to be affected with the public
interest and licensed for use by persons having atomic energy utili-
zation licenses from the Commission, (2) the payment of just
compensation for patents and patent rights revoked under the Sen-
ate bill, and (3) the grant of awards by the Commission to persons
making inventions or discoveries useful solely, or among other
purposes, for the production of fissionable material or the utiliza-
tion of fissionable material or atomic energy for a military weapon.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 93
The bill provided that in fixing royalty fees the Commission should
take into consideration any defense, general or special, that might
be pleaded by a defendant in an action for infringement, the ex-
tent to which, if any, the patent was developed through federally
financed research, the degree of utility, novelty, and importance of
the invention or discovery, and might take into consideration the
cost to the owner of the patent of developing the invention or dis-
covery or acquiring the patent. The bill provided that the Com-
mission, in connection with applications for just compensation and
awards, should take into account the same factors considered by it
in fixing royalty fees, and also the actual use of the invention or
discovery. The Senate bill provided that any person aggrieved by
a Commission determination upon an application for an award or
the fixing of a reasonable royalty fee might obtain a review thereof
in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The House
amendment contained no provisions with respect to the fixing of
royalty fees or the payment of awards to inventors.
[p. H]
The House amendment provided that persons dissatisfied with
Commission determinations as to just compensation for inventions
or discoveries condemned, or tendered to and used, by the Com-
mission should have the right to maintain suit in the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia for the purpose of
determining the just compensation to be paid. The amendment
further provided for an appeal to the Court of Appeals of the Dis-
trict of Columbia from the decision of the district court. The sec-
tion of the Senate bill relating to patents contained no specific
provisions with respect to judicial determination of just compensa-
tion for patents and patent rights revoked by the section or taken,
requisitioned, or condemned by the Commission. Section 11 of the
Senate bill provided, however, for suit in the Court of Claims in
the event the person entitled to just compensation should be dis-
satisfied with the determination of the Commission.
The House recedes on this amendment.
Amendment No. 38: This amendment struck out the provision
authorizing attorneys appointed by the Commission to appear for
and represent the Commission in any case in any court. The Sen-
ate recedes.
Amendment No. 39: This amendment struck out the provision
which waived certain general restrictions of law in the expend-
iture of funds for the purposes specified in section 10 (b). Since
amendment No. 26 struck out section 10(b), this provision is no
longer appropriate. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 40: This is a clerical amendment and the Senate
-------
94 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
recedes.
Amendment No. 41: This amendment provided that section 10
of the Administrative Procedure Act should be applicable with re-
spect to agency actions of the Commission immediately upon the
enactment of this act and provided that this act should not be held
to supersede or modify the Administrative Procedure Act. The
Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 42: This is a clerical amendment and the Senate
recedes.
Amendments Nos. 43, 44, and 45: These amendments increased
from 9 to 11 the number of Members from each House who would
be members of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, and in-
creased from 5 to 6 the number of Members from each House who
might be members of the same political party. The House recedes.
Amendment No. 46: This is a clerical amendment, and the Sen-
ate recedes.
Amendment No. 47: This amendment made the heavier criminal
penalties provided in subsection (a) of the enforcement section,
rather than the lighter penalties under subsection (b), applicable
in the case of violations of the act arising out of the failure to
report certain inventions and discoveries to the Commission. The
House recedes.
Amendment No. 50: This is a clerical amendment, and the Sen-
ate recedes.
Amendment No. 51: This amendment eliminated from the bill
the provisions which would have provided criminal penalties for
violations of regulations or orders issued under specified sections
of the Act. The Senate recedes with an amendment which restores
the provision with a clerical change correcting a cross reference.
Amendments Nos. 52 and 53: These amendments, like some of
those referred to above, provided that the death penalty might be
imposed
[P. 12]
upon persons convicted of violating certain provisions of the
act, with the intent to injure the United States or to secure an
advantage to any foreign nation, and provided that the minimum
term of imprisonment for persons convicted of such violations
should be 10 years. As the offenses to which these amendments
were applicable are likely to be of a less serious nature than the
other offenses to which the heavy penalties were made applicable,
these penalties were deemed to be excessive in these cases and the
House recedes.
Amendments Nos. 54 and 55: These amendments modified the
provision relating to enjoining violations of the act or regulations
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 95
or orders thereunder, so that instead of providing, as did the
Senate bill, that upon a showing by the Commission that a person
has engaged or is about to engage in such a violation an injunction,
restraining order, or other order shall be granted without bond, it
will provide that upon such a showing an injunction, restraining
order, or other order may be granted. The Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 56: This amendment provided that all persons
associated in any capacity with the control and development of
atomic energy under the Commission, and all violations of this act,
should be investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. As
the subject matter of this amendment is dealt with in connection
with amendment No. 35, the House recedes on this amendment.
Amendments Nos. 57 and 58: These are clerical amendments,
and the Senate recedes.
Amendment No. 59: The amendment inserted a definition of the
term "nuclear fission". The House recedes.
Amendments Nos. 60, 61, and 62: These are clerical amend-
ments, and the House recedes.
Amendment No. 63: This is a technical amendment, and the
Senate recedes.
Amendments Nos. 64, 65, and 66: These are clerical amend-
ments, and the House recedes.
Amendment No. 67: The bill as it passed the Senate defined the
term "facilities for the production of fissionable material" so as to
include any equipment or device capable of such production. This
amendment limited the term to any equipment or device peculiarly
adopted for and capable of such production. The House recedes.
Amendment No. 68: This is a clerical amendment, and the Sen-
ate recedes.
Amendment No. 69: This amendment struck out a provision
transferring funds available for expenditure in connection with
the Manhattan Engineer District to the Commission for expend-
iture for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the Act.
The Senate recedes.
Amendments Nos. 70 and 71: These are clerical amendments,
and the Senate recedes.
A. J. MAY,
R. EWING THOMASON,
CARL T. DURHAM,
CHARLES R. CLASON,
Managers on the Part of the House.
-------
96
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
l.la(4) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 93 (1946)
l.la(4)(a) June 1: Passed Senate, pp. 6082-6085, 6087-6088, 6094-6098
Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, I
rise to propose to the Senate that it
adopt Senate bill 1717, as amended and
reported by the Special Committee on
Atomic Energy. The bill provides for
the development and control of atomic
energy. Your committee, constituted
at the end of last October, has engaged
in more than 5 months of continuous
study of a problem which challenged
the complete attention, the intelli-
gence, and the earnestness of the com-
mittee members. I wish to pay tribute
to the members of the committee who
worked morning and afternoon on this
subject, which was entirely new to
them when they commenced, as it was
to me, and who pored over every detail
of the bill. I am happy to tell the Sen-
ate that after this 5 months of work, in
which there was not even for 1 moment
a scintilla of partisanship, the commit-
tee has agreed on every word, and
every line, and every clause of the bill.
I have said, Mr. President, that it is
a challenging subject. It is compli-
cated. Atomic energy can make or de-
stroy America. So, I should like to
speak for a few moments about the
result of the committee's endeavors
and about the bill as it finally shapes
up before us.
It was soon concluded that there
could be no private production of fis-
sionable material within the bound-
aries of the United States. It was
concluded that national safety and
national welfare demanded that all fa-
cilities producing fissionable material,
of which atomic bombs are composed,
should be under the sole management
and control of the Government. We
also concluded that it was necessary at
this time to impose certain security re-
straints in regard to this subject.
Those security restraints will be
found written into the bill. This was
one of the most difficult subjects with
which we had to deal, because we real-
ized that if we were to progress, as we
must progress in this science, the max-
imum amount of freedom had to be
allowed to scientists. At the same
time, it was appreciated that during
the pending state of the world's affairs
it was absolutely necessary that we im-
pose some restrictive clauses. We dis-
covered that the espionage act as it
was written would not do, so S. 1717
was written so as to strengthen the
provisions of the Espionage Act and
thus cover the subject.
I should like to take a few moments
to refer to the patent features of the
bill. Obviously if all production of fis-
sionable material is to be under Gov-
ernment control and management
there is no field for private patents on
the production of such material. How-
ever, the bill provides that anyone who
makes such an invention shall be prop-
erly compensated. It is provided that
there shall be no patents on the inven-
tion of atomic weapons. Obviously,
this is a wise provision of the bill; but
compensation is provided for the
discovery.
Mr. President, what is the treatment
that we have given to inventions of
what might be termed atomic-energy
devices? In such cases the bill pro-
vides that patents shall be issued by
the Patent Office, but a license must be
secured from the Commission, which I
shall describe later in my remarks.
After the application for the license is
made to the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion, under the terms of the bill the
Commission must submit to the Con-
gress a complete study of the economic,
social, and international consequences
of the issuance of such license, and the
Congress shall have 90 days in which
to enact any legislation which it feels
may be necessary in the premises.
That is a distinct departure from our
usual way of doing things; but we
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
97
must remember that atomic energy
makes its own rules. It is sui generis.
After the Congress has 90 days in
which to act and either acts or does not
act, the Commission, as the case may
be, may issue a license to the patentee
to use the atomic-energy device.
I should like to describe the adminis-
trative organization of the Commis-
sion. The Commission is composed of
five members, to be appointed by the
President, with the advice and consent
of the Senate, the chairman to be paid
$17,500 a year and the members $15,-
000 a year. This is the over-all policy-
making commission.
Under this Commission, provision is
made for a military liaison committee
composed of members of the armed
forces, to be appointed, respectively, by
the Secretary of War and the Secre-
tary of the Navy, to advise and consult
with the Commission on military mat-
ters relating to atomic energy. This
committee has the right, if it so de-
sires, to appeal to the Secretary of
War and the Secretary of the Navy on
any matters pertaining to military
affairs and the way they are being
handled by the Atomic Energy
Commission.
The bill further provides for a tech-
nical advisory committee, to be ap-
pointed by the President, which shall
meet four times a year, and which shall
be on a part-time basis, to advise and
consult with the Commission on scien-
tific and technical matters relating to
materials, production, research, and
development.
Finally, the bill provides for the
establishment of a new standing
committee
Mr. DOWNEY. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. McMAHON. I yield.
Mr. DOWNEY. Is the technical ad-
visory committee which the Senator
has mentioned to be composed of scien-
tists and technicians?
Mr. McMAHON. The Senator is
correct. The bill also provides for a
new standing committee, to be com-
posed of nine Members of the Senate
and nine Members of the House of
Representatives, who will act in all
respects as the agent of the Congress
for the purpose of keeping in congres-
sional touch with the developments of
atomic energy and the actions of the
Commission.
The bill makes provision for free
mining. We have not attempted to
take over all the uranium in the United
States. We have provided the Com-
mission with the power to condemn
and pay just compensation for any
uranium supplies which it is unable to
buy in the open market. We believed
that it was important and necessary
to see to it that the independent mining
system which now exists in the United
States should not be disturbed any
more than was absolutely imperative
for the security of our country. We
have tried to provide for free science
and free research, because we realized
that unless we left men's minds free to
research, invent, and discover in this
field we would be doing a disservice not
only to nuclear physics, but to science
as a whole.
Mr. President, there are two kinds
of security. One kind comes from
locking the doors, pulling down the
shades, watching the files, and seeing
that this man does not talk with that
man—compartmentalization, as it is
called in Army circles. Then there is
the kind of security which I call secu-
rity by achievement; in other words,
security which will come from a more
speedy, more complete, and more effi-
cient way of producing atomic energy.
* * * * *
[p. 6082]
Mr. TUNNELL. I should like to
ask the Senator what the license which
the Commission grants authorizes to
be done?
Mr. McMAHON. I assume that the
Senator is asking me about the license
in connection with an atomic-energy
device.
Mr. TUNNELL. That is correct.
-------
98
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. McMAHON. Under such a li-
cense the owner of the invention may
proceed to manufacture, further de-
velop, and use the device.
For instance, let us assume that
there was an atomic-energy device
which was capable of being placed in a
locomotive and hauling a train from
Washington to New York. Let us as-
sume that the Pennsylvania Railroad
was the licensee. The Senator will ap-
preciate, as was so well said by the
Senator from Michigan during the
conduct of our deliberations, that if we
were to wake up some morning and
were to read in the Washington news-
papers a story that that development
had come about overnight, without the
proper amount of planning and fore-
thought, it might precipitate the econ-
omy of the country into chaos.
Mr. TUNNELL. Then, as I under-
stand the Senator, in order to manu-
facture devices for the use of atomic
energy, it will be necessary, will it not,
to have a license from the Commission.
Mr. McMAHON. The Senator is
exactly correct.
Mr. TUNNELL. Very well.
Mr. McMAHON. I reiterate that
the Commission cannot grant a license
until it reports to the Congress on the
basis of a thorough and complete study
of what the Commission believes will
be the economic, social, political, and
international consequences of the use
of the device.
Mr. TUNNELL. The Commission,
then, will report to Congress in the
case of each device?
Mr. McMAHON. Exactly so.
Mr. TUNNELL. I thank the
Senator.
Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield to me, to
permit me to ask a question at this
point?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
JOHNSTON of South Carolina in the
chair). Does the Senator from Con-
necticut yield to the Senator from
Utah?
Mr. McMAHON. I yield.
Mr. THOMAS of Utah. That does
not mean, does it, that Congress would
put a lid upon progress or upon im-
provement? No provision is made or
method prescribed which would re-
quire the showing of economic necessity
for the use of a lighter metal than
steel, for instance, or something of
that sort which might affect the steel
industry, just as the use of stronger
energy might affect industries which
are now using energy of another kind?
It does not mean that Congress would
be the judge and would weigh the
problem of a proposed change, and
would, therefore, be found in a position
to renounce progress or to keep it
static? It merely means that all the
people will know what is happening. Is
not that the idea?
Mr. McMAHON. There will be no
disposition, I am sure, to restrict the
use of atomic energy in our industrial
life. We have tried to write the bill
with the idea in mind of promoting the
further invention, the further discov-
ery, and the further use of atomic en-
ergy. All we have tried to do is to set
up certain safeguards against throw-
ing atomic energy into our economy in
such a haphazard way or such an over-
night way as to cause consternation,
chaos, and even, perhaps, the destruc-
tion of our economy.
Let me say to the Senator from
Utah, suppose there was no such pro-
vision as the one contained in the bill;
suppose a license were to be granted,
upon application, to the Pennsylvania
Railroad, and suppose that railroad
proceeded to use it. What would hap-
pen? Certainly the coal mines would
immediately decrease their production.
Perhaps hundreds of thousands of
miners would be thrown out of work.
The railroad itself, inasmuch as it se-
cures a large income from the trans-
portation of coal, might be seriously
affected. As the Senator knows, the
securities of the railroad companies
are owned in large part by the insur-
ance companies of the United States.
Such a change might undermine the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
99
values of all such stocks and securities
held by the insurance companies; their
present values might be reduced 80
percent, so that overnight we would
have economic chaos.
I wish to emphasize to the Senate
that the committee wrestled long and
seriously with this problem just as it
did with every other problem involved.
Every facet was examined. Every
argument was met. So, the bill as re-
ported by the committee is the unified
conclusion of the 11 Senators who
spent 5 months on this bill.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. McMAHON. I yield.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Then the pur-
pose, as the committee conceives it, is
to bring about evolution in the use of
atomic energy in our industrial life,
rather than to bring about revolution
by a sudden substitution of atomic en-
ergy for our existing forms of energy.
Is that correct?
Mr. McMAHON. We went to school
to the scientists, as I am sure Senators
will realize, and we talked with just
about everyone whom we thought
could help us with this problem. I say
to the Senator that I have great faith
in the future of atomic energy, indus-
trially as well as medicinally; indeed
in those respects it is here today. Let
us consider an example of perhaps
lesser importance: As an aid, for in-
stance, in the discovery of new oil
wells, it has been used recently. How-
ever, after all, we now have an econ-
omy which is built upon water power
and upon coal and upon an integration
of our natural resources as they are
today. If overnight a cessation of one
of those great industries were to occur,
we might lose the benefits of atomic
energy because of the very destruction
of the base of our Government, which
is economic stability.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Yes. And if we
were to be plunged into the use of
atomic energy overnight, it would, in
the Senator's opinion, would it not,
completely wreck our present economic
system?
Mr. McMAHON. I can say to the
Senator that it is my conviction that if
what I cited in the example to the Sen-
ator from Delaware were to occur,
without any previous planning with
respect to how to provide for the em-
ployment of the men who would be
thrown out of work by even the one use
which I then suggested, we would be
playing with fire.
Mr. HUFFMAN. I thank the
Senator.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. McMAHON. I yield.
Mr. HATCH. I have been reading
the provisions relating to public lands,
as found on page 43 of the bill. I
should like to have a little information
about the provisions, if the Senator is
able to give it to me. I observe in sub-
section (7), on page 43, a provision
that all fissionable materials in the
public lands "are hereby reserved for
the use of the United States."
First, I observe that there is a pro-
vision that all fissionable material is
reserved to the United States—that is
to say, such material which is in the
public lands of the United States. Then
there follows an exception.
Mr. McMAHON. Yes.
Mr. HATCH. That exception is in
the language—
Except that with respect to any location,
entry, or settlement made prior to the date of
enactment of this at no reservation shall be
deemed to have been made, if such reservation
would deprive any person of any existing or
inchoate rights or privileges to which he would
otherwise be entitled or would otherwise enjoy,
Mr. McMAHON. If a man takes
out a patent on a piece of public land
and spends the necessary $100 a year
in order to perfect his right, he has
title to the uranium which may be
mined until he separates it from its
place in Nature. When he separates
it from its place in Nature he must
receive a license from the Commission
before he may dispose of or remove the
material.
-------
100
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Frankly, there is only this difference
between the Senator from New Mex-
ico, who after the passage of the bill
takes a patent on a piece of land, and
myself, if I have heretofore obtained
in the State of Colorado, let us say, a
patent on a piece of land containing
this material: In the Senator's case,
when he goes to the Secretary of the
Interior he will have placed in his
patent a reservation to the title of all
the uranium, thorium, and all the ma-
terials which are later determined by
the Commission to be capable of pro-
ducing atomic energy, whereas the
Senator from Connecticut, who had
previously acquired his patent, will
have the title, but will be unable to sell
any of the source materials to anybody
except the Commission when he takes
them from their place in Nature.
Mr. HATCH. Suppose that subse-
quent to the general release to the pub-
[p. 6083]
lie of the discovery and uses of atomic
energy, numbers of persons have gone
into the Western States and have
merely filed mining claims on lands
which proved later to be capable of
producing sufficient material of the
kind to which the Senator has referred.
They have no patent now, but they do
have the right which was acquired by
the filing of the claim in the first in-
stance. They have done nothing from
that time to the present date, but all
the fissionable material in all those
lands—
Mr. McMAHON. The source ma-
terial.
Mr. HATCH. The source material
belongs, under this bill, to those
individuals.
Mr. McMAHON. It may seem that
the right is worth money, but allow me
to point out that the minute the indi-
vidual digs the source material from
the ground and separates it from its
place in nature, he has only one cus-
tomer, namely, the Commission which
is created under this bill. He must re-
ceive a license before he may move that
source material from above the
ground, where he has separated it
from its place in nature, to the smelt-
ing mill.
Mr. HATCH. I am sure that a li-
cense would not be denied arbitrarily.
He would receive the license and he
would sell to the Commission.
Mr. McMAHON. He would receive
just compensation as provided under
the bill.
Mr. HATCH. There is another
clause in the same section which
causes me to question the meaning of
it. Suppose the Commission did not
wish to buy material.
Mr. McMAHON. That situation is
provided for in the last sentence of the
paragraph. The language there is:
If the Commission does not require delivery
of such material to it, the reservation made
puisuant to this paragraph shall be of no
further force or effect.
Mr. HATCH. Under those circum-
stances, the individual would have a
complete right to sell or otherwise dis-
pose of his material?
Mr. McMAHON. Yes.
Mr. HATCH. Is that what the com-
mittee wants to accomplish?
Mr. McMAHON. Yes; because if
the Commission should ever take the
position that it did not want any spe-
cific amount of thorium or uranium,
the Senator may be assured that it
would be of such concentration that it
would not be feasible to use it for the
production of fissionable material.
Mr. HATCH. Then, there is no
absolute reservation to the United
States. It is subject to the will of the
Commission.
Mr. McMAHON. The reservation
which is made by the Secretary of the
Interior is in favor of the Government
—in this case, the Commission. The
Commission has the right to purchase
every single ounce of the material at a
fair and just price. If the Commission
should decide that it did not want to
buy the material, theoretically the
miner would have the right to sell it to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
101
someone else. Such right, I believe
the Senator from New Mexico will
agree with me, is illusory and is worth
nothing. If the Commission does not
buy the source material, the man who
separates it from the ground does not,
under the terms of the bill, have any
right to export it. Under this bill, the
exportation of source material would
be a crime punishable by imprison-
ment. What will the miner do with it?
Will he go to the labor of digging it
and bringing it above the ground if he
may not export it or sell it to the Com-
mission? The result will be that the
material will remain in its place in
nature.
I can conceive of the Commission
saying to the Senator from New Mex-
ico and to the Senator from Connecti-
cut, who may be working a deposit in
the State of New Mexico, for example,
"We do not want to buy it. For the
purposes of conservation we do not
want to touch it. We shall refuse you
a license to remove your uranium."
Very well; since we may not export it
or sell it to the Commission, would the
Senator from New Mexico proceed to
dig the uranium and thorium out of
the ground?
Mr. HATCH. Perhaps he would
not, but I am trying to understand
what the bill means, and I am already
convinced that there is not a complete
reservation of title to the United
States Government in the Govern-
ment-owned lands.
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr.
President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. McMAHON. I yield.
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. One
further difficulty which the Senator
from Connecticut has not mentioned
lies in the fact that uranium ore is a
complex material. In our area of the
country, at least, it is usually found
with vanadium. There are times when
it is very necessary to have vanadium
production. If the restrictions which
the Senator from New Mexico is in-
sisting upon are to be placed in the bill,
not only would the production of ura-
nium be stopped but also the produc-
tion of any of the ores which are found
with it, such as vanadium. That
would be a very serious matter. The
vanadium industry in the States of
Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and
Utah—the only States in the United
States which meet together at four
corners—is very important. The area
formed by the joining of the four
States holds deposits of vanadium and
uranium. Vanadium is highly desir-
able in the steel industry. If there is
to be an absolute restriction to the re-
moval of uranium from its natural
place in the earth, the production of
vanadium will be brought to an end.
Mr. McMAHON. I thank the Sen-
ator.
Mr. HATCH. I have not insisted on
any restrictions whatever, I may say to
the Senator from Colorado. I am try-
ing to find out what the bill means.
However, I repeat that an absolute
reservation has not been made to the
United States. A reservation has been
made which may or may not be effec-
tive on the commission. That may be
a wise course to follow, but that is the
effect of the language, as I read it.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield to me?
Mr. McMAHON. I yield to the Sen-
ator from Iowa.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I may sug-
gest to the Senator from New Mexico
that this matter was very thoroughly
studied by the members of the commit-
tee from the Western States. First,
the object was to give the United
States a preemptive right in the mate-
rial itself, reserving the greatest pos-
sible freedom for private exploration
and mining development. In other
words, we discussed the fact that if we
were to insist upon too many restric-
tions it would perhaps discourage, if
not put an end to, mining development
and exploration.
It will be noticed that in paragraph
(5) on page 42, under the heading
"Acquisition," the Commission is di-
rected—the bill uses the word "di-
-------
102
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
rected"—to purchase uranium that is
discovered on already patented prop-
erty or property in which rights have
already been acquired. In paragraph
(7), on page 43, referring to public
lands, there is first a preemption of
such material; in other words it is re-
served primarily in place for the Gov-
ernment of the United States sxibject
to the Government through this Com-
mission being able, if it is of no value
to the Government, to divest itself
eventually of uranium that might be a
drug on the market at some time in the
future. It was an attempt, first, as I
understand—and I wish to be corrected
by the chairman of the committee if
my statement is not correct—to reserve
uranium in any public lands for the
undisputed use, control, and acquisi-
tion by the Government, and the right
of the Government to fix just compen-
sation for its separation from other
ores, so that it would not necessarily
disturb the discovery and production
of other metals. Consequently—and
this is, perhaps, rather important—it
allows the Government at some time in
the future to divest itself and to get
out from under the responsibility of
buying, if, as, and when, it may not be
desirable on the part of the Govern-
ment to do so. That time may never
come, but I can assure the Senator
from New Mexico that a very great
deal of thought was devoted to this
question by the two Senators from
Colorado, who are vitally interested in
the mining industry, and I believe they
are both satisfied with this provision.
*****
[p. 6084]
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. I
should like to call attention to the fact
that once this source material is re-
moved from its natural place in the
earth the bill provides for an absolute
confiscation of it. That is, if the Com-
mission wants to confiscate it, it takes
it over at its own price. But the thing
we wanted to be careful about was
placing a prohibition against its devel-
opment while it was in place, for fear
of doing violence to other metals and
other resources, and to the development
of our whole mining area. That is the
thing we had to guard against. But the
committee did not hesitate, and this
bill provides that when the source ma-
terial has been removed from its nat-
ural place in the earth it shall go to the
United States Government. It goes to
the Commission directly, and at the
Commission's own figures and own
price.
Mr. HATCH. I would not quite
agree with that statement if it were
not for the last sentence that was used,
that if the Commission does not desire
the material, then the reservation is no
longer effective. That would leave it
wide open to sale, export, or anything
else, if it were not for the other provi-
sions of the bill, which I assume, from
what the Senator from Connecticut
said, do prohibit sales and export.
*****
[p. 6085]
Mr. MURDOCK. If the Senator
will indulge me for a further question
or two, let us assume, as has been sug-
gested by the distinguished Senator
from Connecticut [Mr. HART], that
uranium is found in complex ores. Let
us assume that the prospector, after
the effective date of this act, discovers
a ledge or a lode of lead ore. The
large percentage of commercial value
is in lead, but his assay shows at least
some values in uranium or other fis-
sionable material. What does that
mean so far as the locator of the claim
is concerned?
Mr. MILLIKIN. Has he made a
valid location?
Mr. MURDOCK. We will assume
that after the effective date of the act
he makes a valid location. He has per-
fected the location, so far as it can be
perfected, but it still is a location, and
has not proceeded to patent. In the ex-
traction of his ores from the lode, he
finds that among other values it has
some values in fissionable materials.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
103
Mr. MILLIKIN. Under the case
stated, it is my judgment that the ura-
nium part of his ore would belong to
the United States Government, but
that that would not prevent him from
exploring and developing the other
ores.
Mr. MURDOCK. Of course, the
mine locator is not in a position to
separate the fissionable material from
other material. Will he be interfered
with at all in his regular processes or
procedure of shipping the ore to the
smelter and handling it as he handled
it prior to the enactment of the law?
Mr. MILLIKIN. In my judgment
some regulatory power would have to
be exercised to see that such a situa-
tion did not arise. The Commission
proposed to be established would pre-
scribe certain rules and standards re-
garding the protection and handling of
source materials. It seems to me that
the Department of the Interior, on its
part, could make rules which would not
hinder the prospector, but would allow
him to develop those things which were
not fissionable; and that between the
two bodies it would be possible to ena-
ble him to mine complex ores, and at
the same time not allow fissionable ma-
terials to get out of control.
*****
[p. 6087]
Mr. McMAHON. I wish to refer,
first, to the fact that in the bill we have
made ample provision for the promo-
tion of research, because, as I have
previously indicated, we realized that
unless we have progress in this field,
we shall certainly drop back into a
second-place position. So, under sec-
tion 3 of the bill the Commission is
directed to exercise its powers in such
manner as to continue the conduct of
research and development activities.
Under the bill the Commission is em-
powered to conduct its own research
operations. I call attention to the fact
that the Commission is also authorized
and directed to make arrangements, in-
cluding contracts, agreements, grants-
in-aid, and loans, for the conduct of
research and development activities re-
lating to atomic energy.
I desire to refer briefly to the fact
that in section 6 of the bill we have
carefully considered the subject of mil-
itary applications of atomic energy,
and under that section we provide for
the complete monopoly of production
of atomic weapons within the proposed
Commission. That does not mean that
the Navy and the Army will not have
a right to conduct research in the field
of atomic energy and atomic weapons.
That does not mean that any citizen
may not, independently of Government
or of grants-in-aid of the Army or the
Navy, proceed to vise his inventive ge-
nius for the purpose of bringing about
an improvement in the science.
Mr. President, I wish further to call
attention to the fact that your commit-
tee realized that what we were writing
was in a new field—a field in which
there had been no experience. So we
wisely, I think, concluded to write into
the bill a recognition of that fact. If
Senators will examine the bill, they
will see that we specifically declare that
we are writing interim legislation. I
certainly would not be one who would
believe that this bill may not have to be
amended within a short period of time,
because, although I think the commit-
tee has labored wisely and well, I think
it would be impossible for any group of
Senators to sit down and try to write a
bill which would be a permanent blue-
print in this new science.
Mr. President, it is my sincere con-
viction that this bill deserves the im-
mediate and favorable action of the
Senate. It is in every sense a nonpar-
tisan bill. The subject was of too
great importance to receive anything
but consideration from the point of
view of the national interest. It was
approved, as I have indicated, after
months of study and preparation, by
men of both parties whose only con-
cern was the best interests of our coun-
try and the people who compose it.
That was the anvil on which every ac-
-------
104
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
tion was hammered out. That was the
criterion by which every word was
judged.
The bill comes to the Senate with
unanimous committee approval. No
section, no paragraph, no word was
adopted except by unanimous consent.
The achievement of unanimity on
every phase of a subject so complex
and so vital merits the approbation of
Senators.
I believe it is an enlightened,
forward-looking, common-sense bill,
based on the realities of the world in
which we live, the peculiarities of
atomic energy, and the fundamental
principles of our Government. It is a
bill based on careful study and ex-
tended consideration. Aware of their
unique responsibility as builders of the
atomic age, the committee members
labored long and arduously to forge in
the fires of democratic action the
finest instrument they could devise in
the discharge of their grave assign-
ment.
Mr. President, it strikes me that
right here is an appropriate time to
express again my profound sense of
appreciation of the support and con-
sideration shown by members of the
committee to its chairman.
*****
[p. 6088]
The amendment was agreed to.
(The explanation of Senate bill 1717,
for the development and control of
atomic energy, submitted by Mr.
McMAHON, and ordered to be printed
in the RECORD at the close of the debate
on the bill, is as follows:)
*****
[p. 6094]
POWER TO CONTROL
This bill takes strong measures to protect us
against a great menace. First of all, it pro-
hibits any private ownership of the explosive
material in an atomic bomb, the so-called "fis-
sionable" material. It absolutely prohibits
export of such material and prohibits its import
by private persons. It prohibits private owner-
ship of facilities producing this material. It
prohibits private patents on production proc-
esses or on military devices using atomic energy.
It prohibits unauthorized dissemination of infor-
mation regarding production processes or re-
garding uses of atomic energy that have military
importance. The production and ownership of
this explosive material is to rest exclusively in
the Atomic Energy Commission established in
this bill. The Commission is to hold all patents
on production processes and on military devices,
paying just compensation to inventors and
patent owners. The Commission alone is per-
mitted to release information fiom the restricted
category set up in the bill and to permit its free
dissemination.
In approving this bill our committee agreed
unanimously on the powers granted. They
are the minimum powers necessary to protect
this Nation, this city, this building itself against
an atomic bomb manufactured within our own
borders, or from the misuse of information or
material in our possession.
Is there anyone among you who will contend
that the times are now so propitious, the world
so well-intentioned, and America so supremely
secure that we can permit any Tom, Dick or
Harry to play ball with the stuff annihilation is
made of? When a push button may destroy a
city can we afford to leave such buttons in pri-
vate hands? If not, then we cannot allow
private persons to own the facilities for pro-
ducing fissionable material.
Would you allow anyone to own the rights to
an atomic weapon now?
This bill prevents anyone from holding
patents on the explosive material in atomic
weapons.
Would you spread before the world the blue-
prints of the atomic bomb now?
This bill keeps military information secret
until its release can no longer injure our
national security.
Furthermore, by providing that only the
Atomic Energy Commission shall own and
operate the plants producing fissionable ma-
terial and atomic bombs, the bill insures that
current production processes are known inti-
mately only by Government workers or by the
employees of firms under direct Government
contract.
Even if these provisions occasioned financial
loss to many private persons, even if their en-
forcement required the confiscation of extensive
properties, mortal danger would still provide the
grim necessity for their enactment. In fact,
however, these provisions simply extend powers
already held by the Government and they con-
tinue a legal situation which already exists.
Atomic energy was developed by the people's
money, $2,500,000,000 of it. The Government
now owns all fissionable materials and the
plants where these materials aie made. The
Government guards those plants and the tech-
nical information about them, as secrets of
national importance. To maintain these rights
of ownership and the essentials of these secrecy
provisions under the Atomic Energy Commis-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
105
sion does violence to no one. It is not merely a
step toward the conversion of our atomic energy
installations to peaceful purposes; it is a neces-
sary measure to insure their continued develop-
ment and operation for all purposes.
The contention which I made at the outset
of this speech, that this bill provides first of all
for the security of this Nation, would be a mere
bundle of hollow words if these provisions were
any less strong or Jess comprehensive. These
provisions for a Government monopoly over the
information, the patents and the productive
facilities required for making fissionable ma-
terial and over the material itself, the patent
provisions and those controlling information,
are inseparable from one another. They are
made to support and reinfoice one another.
Together they constitute our only immediate
defense.
If anyone should say to me, "Such controls
are extensive," I would agiee with him. But if
he should say to me, "Such controls are more
extensive than necessary," then I will be forced
to conclude that he has not realized, or has for-
gotten, the power of the atomic bomb. And I
would want to paste up on the inside of his
brow, where his mind could always see it, the
sobering slogan: "Remember Hiroshima!" And
to this I would add that the atomic bomb of
Hiroshima is but a model T version. The scien-
tists who made the bomb testified before our
committee that the atomic bomb of the future
may be a thousand times more powerful, may
kill or maim everyone within 5 miles of where
it strikes, and may affect every building within
40 miles. So far as we know now, such a bomb
has not yet been built, but the scientists tell us
it is perfectly feasible.
I have said that S. 1717 provides, first of all,
for the national security. I have shown how
the bill contains the controls necessary to avert
immediate and sudden catastrophe. But the
committee in approving S. 1717 was not so
short-sighted as to think that we can achieve
security by stagnation. A Goveinment monop-
oly protects us only from dangers within our
own bordeis. But any nation in time can learn
our secrets—if not fi om us, then from that
same book of Nature from which we learned
them. We can be secure only by everlasting
progress. This bill provides the means for the
continuous development of atomic energy in all
its aspects and applications.
The Atomic Energy Commission, as oiganized
in the bill, is perhaps, first of all, a production
agency. It is the agency empowered to produce
materials releasing atomic energy and to make
them into military weapons, if needed. There
is nothing unusual in this assignment of duties.
In time of peace, and for the most part in war-
time too, the task of production is a civilian job.
Production has never been a military function,
and it is not a job for which military men are
well equipped. The Atomic Energy Commission
will in this bill bear roughly the same relation j
to the Avmy and Navy's procurement programs i
that any private industry—the steel, or the
automotive industry, for instance—has always
borne. It will receive orders for fissionable ma-
terial and for atomic weapons from the Com-
mander in Chief of the armed forces, the Presi-
dent, it will fill those orders; it will deliver on
those orders as authorized by the President.
Like any good production agency, the Com-
mission is also chai ged in its other divisions
with research and development; it can devise
new techniques of production; it can assist the
armed foices in devising new weapons. Pro-
duction and research in production, military
work and leseaich on military weapons
[p. 6095]
are activities of the organization which comple-
ment and strengthen one another. The bill
establishes a Division of Military Applications
in which military research is to be cairied on,
but nothing in this bill prevents any other
person or agency in the United States from
developing new designs for atomic weapons.
The Atomic Energy Commission is expressly
directed, under section 3 of this bill, to encour-
age such research by grants of money and loans
of facilities and equipment. The only lestric-
tions on military work apply to the manufac-
ture of atomic weapons and to the use and
manufacture of atomic explosives.
FREEDOM OF RESEARCH
Mr. President, if our national security de-
pended merely upon our progiess in the mili-
tary arts, if this bill could stand or fall on
how well it protects and piomotes this progress,
if simple military strength had been all our
committee was concerned with, our task would
have been simple indeed and we would have
reported a bill back to you months ago. For
surely nothing that makes for military strength
is lacking from the provisions I have been
discussing.
But the fact is—and I cannot repeat it too
often—this bill is not a good bill because of
the precautions it takes, because of the con-
trols it establishes, because of the limitations
it places on free development of atomic energy.
This bill is a good bill because of the freedom it
allows and because of the encoui agements it
gives to this development. Let me read from
section 1 of the bill:
"Accordingly, it is hereby declared to be
the policy of the people of the United States
that, subject at all times to the paramount
objectives of assuring the common defense
and security, the development and utilization
of atomic energy shall, so far as practicable, be
directed toward improving the public welfare,
increasing the standard of living, strengthen-
ing free competition in private enterprise, and
promoting world peace.
"(b) Purpose of act: It is the purpose of
this act to effectuate the policies set out in
section 1 (a) by providing, among others, for
the following major programs relating to atomic
energy:
-------
106
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
" (1) A program of assisting and fostering
private research and development to encourage
maximum scientific progress;
"(2) A program for the control of scientific
and technical information which will permit
the dissemination of such information to en-
courage scientific progress, and for the sharing
on a reciprocal basis of information concerning
the practical industrial application of atomic
energy as soon as effective and enforceable
safeguards against its use for destructive pur-
poses can be devised;
"(3) A program of federally conducted re-
search and development to assure the Gov-
ernment of adequate scientific and technical
accomplishment."
There follow the other programs of the bill
directed toward assuring the national security
through atomic-eneigy control. Throughout the
bill, provision is made for independent work
by private individuals and for encouragement of
this work by the Commission. Let me mention
a few sections where these features are most
obvious.
Along with the organization's own research
conducted under its division of research, the
bill provides in section 3 for assistance of all
sorts to the research of other Government
agencies, of private academic institutions and
industrial establishments. The Atomic Energy
Commission is authorized and directed to give
financial assistance and loans of equipment and
facilities for such research. In the distribution
of fissionable material under section 5, it is to
give priority to applicants requiring this ma-
terial in research.
FREE MINING PRIVILEGES
In section 5 of the bill, provision is made for
the control of source materials, the uranium
ores from which the fissionable material is
made. This material is at the foundation of all
atomic energy production. A supply of this
material is indispensable to the Atomic Energy
Commission's production program. To keep
track of our supplies of this material and to
prevent their export or diversion into un-
authorized channels, S. 1717 requires that all
transfers of source material be licensed by the
Commission. To assure an adequate supply of
source material for the Commission's produc-
tion program, the bill enables the Commission to
acquire stocks of this material or lands con-
taining deposits of this material by purchase or
through exercise of the right of eminent domain.
Title to source materials on public lands is re-
served to the Commission and the Commission
is authorized to make investigations to deter-
mine the existence of deposits of this material
on private property but is not authorized to
explore on private property without the owner's
consent. Thus far the bill goes—and no farther.
There is no substantial interference in this bill
with the rights of private mining interests.
It is not the intent of the committee to authorize
the Commission to engage in mining operations
in competition with private mining activity
unless such operations are necessary to insure
to the Commission a supply of source materials
adequate for carrying out its duties and re-
sponsibilities under the provisions of the bill.
There is no discouragement to the individual
private prospector who, as Senator MILLIKIN
has reminded us, goes out with nothing else but
"beans, bacon, and independence" and on whom
the real burden of discovery of our mineral de-
posits has always rested.
[p. 6096]
Mr. President, I have taken considerable time
in expounding the philosophy behind this bill
—showing what it seeks to do and why. But I
have as yet said nothing about the means to
accomplish its aims—the instrument for doing
the job. That instrument is the organization
which this bill would bring into being. This
organization is not only the most efficient and
effective instrument for doing the job to be
done—it is, in fact, part and parcel of the ob-
jectives of the bill. The committee, after
months of study, could find no other way to
protect national security, foster scientific ad-
vancement for a prosperous economy and pro-
mote international cooperation for control of
atomic energy while at the same time preserving
and strengthening our traditional forms and
institutions of government.
Let me begin my explanation of this organiza-
tional structure by going at once to the very
heart of it—the Atomic Energy Commission.
THE COMMISSION
To accomplish objectives as broad as these,
in a field of human activity as new and com-
plicated as atomic energy, to handle powers
as extensive as required is a task demanding
the full-time attention of wise, experienced and
independent men. The committee, seeing the
problem in this light, rejected all proposals for
an Atomic Energy Commission which might
become a conglomeration of part-time repre-
sentatives of special groups. To make policies
affecting our lives, our safety, and the whole
shape and substance of our future demands con-
stant attention to the whole problem of atomic
energy in our society. This is no job for part-
time executives or a single administrator, either
in the Army or outside it, no matter how long
may have been his practical engineering experi-
ence; how brilliant his recent success, or how
complete his understanding of our atomic
energy development in all its scientific, tech-
nological and administrative detail.
S. 1717 would give the principal responsi-
bility for the control and development of atomic
energy to a Commission of five civilians of un-
questionable caliber appointed by the President,
with the advice and consent of the Senate and
responsible to the President and the Congress.
These men would devote their complete time and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
107
attention to the responsibilities of their high
position. They would serve at salaries com-
parable to those on the highest level of govern-
ment. As a special precaution, it is provided
that the President shall submit to the Senate
the qualifications of nominees for these positions
at the time that their names aie submitted for
confirmation.
This bill, in short, considers the making of
American atomic policy more than a problem in
science, in military technology, or in production
techniques; it consideis it piimarily as a piob-
lem in statesmanship.
Under the Commissioners, the bill sets up an
organization with two main purposes: the effi-
cient execution of the Commission's policies and
programs and the proper paiticipation of other
groups, military and scientific, that have legiti-
mate interests and responsibility in the atomic
energy field.
I would like now to explain these two
aspects of the organization structure. They
are fundamental in understanding how this
bill provides for oui national security without
retaidmg unnecessarily the peaceful economic
progress of the country or endangering our
chances for a lasting peace.
GENERAL MANAGER
It is essential that the oiganization subordi-
nate to the Commission to be able to operate
efficiently. It should operate, as any other oi-
ganization in business 01 Government operates,
under the administiative direction of one man,
who has some independence and powei in his
office and is responsible for the faithful execu-
tion of policies S. 1717 piovides foi a Gencial
Manager to be appointed by the Piesidcnt to
carry out the plans and policies laid down by
the Atomic Eneigy Commission.
This Geneial Manager, it is expected, will
have the same administrative authority ovci
the plant, equipment, and employees of the
organization that the head of any old-line Gov-
ernment depaitment has where efficient admin-
istration is the admimstiator's real job.
FOUR DIVISIONS
The framework of the four divisions sub-
ordinate to the Geneial Manager can be judged
only in relation to the powers which the organ-
ization is to exei else and the pi oblems it is
expected to meet. These four divisions arc Pro-
duction, Engineering, Rcseaich, and Military
Applications.
The Division of Production will cany out
production programs—the running of plants
and the provision of raw materials for th.s
work.
Problems in the constiuction of new plants
or redesign of existing plants or engmeeimg
problems related to industrial uses of atomic
energy will come undei the supervision of
expert engineeis of all kinds in the Division
of Engineeiing. This work was set up in a
sepaiate division as the result of testimony in
committee hearings on the expeiience of the
Manhattan district p reject and the many
unusual and difficult engineering problems
involved.
The research programs of the organization
itself are placed under the Division of Research,
but this Division is given no power over private
itsearch and no responsibility for extending the
many aids to private leseaich provided foi-
under the bill. These responsibilities are left
with the Commission.
The military applications of atomic energy
are set up in a Division of Military Apphca-
tions. This Division is to carry on the develop-
ment woi k on atomic weapons which the
oiganization is directed to undertake, though not
to the exclusion of the aimed foiccs 01 of any
person or agency.
These divisions weie set up in the bill after
a thorough study of the duties and anticipated
problems of the oiganizations. They are de-
signed to make the oiganization operate effi-
ciently both in its immediate job of pioduction
and control and in its long-range task of de-
veloping both military and peacetime applica-
tions of atomic eneigy. They reflect clearly the
intention of the bill to provide for both the mili-
tary security and the peaceful progress of the
United States.
I now turn to the other aspect of the or-
ganization's structure: The provisions for par-
ticipation by skilled scientists and technicians
and by the armed forces.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
A General Advisory Committee is set. up to,
be composed of nine civilians appointed, by the
President. They are to meet at least four tames,
a year to advise and consult with the Commis-
sion on scientific and technical matters.. Tiher.e
can be no doubt that this Committee will make
it possible for scientists to participate in this
work as a matter of right and will, make it^
impossible for the Commission to go astiay in
its policies because of lack of scientific informa-
tion.
MILITARY LIAISON
The Military Liaison Board is the principal
avenue for military participation in t)ie, or-
ganization. This Board, to be composed qf
Army and Navy representatives appointed by
their department heads, is given power be-
yond the mere advisory power granted to the
General Advisory Committee. The Commission
is to advise and consult with the Military
Liaison Committee on all matters relating to
military applications of atomic energy. On any
matter which the Committee believes relates to
military applications it has the light to protest
to the heads of the Depaitments of War and
Navy. Upon their discretion these Department
heads may cany the protest to the President
for final decision.
Surely no fairei or more proper method could
be devised for enabling the armed forces to
guard its legitimate interests in the work of the
Commission. Fuithermore this bill permits the
-------
108
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
armed forces to carry on research on atomic
weapons. Subject to the Commission's right to
set up safety regulations and to its powers over
the actual materials that release atomic energy,
research on, but not the manufacture of, atomic
weapons is left free and open to all. There is
nothing in the bill to hinder the Army's and
Navy's military research programs. The Mili-
tary Liaison Committee is, however, limited
strictly to matters of military applications of
atomic energy. Lacking the dignity of Presi-
dential appointment, it will at all times be
subordinate to the civilian Commission on mat-
ters of general policy.
ORGANIZATION SUMMARY
Here then, Mr. President, is the outline of
the organization that is to direct this most
difficult and critical activity. It provides for
an organization equipped to continue what-
ever production and engage in whatever mili-
tary research the immediate security of this
country requires, while advancing, at the same
time, the scientific and technological work on
which the long-run security and economic wel-
fare of this country depend.
Mr. President, this is a strong organizational
mechanism. It is designed for a heavy load
and for difficult operations. It is designed co
bear large powers and to work quickly and
efficiently in complex and untried fields.
CONGRESSIONAL PARTICIPATION
Mr. President, this bill is written for chang-
ing and difficult times. Its main purpose is to
strengthen our national security, and one of the
ways in which it does this is by reinfoicing
our traditional institutions of government. It
is in line with our traditions that the Congress
should play a large part in such an enterprise
as this bill contemplates. Nothing could be so
necessary as that the Congress should have the
means of watching over this new and powerful
organization, to assist it with new laws when
new laws are required, to assess its operations
and alter its powers and structure when neces-
sary, to be ready to adapt it continuously to
changing circumstances.
Because of its importance, I have purposely
left until now all discussion of the role of Con-
gress in the operation of the atomic energy
organization set up by this bill. Section 14
provides for the establishment of a joint con-
gressional committee of 18 membeis. Nine
Members of the Senate are to be appointed by
the President of the Senate, and 9 Members of
the House are to be appointed by the Speaker
of the House of Representatives. In both cases
no more than 5 of the committeemen are to be
members of the same political party.
This joint committee is to make continuing
studies of the activities of the Commission and
of problems relating to the development, use,
and control of atomic energy. All bills, resolu-
tions, and other matters in the Senate or the
House of Representatives relating to the Com-
mission or to atomic energy are to be referred
to this joint committee, "which is to report back
to Congress, by bill or otherwise, from time to
time.
There is another provision in the bill for
congressional action which I want to mention
here. This is the provision in section 7 for
congressional control of the licensing of atomic
energy devices. It provides the means for a
carefully planned and well-considered introduc-
tion of this new energy in its civilian uses into
our economic system. Before any new use of
atomic energy is permitted, the Atomic Energy
Commission is to
[p. 6097]
report to the Congress the probable effects of
such an innovation on our economy and on our
international position.
After making such a report the Commission
must wait 90 days during which the Congress
is in session before authorizing the innovation
by licensing its manufacture or use. This pro-
vision looks into the future, to the time when
new uses of atomic energy may make obsolete
whole industries and create serious technological
unemployment. The bill provides for the free
development of industrial uses of atomic energy
under private enterprise, with private patents,
and a licensing system to prevent the evils of
monopoly. But it provides that first the Con-
gress shall be apprised of the full effects of
such development and shall have the oppor-
tunity, either to let it move along freely or to
guide it where its progress threatens to cause
sudden hardship or widespread economic shock
and suffering. Through these provisions, this
bill preserves the prerogatives and the powers
of the Congress and pi ovides the means for
their wise and effective employment.
[p. 6098]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
109
l.la(4)(b) July 16: House Disagrees To Senate BUI, pp. 9135-9136,
9140-9141
DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL OF
ATOMIC ENERGY
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I call
up House Resolution 708 and ask for
its immediate consideration.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Mr.
Speaker, I make the point of order that
a quorum is not present.
The SPEAKER. The Chair will
count. [After counting.] Two hun-
dred and seventeen Members are pres-
ent, a quorum.
The Clerk read the resolution, as
follows:
Resolved, That upon the adoption of
this resolution it shall be in order to
move that the House resolve itself into
the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union for the consid-
eration of the act (S. 1717) for the
development and control of atomic
energy. That after general debate,
which shall be confined to the act and
shall continue not to exceed 4 hours to
be equally divided and controlled by
the chairman and the ranking minority
member of the Committee on Military
Affairs, the act shall be read for
amendment under the five-minute rule.
At the conclusion of the reading of the
act for amendment, the Committee
shall rise and report the same to the
House with such amendments as may
have been adopted and the previous
question shall be considered as ordered
on the act and amendments thereto to
final passage without intervening mo-
tion except one motion to recommit.
THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL OF
ATOMIC ENERGY
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, later I
shall yield the usual 30 minutes to the
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. ALLEN],
Mr. Speaker, this rule makes in
order Senate bill 1717, the atomic-
energy-control bill. The rule provides
for 4 hours' general debate, after
which the bill will be read for amend-
ment. In view of the conditions, I will
take some time to explain the impor-
tance of this legislation.
On October 29, 1945, 8 months ago,
the Senate passed an unprecedented
resolution not only authorizing and di-
recting a special 11-member committee
to study problems relating to the de-
velopment, use, and control of atomic
energy, but giving that special com-
mittee the power to report legislation
on the subject.
After 6 months of exhaustive hear-
ings, both in open and secret session,
and after having had the outstanding
military and civilian experts of the
United States before the committee,
that special committee unanimously
reported S. 1717, and on June 1 the
Senate passed the bill without a dis-
senting vote.
BEST-INFORMED AMERICANS WANT THIS
The most thoroughly informed peo-
ple in America, the President, the Sec-
retaries of War, Navy, and State, Mr.
Bernard Baruch, the National Re-
search Foundation, the atomic scien-
tists, and many other outstanding
Americans agreed that the McMahon
bill as unanimously passed by the Sen-
ate was the best bill that could now be
devised to guide this terrific new ex-
ploration into the unknown.
It is true that in the meantime an
emergency bill had been prepared and
reported by the Military Affairs Com-
mittees based on information avail-
able a year ago. The McMahon bill,
however, as passed by the Senate, rep-
resents the ripe and considered opin-
ions of many people, all of them
qualified experts, and is the bill now
recommended, without change, just as
the Senate passed it.
OPINIONS VARY ON AMENDMENTS
The House Committee on Military
Affairs, to whom the bill was referred.
-------
110
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
made various and sundry amendments.
The experts say that none of the
amendments strengthens or adds to the
bill. The most important amendments
make it mandatory that one of the
members of the Atomic Energy Con-
trol Commission shall be a representa-
tive of the armed forces, and that the
director of the division of military ap-
plication also shall be a representative
of the armed forces.
There was no thorough agreement
among the committee members.
In fact, the gentleman from Ken-
tucky [Mr. MAY] , the chairman of the
committee, stated there was a wide
difference of opinion in the House
committee on the amendments, as did
the committee in its own report—see
page 4, House Report 2478. I am
afraid the bill as reported by the
House committee by no means repre-
sents the majority opinion of the com-
mittee. The gentleman from Kentucky
[Mr. MAY] pointed out that the divi-
sion of opinion was so great that nine
minority Members submitted their
opinions separately, although only
two, the gentleman from New Jersey
[Mr. THOMAS] and the gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. ELSTON], appeared
before the Rules Committee.
THIS BILL SAFEGUARDS SECRETS
Mr. Speaker, I hope and trust that
this rule will be adopted. All of
those most interested in our national
welfare from the President on down
feel the amendments should be dis-
agreed to.
The Senate bill as passed unani-
mously provided for full civilian con-
trol of atomic energy. That is in line
with the established traditions of our
Nation. Our War Department is
headed by a
[p. 9135]
civilian. Our Navy Department is
headed by a civilian. Our Commander
in Chief, the President, is a civilian.
Ample provision is made in the origi-
nal bill for military and naval liaison
and cooperation and for preserving the
secrecy of real military information.
MILITARY GOVERNMENT HEKE?
The gentleman from New Jersey
[Mr. THOMAS] opposed the granting
of any rule and stated that the Army
should control this astounding and
world-shaking new knowledge, which
may change the fate of all mankind,
apparently because some of the civil-
ians appointed to the Commission
might believe in some kind of world
government, although he did not men-
tion that some military men might be-
lieve in military government right
here.
To support his fears, the gentleman
read to us what he called a report
from the counsel of the Committee on
Un-American Activities, Ernie Adam-
son. I understand that Adamson is a
lawyer and not an expert on atomic
fission. The gentleman stated that as
a result of his brief investigation
Adamson had concluded that the
Army should keep permanent control
over what he called the "manufacture"
of atomic energy.
PROFOUND IGNORANCE DISPLAYED
It is difficult to believe, Mr. Speaker,
that this so-called report should be
seriously considered by anyone. It be-
trays a profound ignorance about the
bill S. 1717 and its provisions and ob-
jectives, about the generation of atomic
energy, and about the methods of
adequate investigation and reporting.
It will be recalled that this man
Adamson has denied that the United
States has or should have a democratic
form of government. If he has no
more knowledge of the history and
Constitution of the United States than
he has of atomic fission, then that re-
mark, too, arose from profound igno-
rance.
In the so-called report Adamson
ascribes to a young scientist the re-
mark that the political power of the
atomic bomb was greater than its
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
111
physical force. The gentleman may be
astounded to know the remark is a
direct quotation from an official Army
report on the impact of atomic war-
fare on our own national defense.
WHO AUTHORIZED RELEASE OP REPORT?
I have neither time, energy, nor in-
clination, Mr. Speaker, to point out
all the foolish and uninformed state-
ments made by this man Adamson. I
doubt very much that the chairman of
the committee, the gentleman from
Georgia [Mr. WOOD], who is an honor-
able, intelligent, and responsible rep-
resentative of his State, gave any
authority to the man to give publicity
to these imaginings of his warped
mind. If the gentleman from Georgia
is on the floor, I should like to know
from him if he gave Adamson any
such authority.
CHARACTER ASSASSINATION
BY INNUENDO
Adamson is trying to suggest that
these brilliant scientists, who risked
their lives every moment in the long,
dangerous, and incalculably impor-
tant experiments to develop the means
of generating atomic energy, who
worked day and night under the ut-
most strain, are not wholly and unim-
peachably loyal to this country. It is
character assassination by innuendo,
by insinuation, by association of ideas.
Adamson says, for instance, the
officers of the Association of Oakridge
Engineers and Scientists, and I quote,
"admit communication with persons
outside the United States." Note
how carefully this sentence is worded.
There is nothing wrong, illegal, un-
ethical, or unusual in communicating
with persons outside the United
States. I communicate frequently
with persons outside the United
States. Most of us here do. Adam-
son makes no charge here of any
illegality; yet in the context of his
absurd report the inference is con-
veyed that the communication is with
some unfriendly power.
SECURITY OFFICERS REPUDIATE ADAMSON
One statement, however, is declared
to be wholly false by the secretary of
the Oakridge Scientists, E. E. Minett.
Adamson says:
The security officeis at Oaki idge think that
the peace and security of the United States is
definitely in danger.
Even that statement is ambiguous.
Minett has informed me through a
telephone message that the Manhattan
district engineer, Col. E. E. Kirkpat-
rick, authorized him to state that no
such statement was made or author-
ized by any the security officers.
Col. David E. Shaw, security officer
of the Manhattan district, also au-
thorized the following statement:
I have not said that I consider the seem ity
of the Manhattan district in jeopardy as the re-
sult of any activity of any cuirent group at
Oakridge.
[p. 9136]
Mr. ABENDS. Mr. Speaker, the
bill, S. 1717, is, I believe, as important,
if not more so, than any piece of legis-
lation this House has ever considered.
I believe this proposed bill is as vital
as any legislation ever before any
Congress. I am sure those Members
who have studied the bill and the re-
port will agree with that statement.
Under general debate, and when the
bill is read under the 5-minute rule, I
do hope the Members of the House will
study as much as possible the ramifi-
cations and the potentialities of this
proposed legislation. It is so far-
reaching, and so broad in scope, that
it is almost incredible that we should
consider granting such powers to a
board of five men. This board would
make of its five members literally the
five most powerful individuals this
Nation or the world have ever seen.
In complete, total control of all mat-
ters concerning atomic energy, the
most powerful energy, the most dan-
gerous weapon or, conversely, the most
beneficent power ever known to civil-
-------
112
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
ization, this Commission, in truth and
fact, would hold the destiny—the lives
and freedom of mankind—wholly
within their discretion.
Up until the present time, we, the
possessor of the know-how of atomic
energy, control to a large extent these
forces which the rest of the world,
especially certain nations, want to
know more about, and are determined
to acquire. This commission, without
asking anyone, could decide just what
shall be done with the secrets of atomic
energy. The commission would be
required to ask no government, no
other power, no people, for permission
to do anything they might want, at
any time they might desire, with this
greatest secret of the ages. I venture
to assert that it has never before been
suggested that such gigantic, world-
controlling powers be placed in the
hands of any five men that I ever
heard of.
It is expected, of course, that the
five-man commission will be made up
of good, patriotic, loyal American citi-
zens appointed by and with the con-
sent of the Senate. Mr. Speaker, we
all have seen the appointment of sup-
posedly good, true, tried, and tested
citizens, only to learn later that they
were humans and, therefore, subject
to error. I make this statement, Mr.
Speaker, so the House of Representa-
tives may be alert to just what we are
undertaking to do here today. I agree
that some control of this vital force
must be established, but, I repeat, we
should realize that we are setting up
the most totalitarian commission in all
history—a group which will hold in its
hands the means for the very life or
death of every citizen in this country
and in the whole world. The hill will
permit this commission, I reiterate, to
do anything it desires at any time.
The commission could determine the
policy of these United States of Amer-
ica as to what shall be done about
atomic energy. This commission could
take from you and from me any of
our possessions; any of our property;
any of our rights guaranteed under
the Constitution; any of our patents
—in truth and fact—anything any in-
dividual in this country now possesses,
if the commission declared it to con-
cern atomic power. We cannot now
conceive that this will be done, but
the truth should be faced by all Mem-
bers. They should understand just
what we are doing here today.
Some of us on the Military Affairs
Committee thought it wise that the so-
called McMahon bill should be amended
in certain respects. In my years of
service here I have never yet seen
legislation passed by either body that
was not subject to improvement by
amendment. Therefore, amendments
were added to the bill in the commit-
tee. Such amendments, I hope we can
convince you, are improvements to the
proposed legislation. Those of us on
the committee who wanted to amend
this bill have no objective in mind ex-
cept that if this bill is to pass it
should be in the best form possible,
and with the Congress of the United
States fully aware of its effects and
implications.
The major change made in commit-
tee was the one regarding the five-
man Commission to be established.
As the bill passed the Senate, it called
for a five-man civilian Commission.
Our committee changed it in this re-
spect: That it be mandatory for one
member of the five-man Commission
to be a military man, and that two
military men could be appointed by the
President, but not more than two.
Now, I would like to ask the House
what is wrong with such a proposal.
If, up to the present time, there is any
group which has a more direct interest
in atomic-energy matters than the mil-
itary defenders of this country, I
would like to know who it is. What
is wrong with placing one military
man on a five-man Commission with
four civilian members? If there is
any one military individual so strong,
so smart, so capable, and so deter-
mined that he can influence four other
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
113
civilians and persuade them to do as,
he likes, then such a man, because of
his sheer ability, should be on the
Commission. I cannot understand the
assertion that we are destroying a ci-
vilian Commission when there are
four civilians and only one military
man provided for such Commission.
[p. 9140]
You will hear it said here that the
War Department is opposed to the
proposition of one military man being
placed on the Commission. Well, they
certainly have never told me so. I do
not believe they are opposed to it. I
hope the membership will carefully
think through this proposal to have
one military man on the Commission.
In the best interests of the country, I
believe it to be a wise and proper step
to take.
While there are other parts of the
bill which I would like to discuss, I do
not now have the time to do so. How-
ever, I want, before I conclude, to draw
your attention to the patents section of
this bill. When the bill is read under
the 5-mJnute rule an amendment will
be offered to strike section 11 from the
bill. At the proper time I hope to offer
concluaive argument in support of
such an amendment. Members of the
House, do not take any steps in opposi-
tion to some of the various amendments
offered until you carefully consider
what you are doing. I repeat, this, in
my estimation, is the most important
piece of peacetime legislation you have
ever been called to vote upon.
CALL OF THE HOUSE
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Mr.
Speaker, I make the point of order that
a quorum is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
ZIMMERMAN ). Evidently no quorum is
present.
Mr. ALLEN of Illinois. Mr.
Speaker, I move a call of the House.
A call of the House was ordered.
The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to
their names:
*****
The SPEAKER. On this roll call
340 Members have answered to their
names, a quorum.
By unanimous consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with.
DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL OF ATOMIC
ENERGY
Mr. ALLEN of Illinois. Mr.
Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gen-
tleman from Ohio [Mr. ELSTON].
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Speaker, I am
opposed to this rule and I am opposed
to the bill. I agree with what the gen-
tleman from Illinois [Mr. ARENDS]
said, that this is an important piece of
legislation. Its importance, in my
judgment, should be judged by the ex-
tent to which it will deprive the Amer-
ican people of their liberties.
I not only agree that it is an impor-
tant piece of legislation but I should
like to add that this is one of the most
dangerous bills ever presented to Con-
gress. I am sure that before the de-
bate is over you will have ample proof
in support of that statement.
This bill comes to us under a great
fear psychology which the propagan-
dists of the country have endeavored
and are still endeavoring to create, to
frighten the American people into
adopting a type of legislation which
will mean the surrender of more of
their liberty than it is safe to surren-
der to any Government agency in time
of peace.
What is the situation at the present
time? Right now, when the world is
still in a state of confusion, when the
war technically is not even over, the
secrets of the atomic bomb and of
atomic energy are in the possession of
the armed services. Some secrets may
have leaked out, but the greater part
of them, I hope, are still known only to
this Government.
What does this bill seek to do? The
-------
114
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
President will no more than sign it, if
it gets that far, than every one of those
secrets, the bombs themselves, as well
as the Oak Ridge plant, will be turned
over to a Government bureau, and the
Army will be completely divested of
control and authority over such prop-
erty.
When the bill first came to our com-
mittee no provision had been made for
the Army and Navy to even have a rep-
resentative on the commission of five,
known as the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion. They said this was because of
some tradition that you cannot have a
man in uniform on a commission of
this kind. But I submit, Mr. Speaker,
that no such tradition could apply when
the safety of the Nation is involved.
The Army and Navy and not a Gov-
ernment bureau are charged with the
responsibility of defending the coun-
try. You might as well transfer the
Navy or the Air Forces to a Govern-
ment agency. The House Committee
on Military Affairs added an amend-
ment to the bill which will give the
Army representation on the commis-
sion, but every conceivable effort, I
understand, is going to be made to re-
move that amendment from the bill.
Our committee was severely criticized
in some quarters because it dared to
disturb any part of this bill as it came
from the other body. We were urged
to report the bill without any hearings.
As a matter of fact, we heard only two
witnesses and another witness who
came in by accident. That was all the
testimony that was presented to our
committee on a piece of legislation of
this importance. The chairman of the
Atomic Energy Commission will re-
ceive $17,500 a year and the other
members $15,000. Five department
heads will receive $14,000 a year each,
making 10 in all. However able or
honest these persons may be, I submit
it is a dangerous thing to take from the
military authorities and turn over to
bureau heads and their employees
whatever secrets of atomic energy we
possess.
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman has expired.
Mr. ALLEN of Illinois. Mr.
Speaker, I yield three additional min-
utes to the gentleman.
Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN.
Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I yield.
Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN.
We are led to believe there are thou-
sands of foreign agents from other
countries in the United States, trying
to get information on the atomic bomb
as well as other secrets. If that is a
fact, would it not be better to let this
type of legislation lie over until we get
more stable conditions in the world
and we know what our Allies intend to
do?
Mr. ELSTON. I think the gentle-
man has stated the situation exactly.
There is absolutely no reason for this
legislation. Present conditions should
not be changed until there is some sta-
bility in the world, until some of the
confusion is gone and until we have
entered into some international agree-
ment which will outlaw use of atomic
weapons. Up to the present moment
there has not been a single agreement
entered into, requiring legislation of
this kind. In the brief time that I have
remaining I would like to make this
point. It is contended that this legis-
lation is necessary in order to create
an impression on the rest of the world
that we are not militaristically in-
clined. It is contended that if we go
on manufacturing atomic bombs, we
may offend other nations. In answer
to this claim, I need only to call your
attention to the fact that at the pres-
ent time if the President of the United
States wants the War Department and
the Navy Department to cease the
manufacture of atomic bombs, all he
has to do is to direct them to cease. We
do not need this legislation. As a mat-
ter of fact, this legislation is directed
at the private industry of the Nation.
It deals almost entirely with domestic
control. If anything ever placed
shackles on private industry, it is the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
115
bill that is before you today. Private
industry under this bill can not make
a single experiment in the development
of atomic energy for industrial pur-
poses without a license from this Gov-
ernment bureau. All patents having
to do with atomic energy would be im-
mediately revoked or they would be
taken over by the Government. No
person could invent anything without
turning his patent over to the Govern-
ment. The incentives provided by
our present patent laws would be
destroyed. Section 11 of this bill is un-
American and is contrary to the con-
stitutional principle upon which our
patent system is founded.
[p. 9141]
l.la(4)(c) July 17,18,19,20
House debates and amends Senate bill, pp. 9253-9254,9256, 9263-9270, 9272-9275,
9343-9346, 9355-9367, 9381-9386, 9464-9470, 9552-9662
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
am always glad to follow the gentle-
man from Missouri and to listen to him
in debate. The chairman of our com-
mittee has outlined to you the history
of this legislation. Our committee was
the first one to take it up in the Con-
gress and the first to consider it.
We devoted much time and study to
atomic energy. We had extensive
hearings and during the hearings we
listened to practically all the scientists
connected with this work. We also
listened to the War Department and
other officials in an effort to seek ad-
vice and to seek some way to control
this weapon. Hearings began some 30
or 40 days after the first one was
dropped.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to make
some remarks on the subject of the
atomic energy bill, S. 1717, which is
before us.
We saw, nearly a year ago, the vic-
torious conclusion of a war whose end
was greatly quickened by the use of
atomic bombs. To produce those
bombs, a great array of scientific tal-
ent was concentrated on the problem
for several years and about $2,000,-
000,000 of the public funds were spent.
Now we are confronted with establish-
ing through legislation a public policy
with regard to the further develop-
ment and control of atomic energy to
the end of serving the common good of
our people in peace and of assuring the
common defense.
While the first use of atomic energy
was a military one, our scientists have
assured us that important peacetime
uses of atomic energy and of the by-
products of atomic power plants are
already known and that others will
surely be developed as research goes
on in this field. The Nagasaki bomb
was made of a brand new chemical ele-
ment, plutonium, manufactured in the
uranium pile at Hanford. We are told
that for every pound of plutonium pro-
duced there were about 10,000,000 kilo-
watt-hours of heat energy released by
nuclear fission and carried away by
the Columbia River. Now work is pro-
ceeding on a pilot plant for the utiliza-
tion of such energy. It is obvious that,
because a power pile produces pluto-
nium as well as power, controls are
necessary in the public interest.
In the bill that came to us from the
Senate after months of hearings, with
the approval of both parties and of the
President, it seems to me that adequate
protection of the interests of the mili-
tary was provided for in the Senate
bill. The top policy-making body,
whose task is both to provide controls
-------
116
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
and to promote the further develop-
ment of atomic energy, is to be an
Atomic Energy Commission of five
full-time civilian members, responsible
to the President. This Commission is
to be advised on all matters relating to
military applications of atomic energy
by a military liaison committee. A
proposal to give the Army and Navy a
[p. 9253]
greater degree of direct control was
rejected by the Senate Special Com-
mittee on Atomic Energy after a great
expression of public opinion in favor
of civilian control and after the heads
of our War and Navy Departments
had testified that the necessities of the
military, in order to discharge their
responsibility for the national security,
were adequately provided for.
My distinguished colleagues on the
Military Affairs Committee have
thought it wise to make several amend-
ments whose aim is to increase the
amount of direct military control in
atomic energy development. I refer
particularly to (1) the amendment re-
quiring one and permitting two mem-
bers of the Commission to be military
men on active duty; (2) the amend-
ment requiring the Director of the Di-
vision of Military Applications to be a
military man on active duty; and (3)
the amendment permitting the armed
forces, with the approval of the Presi-
dent, to maintain their own facilities
and manufacture atomic weapons,
independently.
I wish to state now that I do not
believe that the three amendments
just mentioned, constitute desirable
changes in the bill, and I intend to vote
for their removal.
Referring to the first of these amend-
ments, it must be evident that member-
ship on the Commission is a full-time
job and that no military man could be
on the Commission and have, at the
same time, any other military respon-
sibility. However, he could not have
an undivided loyalty to the Commission
nor could he exercise independent judg-
ment since, as an officer on active duty,
he would be responsible to his supe-
riors in the Military Establishment.
It is clear that the purpose of this
amendment is to increase the amount
of direct military control in the top
policy-making body which our military
leaders tell us they do not require and
which the American people do not
want.
In connection with all of these
amendments, we should recognize the
necessity of maintaining our military
strength, but we should also recognize
the fact that our Government is par-
ticipating in discussions about inter-
national cooperation. We should take
care not to prejudice the chances of
success in those discussions.
Without the discovery of new ideas
and inventions there would have been
no discovery of a new world. Thus we
see discoveries and inventions of mech-
anism become the dynamic controls in
our modern economic system and make
it necessary for political and social
adjustments in the structure of the
modern world.
Speculation gave us investigation in
the field of atomic energy. Experi-
mentation and research by our scien-
tists has given us this problem. This
discovery of nuclear fission has caused
man to change his conception of the
earth and universe.
This is a domestic bill we are dealing
with today, and our problem is to work
this revolutionary discovery into a
self-balancing, self-regulating eco-
nomic system subject to the natural
laws of supply and demand so that it
will not trammel or destroy our indus-
trial liberty or our energy that has cre-
ated our private business enterprise
system. After many trials and errors
this system has proven to be the best
system on earth.
We here in America must take the
lead. As the home of the atomic bomb
America has a great moral responsibil-
ity. And let us pray, we in making our
choice will not fail mankind in this
tragic hour but will shoulder our re-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
117
sponsibility and opportunity and give
fresh hope to the stricken world.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Connecticut.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. In the infor-
mation presented to the gentleman's
committee, is it true the Army and the
Navy both stated that the amend-
ment with reference to military repre-
sentatives on the Commission is not
necessary?
Mr. DURHAM. I am not sure
whether they made that statement or
not before any committee. Our hear-
ings were held long before the Atomic
Committee was set up.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Texas.
Mr. THOMASON. It is safe to say
that the record discloses that the Sec-
retary of War in person and the Under
Secretary of the Navy both stated that
they favor the bill as it passed the
Senate.
Mr. DURHAM. That is correct.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. That is the
question I wanted answered.
Mr. DURHAM. The gentleman
asked me if they appeared before our
committee.
Mr. SHORT. Of course, they know
as much about the bill as we do.
Mr. DURHAM. I think so, yes.
Mr. VORYS of Ohio. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Ohio.
Mr. VORYS of Ohio. Is it not true
that the hearings disclose that the
reason the Secretary of War said
he wanted the Senate bill acted
on promptly \vas his anxiety to get
some sort of legislation promptly,
and he had not objection to the provi-
sion for military representation on the
Commission?
Mr. DURHAM. That is correct. Of
course, the President sent us his mes-
sage, as the chairman stated to you,
last October, urging us to enact this
legislation immediately. Also at that
time the War Department appeared
before us. General Groves himself ap-
peared before us, and asked that we
expedite this legislation. Now here
we are here 9 months later.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from California.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. In
those hearings they advocated a bill
that provided for the very repre-
sentation the gentleman from Ohio
mentioned.
Mr. DURHAM. That is correct.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. The
other day they repeated their confir-
mation of that legislation.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tlewoman from Connecticut.
Mrs. LUCE. I have here the state-
ment of Mr. John Kenney, Assistant
Secretary of the Navy, which he made
before our committee on June 12. He
says, and I quote from his own
testimony:
The bill in its present form satisfactorily cov-
eis the Navy's primary interests in having a
voice in the affairs of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission and in being able to conduct its. own
reseaich and development programs without
undue interfeience from the Commission.
Mr. DURHAM. That is correct.
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield
15 minutes to the gentleman from In-
diana [Mr. HARNESS].
Mr. Chairman, I make the point of
order that a quorum is not present.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
count. [After counting.] One hun-
dred and four Members are present, a
quorum.
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield for a brief
question?
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. I yield.
Mr. SHORT. Does not the gentle-
man feel that until the war is officially
declared ended, until the peace treaties
-------
118
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
are written, we certainly should hold
onto the secret weapon we now have?
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. I cer-
tainly do. I think there is no necessity
for rushing this legislation through.
I believe the security of the Nation will
be better protected under the present
set-up than it would be under this bill.
Mr. Chairman, this measure is a
threat to free government. It grants
more complete and sweeping power
and authority to an executive agency
than any other proposal ever consid-
ered in the United States Congress.
The bill literally places in the hands of
a five-man commission complete and
absolute authority over American in-
dustry and the lives of our entire popu-
lation. It is shocking and frightening
that this proposal could advance as
rapidly and get as far in this Congress.
I implore the House to reject the bill
and send it back to the Committee.
Let me call your attention to section
11 (c) of the act, which provides for
compulsory licensing of patents. That
is to say, instead of giving the inventor
an exclusive right in his inventions, in
other words, the right to exclude others
from the manufacture, use, or sale
of an invention, a patentee's invention
shall be made subject to the right of
others to make, use, and sell the inven-
tion upon the payment to the patentee
of a reasonable compensation.
*****
[p. 9254]
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. That
would not influence my feeling on this
bill at all. I am frightened at this pro-
posal, I am fearful for my country and
our free republican system of govern-
ment. I do not want to see any com-
mission set up with such sweeping
powers over the American people's
lives.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. I yield
to the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. MAY. Does the gentleman
agree with me that under the provi-
sions of this bill which authorize the
appointment of employees, servants,
and agents by the commission, they
could probably build as large a bureau
as the Department of Agriculture if
they wanted to?
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. The
Department of Agriculture would be
insignificant compared with what they
could do under this authority. There
is one section in this bill which would
give the commission the authority to
set up one of the greatest propaganda
bureaus we have ever heard of in this
Nation. Why, we voted down funds
for OWI, but this would be a super
OWI with authority to establish li-
braries, publish communications, mag-
azines, newspapers, and other kinds of
propaganda. It simply is too sweeping'
and too much power for a commission
to have.
[p. 9256]
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman,
* * * * *
Is there any need to develop this
thought? If you will read this bill,
imagining that it had been passed, say
in the year 1800, for "electrical en-
ergy," you will see at once how totally
different the economic and political
development of America might have
been. As to whether or not our living
standards would be as high as they are
now, after a hundred years of Govern-
ment monopoly of electric power, is for
each man to decide according to his
own political philosophy. It is also
any man's guess as to whether our
monopoly in the electrical energy field
would have promoted peace or en-
couraged war. But one thing is cer-
tain: That Government monopoly of
electrical energy would not have en-
couraged free enterprise. If that leg-
islation had remained on our books, by
this time we would be a fully matured
Socialist state.
Let us get this quite straight in our
own minds: It is not what men discover
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
119
that changes the structure of society;
it is how men legislate upon those dis-
coveries which change the structure of
society.
At one point in his debate on the
Senate floor, Senator McMAHON said:
The committee became convinced that
(atomic energy) wrote its own rules. It
wiites them out of the sheer necessity that
is inherent in this tremendous foice.
Now that is, I submit, nonsense.
And Senator McMAHON must have
thought so himself, for at the end of
this very same debate, he concluded by
saying:
Aware of their unique responsibility as
molders of (atomic energy) the committee
rnembeis labored long and arduously to foige
in the fires of democratic action the finest
instrument they could devise in the dischaige
of their grave assignment.
Neither Senator McMAHON, nor we,
nor the scientists, nor anybody with a
logical mind can have the proposition
two ways: either atomic energy molds
us, as he first claimed, or we mold
atomic energy, as he afterwards
stated. The latter is, of course, the
truth. The plain fact is that this man-
made law will mold the use of God-
given atomic energy. Nor was this bill
written, as the able Senator claimed
"out of the sheer necessity inherent in
that"—inhuman—"tremendous force."
This bill was written out of the human
horror and fear that gripped the Sen-
ators when they thought of the tre-
mendous human forces in other lands
that might one day be able to hurl
atomic bombs in a surprise attack on
us. Human fears alone—chiefly of
foreign powers—devised this law,
which is—or should be—a law for
keeping us supreme in the field of nu-
clear fission, and at the same time
keeping the knowledge of how to make
bombs away from our enemies. The
able Senator said that this bill was
forged in the fires of democratic action.
It was not. It was forged in the fires
of totalitarian action which are sweep-
ing toward the West, and have already
begun to burn holes in the fabric of our
democratic civilization. Our fears
concerning the future intentions of ag-
gressive totalitarian nations dictated
this bill; and its provisions were born
of a psychological necessity, and not a
scientific one: the dread of sudden at-
tack, and the belief that one way, per-
haps, to forestall it, was to be in a
position to retaliate overwhelmingly.
We have devised this law, not to en-
courage the free enterprise system, or
industrial research, or even the means
of curing cancer and leukemia, but to
protect ourselves so long as we can
from greedy and lawless enemies.
But to return to the inherent threats
in this necessary bill to our whole
American way of life, in the event it
should stay permanently on the books
in a time of real peace in the world:
In chapter I of section III of the
State Department report, there ap-
pears this significant phrase, which
may or may not have been written by
Mr. David Lilienthal, of TVA fame,
one of the reputed authors; and, ac-
cording to rumor, a man slated to be
one of the five atomic commissioners.
I quote:
Reactors for producing denatured plu-
tonium will be large installations, and by the
nature of the process they will yield lai'ge
amounts of energy as a bypioduct. As the
technology of power development by this
method expands, ways will be found for
utilizing this power both as heat and elec-
tiicity. The existing plants are not de-
signed to operate at a sufficiently high
temperature for the energy to be used for the
generation of electrical power. One of the
first reseaich and development problems—of
the Authonty-—would be to develop designs
of reactors such that the energy released
would be in foim usable foi the generation
of electrical power.
And again, in chapter III of section
II of the same report:
We believe that the development of rather
aige power units for heat and conversion to
electrical energy is a piogram for the near
'utuie; that opeiating units which will serve
to demonstrate the usefulness and hmita-
,ions of atomic power can be in existence
within a few yeais, and that only the gradual
incorporation and adaptation of such units
-------
120
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
to the specific demands of contemporary
economy will involve a protracted develop-
ment.
If Mr. Lilienthal is correct, and I
believe he is, in assuming that atomic
energy could be used to generate elec-
trical power, and if this legislation
stayed on our peacetime books, the
commissariat—which is what this
commission would then become—could
at vast public expense develop public
power which could, and perhaps would,
put all privately owned power plants
out of business one by one, slowly or
rapidly. Thus, in passing I call to the
attention of the gentleman from Mis-
sissippi [Mr. RANKIN] that this bill
offers the means of encompassing a
cherished project of his: TVA.
I think that an awareness of the vast
socialistic import, in the power field, of
this legislation, may explain much of
the violent left-wing enthusiasm for the
bill and the fervent support that the
Daily Worker his given this legislation
until recently.
Here are some further clues which
will perhaps help us to understand the
hot-eyed support some left-wingers are
throwing toward this bill:
On page 50, line 14, the definition of
atomic energy is so broad that a com-
mission of purposeful left-wingers
could conceivably control practically
all forms of energy now in use, which
is not surely the intent of the authors.
On page 11, line 17, and on page 12,
line 3, the language makes the Com-
mission the exclusive owner of all fa-
cilities for the production of fissionable
materials, other than facilities useful
in certain very limited fields of re-
search. This completely does away
with private enterprise and free com-
petition in these fields, even where the
production of fissionable material does
not constitute a hazard to public health
or national security. No such Govern-
ment monopoly exists in any other field
in America today.
On page 13, line 24, and page 51, line
25, in connection with manufacture of
production facilities, the term "facili-
ties" is so broadly defined that it can
include equipment which may have
been designed for other purposes, by or
for industries having originally noth-
ing to do with nuclear fission.
On page 26, line 8, the licensing pow-
ers for private use of atomic energy
are so arbitrary and so cramping in
time, that it is impossible to imagine
any person or organization willing to
risk funds in any enterprise making
use of atomic energy. This further in-
creases and entrenches complete Gov-
ernment monopoly of the production
of atomic energy, even where that pro-
duction does not endanger public
health or national security.
Under section 10, called Control of
Information, there are provisions for
the dissemination of information which
authorizes the Commission to establish
libraries, newspapers, and employ all
information channels, according to its
own discretion. The type of informa-
tion is not clearly defined. Such infor-
mation services might make the OWI
look like penny pamphleteering; and
it is only reasonable to suppose that a
vast permanent bureaucracy might use
it for the dissemination of political
ideas, under the guise of helping the
common man to understand the atomic
age.
I have already referred to the dan-
gers inherent in the patent provisions,
section 11. This section represents a
complete departure from the funda-
mental and basic principles of the
United States patent system, for it
removes patent protection in the whole
field of the production of fissionable
material, and in the field of the utiliza-
tion of fissionable material for military
weapons, as well as for all inventions,
to the extent that they are used in the
conduct of research or development
activities in certain prescribed fields.
It revokes patents already granted,
and would prevent the patenting of re-
search instruments manufactured for
the conduct of research in this field.
The patent provisions alone will af-
fect thousands of patents. One has
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
121
only to reflect on the immense variety
of the industrial equipment used in the
Manhattan project, to understand this.
There are some of the socialistic fea-
tures of the bill which might change
the structure of our government in the
event that in peacetimes, the Commis-
sion should ever be controlled by men
of the mind, say of Harold Laski.
If, in view of the needs of national
security, it should prove unwise to
[p. 9263]
modify by amendment all these social-
istic features, I should then support
any amendment calling for the expira-
tion of this act at the end of a reason-
able time. For while I do not view this
sovietizing of American power sources,
and all related facilities and inven-
tions, as an imminent possibility, if
there is not adopted an amendment for
the expiration of this act at the end
of a reasonable time, it becomes a pos-
sibility in the next two decades.
I repeat, there is nothing in the
"logic of atomic energy" which re-
quires that atomic energy must be
used to sovietize America. Only a hu-
man mind is capable of logic, or for
that matter, of illogic, as when a man
speaks of the "logic of atomic energy."
If America is eventually sovietized, as
a result of the wartime discovery of
atomic energy, it will be because the
Congress, in fear and funk, allowed
itself to be duped by the belief so dear
to the heart of the mystical Marxian
that logical matter disposes of mind-
less man, rather than that logical man
disposes of mindless matter. Energy
and matter, which we now know to be
one, are both amoral. Man only is
moral or immoral. We have only to
reflect that if all the large nations of
the world were led today by moral men,
instead of immoral ones, atomic en-
ergy, like all the other power sources,
coal, gas, oil, electricity, which we have
developed in the ways of peace before,
would not require such totalitarian
legislation as this for their peaceful
development.
The really immoral feature of this
bill is that it implies, if indeed it does
not state, that in time, atomic energy
itself can and will automatically pro-
vide "the answers to the atomic age"
without any mental effort on our part;
that it will one day solve all our social,
political, and economic problems, like
some powerful, alert, conscious genie
out of a bottle. Well, it will not. Not
any more than coal, or gas, or oil, or
electricity, or radar, or radio, or tele-
vision have solved in the past the re-
current problems of war and peace.
The plain fact is, that whether we
pass this bill or not, we are still going
to have to face, in the years ahead, the
problem of industrial unrest, the
problem of famine and revolution in
Europe, and, above all, the problems
created by Soviet ambitions and Soviet
ideologies. The discovery of nuclear
fission has not changed, and will not
solve, one underlying problem in the
world today. At worst, in the form of
bombs it can aggravate them greatly.
At best, in the form of heat or electri-
cal energy, or cancer and leukemia
cures, it can ameliorate them only
slightly.
Moreover, today and tomorrow we
will do well to remember that every
scientist who testified before our com-
mittee, or the Senate committee, said
that in from 5 to 15 years Soviet Eus-
sia, and any industrial nation with
access to sources of uranium and tho-
rium can make atomic bombs—and,
they insisted, of a destructive capacity
so much greater that the present
bombs will look by comparison like fire
crackers. So this bill, which can never
solve our domestic economic problem,
except as some in this House may
imagine that communism is a cure-all,
gives us only a temporary respite from
the fear of atomic warfare, even as a
defense measure. Only a wholly effec-
tive system of world nuclear control
can guarantee us for the next two dec-
ades against atomization.
And even if we do achieve interna-
tional control, we will not have solved
-------
122
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the problem of war itself. I am sorry
to be so realistic, but I think that the
American people are at long last hun-
gry for truth, however painful. V-l's
and V-2's and large flights of B-17's
and B-29's will still suffice for greedy
or frightened nations which are driven
by their greeds or fears toward mutual
obliteration.
We have heard little to date of the
existing new and terrible discoveries in
biological and chemical warfare, even
more frightful than atomic bombs.
Senator McMAHON warned that this
legislation must not become a prece-
dent for new legislation. Those will
require new legislation for which this
legislation will possibly be a precedent.
No, we have not solved any funda-
mental problem of peace or war with
this bill. But, nevertheless, I am for
it, for its passage will give our beloved
Nation a few more years in which to
think through the problems of our in-
ternational relations. And think hard
and straight and honestly, like coura-
geous, liberty-loving, and God-fearing
Americans, is what we've all got to do,
if we really hope to avoid another
Armageddon.
Mr. Chairman, the real problem of
the age is how shall we find economic
and physical security, while at the
same time safeguarding our political
liberties. This legislation, S. 1717,
epitomizes this crucial problem of our
age. It does, without any shadow of
doubt, promise us at least 5 years of
security from atomic attack. But its
essential principle, which is state mo-
nopoly and control in the hands of a
few administrative appointees, strikes
near to the heart of political liberty.
Patrick Henry said, "Give me liberty
or give me death."
Perhaps before this debate is over
many of you may feel inclined to echo
Patrick Henry's noble words.
But let me point this out: If your
choice were truly a personal one—that
is to say, if you, as one individual pre-
ferred death to losing your political
liberties—you would be justified and
even honored for making it.
But your choice is not personal, un-
happily. If you vote against this bill
you may be choosing death for millions
of your fellow citizens by atomization.
I, for one, dare not make such a
ghastly choice. I support S. 1717, be-
cause I believe it offers the best
possible solution to the problem of
defending countless American lives in
a world which is neither at war, nor at
peace.
* * # # *
[p. 9264]
Mr. DURHAM. May I call to the
gentlewoman's attention that this bill
permits research in weapons by the
armed forces?
Mrs. LUCE. Yes, that is quite cor-
rect. I thank my colleague, and, as I
said before, the military services ap-
pear quite satisfied with the atomic
scope afforded them by the bill. What
I am dissatisfied with is the socialistic
scope which the bill would afford the
civilian representatives in the power
field in peacetime.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LUCE. I gladly yield to our
chairman.
Mr. MAY. I believe you stated that
it gives every possible freedom to indi-
viduals in scientific research and that
the Commission can prohibit the War
Department from doing anything
about it.
Mrs. LUCE. That is correct—every
freedom is accorded to the scientists,
as a category consistent with Govern-
ment control and monopoly. In this
connection, may I point out that the
main element in the development of
atomic energy is precisely scientific
personnel. It is the heart of the prob-
lem, really. By the very nature of the
subject all fundamental developments
leading to further applications of
sources of nuclear energy for war or
peace must come from physicists,
chemists, and mathematicians, and, to
a less extent, inventors. All funda-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
123
mental changes in the processes must
originate in the minds of men—specifi-
cally scientists. Mind molds matter,
Marxians to the contrary. This is why
civilian control is necessary if we are
to make progress. The two or three
hundred keymen in the nuclear field
will, I fear, just not work for the
Army, in an Army framework, or un-
der Army regulations, in peacetime.
This bill does give them a maximum of
freedom, with which they may then be
able to make maximum efforts in fur-
ther research.
Miss SUMNER of Illinois. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LUCE. I yield to the gentle-
woman from Illinois.
* * * * *
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, it is
not my intention to even attempt to an-
swer the powder-puff arguments of the
very delightful lady from Connecticut
[Mrs. LUCE],
This is one of the most dangerous
pieces of legislation that has ever come
before the American Congress.
Our country today is standing on
top of the world. The civilized world
is looking to us for leadership. Every-
body with any intelligence knows that
America is not going to use the atomic
bomb to destroy other nations. Then
why should we plunge from the highest
pinnacle to which we have ever as-
cended or ever climbed, at the expense
of the toil and sweat and blood and
tears of the American people, and
throw away the most powerful weapon
on earth, which the enemies of this
country are striving day and night to
get into their hands?
This is one of the saddest days in the
history of the world, when communism,
the enemy of Christianity, the enemy
of our form of government, the enemy
of our way of life, murdered Mikhailo-
vitch, that patriot that we heard
[p. 9265]
praised on this floor of this House by
the head of his own country.
As you know, I am the ranking Dem-
ocrat on the Committee on Un-Ameri-
can Activities. I offered the resolution
that created that committee. I have
taken more abuse from the Reds, the
Communists and their fellow travelers
in this country than any other man
who has been in public life in my day,
and I am going to speak so plainly that
you and they can understand it.
Mr. RANKIN. The gentleman from
Michigan is correct.
I put the safety of my country first.
My country comes first at all times, and
I am opposing this entire resolution
because I think it is one of the most
dangerous measures that has been pro-
posed since I have been a Member of
Congress.
Leave this atomic energy, this
atomic bomb, in the hands of our mili-
tary authorities for 5 years. Why all
this smear of our military authorities?
You have never seen a traitor who
graduated at West Point or Annapo-
lis, and I don't believe you ever will.
They have the interest of this country
at heart, and they are protecting it
from these alien spies who are after it,
and holding it so that it may be used in
case of attack.
You know that little Canada, glori-
ous_ Canada, arrested those spies that
had been down here, down to Oak
Ridge, stealing the secrets of the
atomic bomb, in order to use it against
you and me and the rest of the Ameri-
can people.
There are spies down there now, and
the investigators of the Committee on
Un-American Activities are down
there on their trails. Here you are
proposing to do what they want us to
do, proposing to do by legislation what
they are attempting to do by stealth.
I am not criticizing the Committee
on Military Affairs. I am not ques-
;ioning the patriotism of any Member
of this House. But, so help me God, I
,vould rather see this bill defeated than
anything else that could occur at this
time. I suggest that we send it back to
-------
124
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the Committee and say to the world,
"We are going to keep this atomic
bomb where it is today." We already
have a plant built at Oak Ridge that
cost us $2,000,000,000. That plant cov-
ers 70 square miles. We know how to
make these bombs. We have a supply
already made. We know how to dis-
tribute them. We have the planes al-
ready built for that purpose. We have
the trained aviators, and if you do not
believe it, go down to Trans Lux to-
night and see that demonstration. Do
not let anybody tell you that was a flop.
You will not come back with that im-
pression.
Let us say to the world, "Behave
yourselves, quit murdering innocent
people all over the world. Quit raping
the helpless Christian innocent women
of Europe. Stop the robbing and mur-
der of the helpless people of Europe."
A minister of the gospel in New Jer-
sey wrote me and said, "Is there noth-
ing that America can do to stop the
raping of the innocent Christian
women of occupied Europe by the Com-
munists that are dedicated to the over-
throw and destruction of everything
we stand for?"
If the Communists had this bomb
and we did not, this Capital would not
last 60 days, and you know it. If the
Communists had this atomic bomb and
we did not, London would not last 60
days, nor would New York or Pitts-
burgh. They would use it to destroy
everything that Christianity has built
in the last 1900 years.
So I say the thing to do is send this
bill back to the committee, stand where
we are, go back to the American people
and find how they feel about it, talk to
those boys who fought and won this
war.
I talked with a young man who had
been to Nagasaki. I wish every Mem-
ber of this House could talk to that
young man and just find what he saw,
and picture Washington if this bomb
was in the hands of the gang that
murdered Mihailovich today, and we
had none.
This is my country. I have taken all
the abuse I am going to take. I am go-
ing to answer back from now on, I can
tell you that. I have taken all the
abuse from these Reds that I am going
to take. I propose to call a spade a
spade. You are not going to wreck my
country if I can prevent it; you are not
going to take the only weapon we have
now to protect ourselves and give it to
our enemies. God forbid.
Jefferson warned us, and Washing-
ton warned us that our policy should be
"peace, commerce, and honest friend-
ship with all nations, entangling alli-
ances with none." Let us say to the
world, "We will lead the way into an
era of peace, everlasting peace, but we
are not going to hand you the gun with
which to destroy the civilization of
mankind."
Send this bill back to the committee,
and you will be doing the will of the
vast majority of patriotic Americans
in every State in this Union.
You will be saving America for
Americans and preserving the peace of
mankind.
*****
[p. 9266]
Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Chairman, in
reading Senate Report 1211 on the bill
for the control of atomic energy, S.
1717, it is interesting to note that in
the summary of the testimony which
was given before the McMahon com-
mittee the members state that—
The peacetime benefits of atomic energy
promise to be great, indeed, particularly in
medicine, biology, and many branches of re-
[p. 9267]
search. These benefits are immediate in their
promise, but will require extended and un-
fettered development for full realization.
Note, gentlemen, that the testimony
indicated that there should be "unfet-
tered development." It was agreed
that the principal of atomic energy
could be kept secret only temporarily
and it was further agreed that legisla-
tion should facilitate, as far as pos-
sible, "the rapid scientific development
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
125
of atomic energy, which would promote
both the industrial prosperity of the
world and the improvement of our in-
struments of national defense."
S. 1717 is supposed to be the answer
to this problem, and in its declaration
of policy section 1 of the bill states that
the objective shall be "the development
and utilization of atomic energy to-
ward improving the public welfare, in-
creasing the standard of living,
strengthening free competition in pri-
vate enterprise, and promoting world
peace."
Note, especially, that one of the pur-
poses of the bill is to strengthen free
competition in private enterprise, and
the Senate committee in this connec-
tion has explained that to carry out
these purposes the bill provides for
Government control over atomic energy
and for Government programs for in-
formation, production, research, and
development.
On the one hand, then, is the desire
to "strengthen free competition in pri-
vate enterprise," and, on the other, is
the statement that to provide this there
must be Government control. But
there are controls and controls, and the
form that this control is to take is fur-
ther explained when it is said that
provision is made for Governmeiit
"production, research, and develop-
ment." In other words, there is not to
be control as we ordinarily think of
control. There is to be direct Govern-
ment ownership and operation. How
this is consistent with the expressed
desire to strengthen free competition
in private enterprise in this all-impor-
tant field it is difficult to see.
Let us examine the controls that are
mentioned. First, the Commission
which is to be created is to own all fis-
sionable materials, but it must be re-
membered that under the definition of
fissionable material there would be in-
cluded ores only if they contain ura-
nium, thorium, or any other material
which is determined by the Commis-
sion, with the approval of the Presi-
dent, to be peculiarly essential to the
production of fissionable materials and
then only if in such concentration as
the Commission may by regulation de-
termine from time to time.
In order to exercise the control that
is desired, it is further stipulated that
unless authorized by a license issued by
the Commission, no person may trans-
fer or deliver, and no person may
receive possession of, any source mate-
rial after removal from its place of
deposit in Nature. No license, how-
ever, is required for "quantities of
source materials which in the opinion
of the Commission are unimportant."
This provision is quite vague, for
just what does unimportant mean? It
is entirely proper that the bill should
take into account the possible hazards
to national health and safety that the
use of these source materials might
engender and, from a reading of the
Report No. 1211 of the Senate Special
Committee on Atomic Energy, this was
contemplated. However, because of
the vagueness inherent in the word
"unimportant," it should, in my esti-
mation, be eliminated. Hence, it is
urged that the words "in the opinion of
the Commission are unimportant"
should be stricken out and there should
be substituted for these words "do not
constitute hazards to national health
and safety."
If this change were made, the vague-
ness created by the word "unimpor-
tant" would be eliminated and this
particular control would be limited to
definite types of hazards which are
interpretable.
There is also vagueness in connec-
tion with the provision for the issuance
of licenses for source materials. This
part of the section reads:
The Commission shall establish such standards
for the issuance, refusal, or revocation of
licenses as it may deem necessary to assure
adequate source materials for production, re-
iearch, or development activities pursuant to
" .is act or to prevent the use of such materials
a manner inconsistent with the national
welfare.
The Commission should be empow-
ered to establish the standards for the
th
-------
126
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
issuance of licenses for source rm-.te-
rials, but when it is granted the power
not to issue licenses in order to "pre-
vent the use of such materials in a
manner inconsistent with the national
welfare," the Commission is given very
wide latitude of interpreting a very
vague phrase. It seems only proper
that a bill which contains a provision
as important as this should be definite
in its language and, consequently, I
believe that this phrase should be re-
placed by "not constituting a hazard
to national health and safety."
It is also to be noted that in connec-
tion with reporting, the Commission is
authorized to issue regulations requir-
ing reports of ownership of source ma-
terials but may except from this
requirement quantities of source mate-
rials which "in the opinion of the
Commission are unimportant." Here,
again, the word "unimportant" is
vague and should be deleted and re-
placed with the wording "do not con-
stitute hazards to national health and
safety."
Further, with respect to source ma-
terials, the Commission is—
authorized and directed to purchase, take, requi-
sition, condemn, or otherwise acquire, supplies
of source materials or any interest in real
property containing deposits of source materials
to the extent it deems necessary to effectuate
the provisions of this act.
The words "to the extent it deems
necessary" could provide the basis for
what might lead to arbitrary use of
this power, a use against which the
citizens of the United States might be
more or less powerless, and therefore
these particular words should be de-
leted and replaced by "upon determina-
tion that such action is necessary in the
interest of the common defense and
security."
But, aside from the control of source
materials, the bill in section 4 further
provides that—
The Commission shall be the exclusive owner
of all facilities for the production of fissionable
material other than facilities which (a) are
useful in the conduct of research and develop-
ment activities in the fields specified in section
3, and (b) do not, in the opinion of the Com-
mission, have a potential production rate ade-
quate to enable the operator of such facilities to
produce within a reasonable period of time a
sufficient quantity of fissionable material to pro-
duce an atomic bomb or any other atomic
weapon.
It is obvious that the intent of this
section is to assure the Commission
control over all production of fission-
able materials. This is done by mak-
ing it impossible for fissionable mate-
rial to be produced in any quantity
except in a Government-owned plant.
This is further emphasized by the fact
that the Commission is authorized and
directed to produce or to provide for
the production of fissionable material
in its own facilities and it can make
contracts with persons, obligating
them to produce fissionable materials
in facilities owned by the Government.
However, the degree of control which
it is desired that the Commission have
could well be obtained without making
it necessary that all production activ-
ities be limited to Government-owned
factories. The incentive of private
enterprise to produce at the lowest pos-
sible cost is lost to the Government
when production can be undertaken
only under a management contract in a
Government-owned plant.
A contractual arrangement such as
is envisaged in the bill does not provide
the encouragement for the creation
and use of new productive methods
that are always being evolved when
production of any type is carried on
under our normal competitive proc-
esses. The committee in its report on
acquisition of source materials indi-
cated that it did not intend that the
Commission would engage in mining
operations in competition with private
mining activity and that—
The committee has been alive to the neces-
sity of encouiaging the activities of indepen-
dent prospectors.
The committee has further explained
that—
The principle of Government monopoly
which the committee has adopted as essential
in reference to the production and ownership
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
127
of fissionable materials is not extended to the
ownership, mining or refining of source ma-
terials. * * *
Wherever possible, the committee endeavors
to reconcile Government monopoly of the pro-
duction of fissionable mateiial with our tradi-
tional free enterprise system. * * * Prospecting
for and mining of source materials are at every
stage to be encoiuaged and supported.
It seems to me that just as prospect-
ing for and mining of source materials
are to be encouraged and supported,
every phase of the nonmilitary devel-
opment of atomic energy should be sim-
ilarly encouraged and supported.
Section 1 of S. 1717 has as one of its
objectives strengthening free competi-
tion in private enterprise, but in section
4 there is no private enterprise and
there is no free competition. I appre-
ciate and sympathize with the desires
of the framers of the bill to protect the
public welfare, but I believe that it is
unnecessary and undesirable to have
the Commission the exclusive producer
[p. 9268]
of fissionable materials, except where
production is incident to research and
development activities.
It seems to me that the country
would be adequately safeguarded if the
Commission were given the authority
to regulate and police the production
of fissionable material and private
ownership or operation were forbidden
except under license by the Commis-
sion. Then the Commission would
have adequate control and I conse-
quently believe that that portion of this
section which reads "the Commission
shall be the exclusive owner of all fa-
cilities for the production of fissionable
material other than facilities" should
be eliminated and replaced by the fol-
lowing wording:
The Commission is authorized to own and
operate facilities for the production of fission-
able material. Private owneiship or operation
is expressly forbidden except under license by
the Commission: Provided, however. That no
license for operation or ownership is required
for facilities which (a) are useful in the con-
duct of reseaich and development activities in
the fields specified in section 3, and (b) do not,
in the opinion of the Commission, have a poten-
tial production rate adequate to enable the
operator of such facilities to produce within a
reasonable peiiod of time a sufficient quantity
of fissionable material to produce an atomic
bomb or any other atomic weapon.
The bill in section 4 also provides for
operation of other production facilities
when it states that—
Fissionable material may be produced in the
conduct of research and development activities
and facilities which under paragiaph (1) above,
are not required to be owned by the Commission,
Then in paragraph (e) of section 4,
under the title of "Manufacture of Pro-
duction Facilities," it is stipulated
that—
Unless authorized by a license issued by the
Commission, no person may manufacture, pro-
duce, transfer, or acquire any facilities for the
production of fissionable material.
In view of the limitations placed on
the ownership of production facilities,
the definition of the word "facilities" is
very important. Turning to section 17,
we find that this is defined as "any
equipment or device capable of such
production and any important compo-
nent part especially designed for such
equipment or devices, as determined by
the Commission."
It is obvious that a facility capable
of such production might not have been
originally intended for the production
of fissionable material and, therefore,
it seems to me that this term is entirely
too broad and I recommend that it be
modified as follows:
(g) The term "facilities for the production
of fissionable material" shall be construed to
mean any equipment or device peculiarly
adapted for and capable of such production
and any important component part especially
designed for such equipment or devices, as
determined by the Commission.
I repeat, gentlemen, that the powers
conferred on the Commission and the
limitations on production of fissionable
material and ownership of production
facilities are inconsistent with the
avowed purpose of facilitating the
rapid scientific development of atomic
energy or of "strengthening free com-
petition in private enterprise."
-------
128
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Indeed, this expression of intent is
vitiated by the admission that a Gov-
ernment monopoly in the production of
fissionable material is being created.
And this cannot be reconciled with our
traditional free enterprise system.
Instead of facilitating the rapid sci-
entific development of atomic energy
the proposals contained in this meas-
ure would tend to stifle them—and the
free enterprise system with them.
Experience has shown that the
forces of free competition do more to
aid the rapid development of an art
than does any other system. Let us not
fool ourselves—this bill will not foster
either the development of atomic en-
ergy or the free enterprise system. It
tends to kill them both and it is not at
all necessary, for we can attain all of
our objectives of safeguarding the na-
tional health and welfare, of facilitat-
ing "the rapid scientific development of
atomic energy" and "strengthening'
free competition in private enterprise"
if by "controls" we mean not state
ownership but controls through proper
supervision under an adequate system
of licensing. This, I believe, as I have
already explained, can be done and
should be done.
Mr. MAY. I yield such time as he
may desire to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. FLOOD].
Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Chairman, the
principles and objectives of the Mc-
Mahon atomic-energy bill should re-
ceive the full and sincere support of
the House. The declared purposes of
the act incorporate the desired ends of
progress, security, and development, as
well as international accord. All these
demand support and require vigilant
and constant guarding of the public in-
terest, but the technical and scientific
phases of the problem make it difficult
for a full, public understanding of the
extent and the far-reaching effects of
research and experimentation in the
field of nuclear-chain reaction.
The popular concept of atomic en-
ergy to the average American is a
bomb—a lethal weapon designed to lay
cities in ruins, and to blot out lives of
thousands of people.
The pictures of the ruins of Hiro-
shima, of the nuclear clouds rising
above Nagasaki, of the scarred hulks
in Bikini atoll, have impressed upon
the American people the terrific forces
which have been harnessed by science.
The control of these forces is well es-
tablished in the statement of powers of
the Commission and the committees
provided for in the bill known as the
McMahon bill. That this control
should be lodged in civilian hands with
due provision for military advice and
counsel is a principle which, in my
opinion, is unanswerable and wrorthy
of the unqualified support of the mem-
bership of this House, who are the
elected representatives of the people.
Adherence to civilian control of
atomic energy is demanded, because
the interest of every American citizen
is involved.
Fundamentally, atomic energy is a
new source of power which, according
to scientific testimony, is capable of
industrial use and application. In
fact, the pending bill directs arrange-
ments to such use in section 3(a).
What is the anticipated result? Great
basic industries, embracing many sec-
tions of this country and employing
hundreds of thousands of employees,
will be faced with a newcomer in the
field of production of power. The
great anthracite and bituminous coal
industry of 'Pennsylvania and the tre-
mendous source of electrical energy—
all will find themselves face to face
with progress. This progress, which
may come and if guided and directed in
the paths of peace, must march with
our existing economic structure. To
tear down without consideration our
great basic industry of coal would
bring national calamity. As a result,
the careful guidance, the sound
thought, and deliberation which atomic
energy and its uses demand should
rest in civilian hands.
The bill adequately provides for the
necessary safeguards to protect the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
129
public. However, in the appointment
of representatives to the commission,
the General Advisory Committee and
the Advisory Boards, mentioned in sec-
tion 2, I hope that the basic industry of
coal will receive representation from
its ranks of its management and of its
workers. Their interest in any future
program or reconversion should receive
adequate hearing and competent repre-
sentation. And what is more, it should
be published and broadcast to the
American public the fact that this bill
is designed not only to give them secur-
ity but, what is more, to protect them
in their economic lives, so that scien-
tific progress as it occurs in the future
will not forthwith and without full
determination of its effects, blot out a
great basic industry which today is
the greatest source of power for tha
wheels of American production.
I trust that the President of the Sen-
ate and the Speaker of this House will
in their selections of members for
service on the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy, established by section
15 of the House bill, recognize that the
people's representatives from the great
coal-producing areas of this country
deserve representation in the work of
the joint committee.
It is a fact that atomic energy de-
molished great industries and factories
in Japan. Let us not have this same
great force wipe out the economic
structure of great industries in our
country without the people and the
Congress studying and plotting the
change, if any, which may come with
the advance of science. None of us
knows as a certainty what the full
force and effect of this new form of en-
ergy will be on our way of life in the
coal fields. We have never stood in the
way of progress, in this, matter we
probably could not if we wished. But
the fact remains that at this early mo-
ment I feel it is my duty as a repre-
sentative of the millions of people of
the coal fields to bring to the attention
of the proposed Atomic Commission and
to the Nation at large, the obligation
owed to the coal industry and its people
in the great mining area of Luzerne
County, Pa., in particular, and the coal-
producing areas of our Nation gener-
ally. Thought and care and planning
must be given to whatever tremendous
transition and reconversion problems
will follow in the wake of atomic en-
ergy harnessed to our economic and
[p. 9269]
industrial life. Where would there be
a better place as the center in which to
develop this new potential ? The liveli-
hood, employment, and welfare of the
future generations of these areas is to
be affected. Then these generations
must be served by and be permitted to
give service to any such program. Mr.
Speaker, out of an abundance of cau-
tion, if for no other reason, I must
insist that in this turmoil and concern
and grave uncertainty filling the minds
of everyone on this subject, the coal-
mining areas of the country must not
be lost in the shuffle of things to come.
I am not an alarmist but I have seen
the coal fields forgotten for years and
its welfare ignored in all sorts of ways.
I am making this statement now to
make certain and to serve warning that
we are not going to be forgotten again,
if it develops that science is going to
utilize atomic energy for industrial and
commercial energy and power. Proper
correlation of and with the coal indus-
try is a vital factor to our national
economy.
The force of this new energy may
shake the sky as it is developed, I do
not know; but I do know that with ref-
erence to the anthracite coal area, its
patriotic workers and their families
and the vast industry which is the
backbone of a vast section, "let there be
justice though the heavens fall."
* * * * *
[p. 9270]
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Chairman, first
of all I wish to thank the gentleman
from Missouri for his very much un^
deserved compliment.
-------
130
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. Chairman, as I have heretofore
said, this bill is both dangerous and un-
necessary. It is dangerous because it
sets up a Government bureau with
more power and authority than has
ever been granted before. This bureau,
under the provisions of the bill as now
written, would have life and death con-
trol over the industry of the Nation
whenever we reach the place where
atomic energy may become useful for
industrial purposes, in fact, even before
that time. Moreover, the armed forces
would become subservient to this power
even in matters of national defense so
far as the use of atomic energy is con-
cerned. Furthermore, it removes in-
centives provided by our patent laws to
inventors, and adopts a patent system
found only in Soviet Russia. The fact
that the Constitution of the United
States gives to every inventor the ex-
clusive right to his discoveries has
meant nothing to the proponents of
this legislation, for under the pro-
visions of this bill patents relating
to the use of atomic power are either
revoked or become the property of the
Government.
Although the measure relates to the
use of atomic power for military as
well as civilian purposes, every con-
ceivable effort has been made to elimi-
nate representatives of the armed
forces from representation on that all-
powerful bureau known as the Atomic
Energy Commission. In its introduc-
tory section this bill is presented to us
through a series of misrepresentations.
For example, section 1 provides that it
is "declared to be the policy of the
people of the United States that, sub-
ject at all times to the paramount
objective of assuring the common de-
fense and security, the development
and utilization of atomic energy shall,
so far as practicable, be directed to-
ward improving the public welfare,
increasing the standard of living,
strengthening free competition in pri-
vate enterprise, and promoting world
peace."
If enacted into law this bill would do
exactly the reverse of these things. If
the paramount objective is to assure
the common defense and security, why
has so desperate an effort been made to
completely eliminate the armed forces
from representation on the Commission
or in any department under the super-
vision of the Commission? Even
though the bill purports to deal with
atomic weapons and national defense,
every attempt to give the Army and
the Navy some representation has been
resisted to the utmost. The House
Committee on Military Affairs was
bitterly assailed by the supporters of
the bill generally because it dared to
amend the act as it came from the Sen-
ate so as to provide that at least one
member of the Commission and the
head of the Division of Military Appli-
cation should be from the armed forces.
The only argument I have heard
against it is the rather specious claim
that it is not in keeping with our tradi-
tions for a military man to serve on a
policy-making commission—that mili-
tary men are only interested in war,
and that other nations might frown
upon their presence on the Commis-
sion. In this connection I wonder why
the civil functions of the War Depart-
ment are so conveniently forgotten. If
there has been any Government agency
that has been free from criticism and
that has been elevated above the run-
of-mine Washington bureau, it has
been the Corps of Army Engineers
which has for so many years been re-
sponsible for our rivers and harbors
and flood-control projects. In this
work they have handled billions of dol-
lars and have performed work in no
way related to war. Yet I have never
heard that it was not in keeping with
American tradition for them to exercise
these functions.
Before we look into the powers of the
Commission and the extent to which it
encroaches upon private industry and
interferes with our American way of
life, you will note that section 9 re-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
131
quires the Army to transfer to the
Commission forthwith upon the pas-
sage of the bill, all facilities, equip-
ment, and material devoted to atomic
energy, research, and development.
This would include even the Oakridge
plant, together with any bombs now in
existence, as well as formulas and se-
crets in connection with the atomic
bomb and other atomic weapons. So at
the start, even before the war is offi-
cially over, the branches of the services
charged under the Constitution with
the defense of the Nation are required
to turn over to a civilian Government
bureau of political appointees weapons
which the services may require for the
defense of the country. If this does
not jeopardize the security of the Na-
tion, then the Bikini tests and the re-
sults at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were
incorrectly reported.
So much for security. As to other
powers of the Commission, let us exam-
ine a few of them. In the field of re-
search the Commission may make
grants-in-aid and loans to public or pri-
vate institutions or persons even in
connection with research for industrial
purposes. Thus the Commission has
the power to favor one school or univer-
sity as against another, and to favor
industries, companies, or individuals to
the detriment of others. As no person
or company would have the right to en-
gage in research on their own part, you
[p. 9272]
perhaps begin to appreciate what is
meant by the term "life-and-death con-
trol of industry."
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman will yield, may I say that
that is why some of the college profes-
sors are so strong for this legislation.
Mr. ELSTON. I guess there is little
doubt of it.
Mr. SMITH of Ohio. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ohio.
Mr. SMITH of Ohio. I cannot under-
stand this talk about giving this secret
away. We have never done anything
like that before. We have kept our
military secrets to ourselves. Who are
these people who want to share this
secret with the world and what are they
doing it for? That is the thing I can-
not understand at all.
Mr. ELSTON. I have an idea who
some of them are.
Bear in mind, Mr. Chairman, that
the Commission will become the owner
of all fissionable material regardless of
who may now possess it. It can be par-
celed out for industrial purposes only
with the consent of the Commission.
As the time may come when atomic
energy power may supplant many other
forms of power, and become vital to
every industry in the Nation, it is not
difficult to understand the extent to
which the Atomic Commission would
control the industries of the country.
If any person, industry or company
should be dissatisfied with the distribu-
tion or refusal of the Commission to
distribute any fissionable or by-product
materials, such person or company may
obtain a review of the determination of
the Commission by an appeal. But let
us examine into the type of appeal af-
forded. On a matter as important as
this, one would feel the appeal should
be to the courts, or at least to an un-
biased or disinterested tribunal of some
sort. Such is not the case, however.
Section 5 (d) (2) makes the Commis-
sion the judge, jury, and executioner
so far as appeals under this section are
concerned. The Board of Appeals
created by this section shall consist of
three members who shall be appointed
by the Commission. Should any person
feel himself aggrieved by a decision of
the Board of Appeals his only further
appeal is to the Commission itself.
Even this right is not guaranteed as it
is provided that "the Commission may
in its discretion review and revise any
decision of such board of appeal."
Here, I submit we see bureaucracy at
its worst.
Mr. COLE of Missouri. That sounds
just like the OP A.
-------
132
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. ELSTON. Well the OPA never
asked for anything more than that.
And if there was ever anything that is
the fulfillment of a bureaucrat's dream,
I think it is this section.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I am glad to yield to
my distinguished friend from North
Carolina.
Mr. DURHAM. The gentleman cer-
tainly would not be in favor of export-
ing this material to some foreign
country?
Mr. ELSTON. I certainly would
not.
Mr. DURHAM. Well, at the present
time that could happen if we allow the
matter to run loose as it is at the pres-
ent time. Any country could import
this material into their country from
the United States.
Mr. ELSTON. No. I am sure we
have ample authority today to regulate
exports and imports of dangerous
commodities.
Mr. HANCOCK. Under the exist-
ing law, has the Army the power to
monopolize the sources of materials
and real estate containing deposits of
such materials? Is there any such
authority under present law?
Mr. ELSTON. The Army might
have that authority in time of war
under war power acts.
Mr. JENNINGS. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I yield.
Mr. JENNINGS. Does not the Gov-
ernment have power to condemn any
property it may need, under the gen-
eral law?
Mr. ELSTON. Yes. The Govern-
ment has the power to condemn any-
thing it needs for a public purpose.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts.
Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I yield.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. It
seems to me it would give that group
tremendous power over other groups.
I am thinking even in terms of internal
disorder and strife and conflict in our
own country. That is one reason I
would like to have the Army in it.
That would not happen if the Army
was in it.
Mr. ELSTON. I do not think it
would either.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I yield.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I
would like to ask the gentleman what
he feels should be done, under the
circumstances he alluded to himself,
namely, that if some development in
the field of atomic energy were made
which rendered all development of
power obsolete, whether he would not
believe that, should that happen, it
would be most important that some
provision be made somewhere so as to
assure that some such development as
that could be available to be used on
an equitable basis by all competent
users in the country.
Mr. ELSTON. Well, I would want
to wait until that happened and then
regulate it.
On the question of the appeal pro-
cedure I was discussing, it may be
contended that the Administrative
Procedure Act would apply, but since
that act makes an exception in cases
where agency action is by law commit-
ted to agency discretion, the Adminis-
trative Procedure Act could not be
invoked in view of the section to which
I have just referred. In an effort to
make the Administrative Procedure
Act apply to this bill, I offered an
amendment in committee to the effect
that it shall apply to this act, but since
the appeal section contained in section
5 still remains in the bill, it would no
doubt be construed to be an exception.
One of the most objectionable fea-
tures of this bill is section 7, which con-
tains the licensing provisions. Under
this section it shall be unlawful for any
person to manufacture, produce, or ex-
port any equipment or device utilizing
fissionable material or to utilize atomic
energy except under and in accordance
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
133
with a license issued by the Commis-
sion. Do not be misled by subsection
(b) which requires a report to Congress
before such licenses may be issued. If
you will examine that section you will
find that there is but one report to be
made to Congress. That report will be
made when, in the opinion of the Com-
mission, any industrial, commercial, or
other nonmilitary use of atomic energy
has been sufficiently developed to be of
practical value. In that report the
Commission will set forth all the facts
with respect to such use, and the re-
port will contain the Commission's esti-
mate of the social, political, economic,
and international effects of such use.
After 90 days subsequent to the mak-
ing of such report, the Commission will
have unlimited authority to issue li-
censes for the utilization of atomic
energy to such persons and on such
terms as it sees fit.
Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I yield.
Mr. McDONOUGH. After the re-
port is made, what happens? Is it
merely an informative report? Does
the bill further say that the Congress
shall say "Yes" or "No"?
Mr. ELSTON. They simply file a re-
port with us whether or not the Con-
gress wants to enact supplemental
legislation. If we want to enact sup-
plemental legislation at any time, we
do not have to wait for a report from
any bureau.
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ELSTON. I yield.
Mr. DOYLE. Would you not want
the Commission to give a full report to
Congress on every phase of the subject?
Mr. ELSTON. Certainly, I would
want them to report, but I am pointing
out that this section is meaningless as
far as the issuance of licenses is con-
cerned.
Mr. DOYLE. If you want a full re-
port, should it not cover the economic
phase of the proposal?
Mr. ELSTON. I am pointing out the
misleading language of the section and
the effort to convey the impression that
before licenses may be issued in any
case the Commission must report to the
Congress.
When we reach section 10 of the bill
we see unfolded a strange philosophy
for America. Let me read the perti-
nent part of this section:
It shall be the policy of the Commission to
control the dissemination of restricted data
in such a mannei as to assure the common
defense and security. Consistent with such
policy, the Commission shall be guided by the
following principles:
(1) That information with respect to the
use of atomic enei gy for industrial purposes
should be shared with other nations on a
reciprocal basis as soon as the Congress de-
clares by jomt lesolution that effective and
enforceable international safeguards against
the use of such energy foi destructive purposes
have been established.
In other words, hereafter it shall be
the policy of this country, as soon as
[p. 9273]
international safeguards have been es-
tablished, to share the use of atomic
energy secrets and power with the
other Nations of the world. When in
all the history of this Nation has it
been required that anything developed
for the benefit of American industry
shall be shared with other Nations?
American industry leads the world to-
day because of American inventive gen-
ius and our free enterprise system, but
now we have a new philosophy. Do not
lose sight of the fact that this sharing
plan pertains to the use of atomic en-
ergy for industrial purposes only. It
has no relation to the outlawing of
atomic energy for military purposes
which, I am sure, every thinking person
favors when it can be done without en-
dangering our own security. Judge for
yourselves what this international plan
will mean to American industry.
Mr. ELSTON. If the terms of the
Espionage Act were violated.
Why do they say this legislation is
needed? The principal claim is that it
will impress the rest of the world that
-------
134
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
we have taken the matter out of the
hands of the military and invested it
with civilians. If that be the purpose,
this legislation very definitely is not
needed as the President can order the
military authorities to cease any of
their military activities at any time, in-
cluding the manufacture of atomic
bombs or the use of atomic energy in
any way.
Another claim is that peace of the
world requires international control of
atomic energy. If that be so point out
a single thing in this bill dealing with
international control or in any manner
related to it. International control can
come about only by international agree-
ment. If any legislation is needed to
augment such an agreement it neces-
sarily would come after the interna-
tional agreement was entered into.
Do we need this legislation to begin
negotiations for such an agreement?
The best answer is—such negotiations
have begun before the duly constituted
United Nations Atomic Energy Com-
mission. Mr. Baruch submitted a pro-
posal to this Commission a month ago.
But it takes two or more to enter into
an agreement, and Russia has flatly re-
jected Mr. Baruch's plan. Not only
has she rejected it, but she has sub-
mitted a counterproposal which never
could be agreed to if we have any re-
gard at all for the security of this
country.
So if we do not need this bill to re-
move an impression that we are mili-
taristically inclined and we do not need
it for the purpose of helping to bring
about international control of atomic
energy, what do we need it for? If it
seeks to do anything further than to
place shackles on American industry
and barriers against inventive genius
and ingenuity such purpose does not
appear from the language of the bill.
If this Nation is concerned lest the
other nations of the world think we are
assuming too much of a military atti-
tude we perhaps should explain why we
are spending hundreds of millions of
dollars in proceeding with the Bikini
tests. Is it consistent to carry on these
demonstrations and at the same time
try to fool the American people into be-
lieving we can pacify the world by
creating another bureau and many ex-
pensive bureaucrats to further regi-
[p. 9274]
ment the lives of our people and further
encroach upon their liberties?
If this measure were to stop with en-
croachment upon American freedom it
would be bad enough, but not neces-
sarily fatal, as such an invasion might
be corrected by subsequent legislation,
although I have found that liberty and
freedom, once surrendered, are not
easy to regain. There is always an-
other emergency offered as an excuse
for retaining them. On the other hand,
if the security of the country is in-
volved legislation might be helpless to
correct the error.
As I see it, the bill before us today, if
enacted into law, will definitely jeop-
ardize the Nation's security. At the
moment the secrets of the atomic bomb
and the bomb itself are safely in the
hands of the military authorities in the
keeping of that branch of the Govern-
ment charged by the Constitution with
the responsibility of defending the Na-
tion. That is where I submit it should
remain until our safety is assured un-
der international agreements actually
entered into and until machinery has
been set up in the world adequate to en-
force such agreements.
% si; Jj< :',- %
[p. 9275]
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
have listened with interest to the gen-
tleman from Texas [Mr. THOMASON]
and the gentleman from Wisconsin
[Mr. BlEMlLLER] and others who have
discussed the question of whether or
not military men should be on this
Atomic Energy Commission. I want
to say to you here and now that con-
sidering the context of the bill any
such discussion is poppycock. It is not
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
135
relatively important in comparison
with what this bill does.
If you will give careful attention to
the bill you will find that, generally
speaking, it divides itself naturally
into two parts. The first part is that
part of the bill or those parts of the bill
grouped together which, in total, com-
pletely vest all rights, titles, and inter-
ests, not only of every person in the
United States, but of every agency of
the Government of the United States,
in any property or any rights in pro-
duction facilities or any raw materials
and any patent rights and even any
ideas, in the Commission as the sole
and exclusive owner.
The second part of the bill which is
of even more vital importance is section
8. I desire to call your attention to sec-
tion 8 and hope you will turn to it and
read it while I read it aloud.
It is entitled "Internationa] Arrange-
ments."
SEC. 8. (a) Definition: As used in this act,
the term "international ariangement" shall
mean any treaty appioved by the Senate 01
international agi cement—
The committee proposes to here in-
sert the word "hereafter," so the sec-
tion will read:
hereafter appioved by the Congress, duiing
the time such treaty or agi cement is in full
force and effect,
(b) Effect of international arrangements:
Any provision of this act or any action of
the Commission to the extent that it conflicts
with the provisions of any international ar-
rangement made after the date of enactment
of this act shall be deemed to be of no f ui thcr
force or effect.
Then subsection (c), Policies Con-
tained in International Arrangements:
In the peiformance of its functions- under
this act, the Commission shall give maximum
effect to the policies contained in any such
international ariangement.
Now, my colleagues, the first group
of provisions in this bill to which I have
referred, as I said before, vests in the
Commission all rights, titles, and inter-
ests, in everything having to do with
atomic energy, certainly in the United
States. Then it provides that when an
"international arrangement" is agreed
to, the Commission shall give maximum
effect—note carefully the words "give
maximum effect"—to the policies con-
tained in the arrangement, and that
any provision of this act or any act of
the Commission to the extent that it
conflicts with the provisions of the in-
ternational arrangements are there-
after null and void and of no further
force or effect. Note that provision
carefully. That is really important.
# :'.-• * * =:-.
[p. 9343]
Mr. HINSHAW. That means a
broad abandonment of sovereignty on
our part and on the part of other
nations. The report advises us very
plainly that in the dawning atomic age
such abandonment of sovereignty is
necessary to the peace of the world
and the safety and happiness of its
citizens.
Then, under plant, it says practically
the same thing as it does for mining.
It says:
The second and major function of the in-
ternational authority would be the construc-
tion and operation of useful types of atomic
leactois and separation plants. This means
that opei ations like those at Hanf ord and Oak
Ridge and their extensions and impiovements
would be owned and conducted by the au-
thority—
Meaning the international authority.
In other words, this bill provides first
that the Congress vest full authority in
the Commission to take over, in abso-
lute ownership, everything connected
with atomic energy in the United
States, including ideas; and then di-
rects that when this proposed interna-
tional arrangement is made, all of this
property acquired by the American
Commission shall be turned over to an
international authority. Now, that is
the kernel of this very hard nut. That
is the thing which we must decide. All
the rest of these issues are minor.
They are relatively unimportant and
we should not spend much time in dis-
cussing them. This is the question we
-------
136
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
must consider and consider carefully.
Are we willing in the first place to vest
all right, title, and interest in every-
thing connected with atomic energy,
including the bombs already manufac-
tured, in a commission, and then give
the Commission authority and even di-
rect it to turn all this over to an inter-
national authority?
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield.
Mr. GRAHAM. And if an interna-
tional arrangement is incorporated and
one of the high contracting parties ve-
toed that, it is of no effect, and null
and void.
Mr. HINSHAW. I thank the gentle-
man. I was coming to that. It seems
to me, in view of the very unsettled
condition in the United Nations Atomic
Subcommittee, and the very difficult
situation that has been brought about
through lack of unanimous agreement
in that committee, that this Congress
and this House at this point would do
very well to hold this legislation for a
little while, begging the pardon of the
chairman of the committee. I know he
has been diligent in bringing this mat-
ter to the floor. But it seems to me that
in view of the seriousness of the pres-
ent situation and the flux that every-
thing seems to be in, in the United
Nations organization, it would be very
well if we withheld action on this mat-
ter for a little while. I may be entirely
in favor of the provisions of this bill,
even including the patent sections set
up in the bill, and I have no argument
on the question of who should be on the
Commission. I think that is a small
matter. It does not matter greatly
whether it is military men or nonmili-
tary men. I am perfectly willing that
it should be nonmilitary men.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield.
Mr. MAY. Does the gentleman have
any views with respect to a possible
difference in cost that would be incur-
red by a separate outside Commission
as provided in the bill, and that which
is now being carried on by the Army at
Oak Ridge?
Mr. HINSHAW. I have no ideas on
that, but perhaps the gentleman's com-
mittee has taken some testimony on
that subject. I do not find any in the
hearings. As a matter of fact, this
little volume of hearings deserves to be
about 3 inches thick instead of three-
eighths of an inch, and to contain the
complete views of everybody in the
United States concerned in this vital
subject, because in the very preamble
of S. 1717 it sets out that this bill is
liable to change the entire way of life
not only of the people of the United
States but of the people of the world.
Therefore, it deserves long, careful,
and well-published hearings. I do not
find much in the hearings except glit-
tering generalities. I understand that
the committee sat in hearing's only 3
days.
Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield.
Mr. DONDERO. The gentleman
does not anticipate that Russia would
veto the turning over of this $2,000,-
000,000 worth of improvements that
the United States has invested in this
matter?
Mr. HINSHAW. If you would like
to refer to it as such, this bill is one of
the greatest acts of appeasement to
Russia that has ever been performed by
the United States, and that includes all
the lend-lease sent to them. I may be
in favor of this kind of appeasement.
I do not yet know. The scientists all
point out that you cannot keep scienti-
fic information to yourself; that the
basic information that led to the devel-
opment of the atomic- bomb did not
come from the United States, but came
from various foreign sources. Those
foreign sources have that information
because they brought it to us. We did
not give it to them. The only knowl-
edge we have that they do not have is
some of the techniques in connection
with the actual manufacture of this
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
137
bomb and the release of explosive
atomic energy; and it is not a question
of basic facts at all.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I think
the gentleman's analysis of the bill is
very helpful. Would not the gentleman
agree with me, however, that we are
faced with the general risk of the uni-
lateral development of atomic weapons
by many nations on the one hand or the
alternative of finding some interna-
tional agreement whereby that can be
prevented on the other?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield
the gentleman one additional minute.
Mr. HINSHAW. We may be run-
ning that risk; I do not know; but I do
know that they are likewise in the posi-
tion of seeing us here with this plant
established and with this atomic energy
know-how. That risk of unilateral
development is not an immediate risk
because the report states that even if
we did nothing further about this bill
no other nation would be able to develop
anything with which to actively threat-
en us within about 5 years.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I think
that is true.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield.
Mrs. LUCE. Is it the gentleman's
thought that if such a world authority
to control atomic energy were formed
that we would have to give them not
only our so-called secrets but land, fa-
cilities, and raw materials?
Mr. HINSHAW. Indeed we might;
this bill provides for it; and then the
international authority would own all
of the plants in the United States they
required for their purposes and we
would be required to turn everything
over to them. We would be then har-
boring an extraterritorial authority
within the United States.
Mr. Chairman, under authority
granted to extend my remarks I include
the following:
Mr. Chairman, I have given as care-
ful study to the bill S. 1717, which is an
act for the development and control of
atomic energy, as has been possible in
the limited time available to me from
my other duties. I have listened at-
tentively to the debates, read several
reports, and have received a number of
letters from qualified persons on this
subject. It seems to me that most of
those who have engaged in this debate
thus far, have missed the point of this
bill. I believe that in order to under-
stand this bill, one must first read the
"Report on the International Control
of Atomic Energy," prepared for the
Secretary of State's Committee on
Atomic Energy by the board of consul-
tants, of which Mr. David E. Lilienthal
is chairman. Section III of that report
contains the summary of their proposed
plan. I desire to quote from that sum-
mary as follows:
The proposal contemplates an international
agency conducting all intrinsically dangerous
operations in the nuclear field with individual
nations and their citizens free to conduct, under
license and minimum of inspection, all nondan-
Kerous, or safe, operations.
The international agency might take any one
of several foims, such as a UNO commission,
or an Intel national corpoiation or authority.
We shall refer to it as Atomic Development
Authority. It must have authority to own and
lease property, and to carry on mining, manu-
facturing, lescaich, licensing, inspecting, sell-
ing, or any other necessary operations.
Further in this summary, it states:
The proposal contemplates an international
agency with exclusive jurisdiction to conduct
all intrinsically dangeious opeiations in the
field. This means all activities relating to
law materials, the construction and operation
of production plants, and the conduct of re-
search in explosives.
[p. 9344]
Mr. HINSHAW: Section 4(b) con-
tains the prohibition that it shall be
unlawful for any person to own any
facilities for the production of fission-
able material or for any person to
produce fissionable material, except to
-------
138
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the extent authorized by subsection
(c).
Then section 4 (c) provides that the
Commission shall be the exclusive
owner of all facilities for the produc-
tion of fissionable material other than
certain designated facilities useful in
research, and other facilities which
have a low potential production rate.
Then section 5, vests all right, title
and interest within or under the juris-
diction of the United States in or to
any fissionable material, now or here-
after produced. Section 5 then pro-
ceeds to prohibit the export or import
into the United States of any fission-
able material, and to prohibit any per-
son to engage either directly or
indirectly in the production of any fis-
sionable material outside the United
States. It furthermore authorizes the
Commission and directs it to purchase,
take, require, condemn, or otherwise
acquire, supplies of source materials,
or any interest in real property con-
taining deposits of source materials.
In fact, the entire bill, in its various
applications, gives the Commission
greater authority than has been given
to any other agency of the Government
at any time in history—and that in-
cludes, in my humble opinion, any pow-
ers that may have been given to the
President, and to the War and Navy
Departments in the conduct of a war.
Section 9 of the bill even goes so far
as to order the President to direct the
transfer to the Commission of all in-
terests owned by the United States or
any governmental agency, not only all
fissionable material, but all atomic
weapons and parts thereof; all facil-
ities, equipment, and materials for the
processing, production, or utilization of
fissionable material or atomic energy;
all processes and technical information
of any kind, and the source thereof—
including data, drawings, specifica-
tions, patents, patent applications, and
other sources—relating to the proc-
essing, production, or utilization of
fissionable material or atomic energy;
and all contracts, agreements, leases,
patents, applications for patents, in-
ventions and discoveries—whether pat-
ented or unpatented—and other rights
of any kind concerning any such items,
including the transfer of the Manhat-
tan Engineer District to the Commis-
sion. And of course, the act turns over
to the Commission irrevocably, any and
every patent relating to atomic energy,
and even requires that any person who
has made or hereafter makes any in-
vention or discovery along these lines,
to report within 60 days to the Commis-
sion giving a complete description
thereof.
Now, permit me to quote to you the
exact wording of the bill and its defini-
tion of the term "person," subsection c,
beginning at page 50:
The term "person" means any individual,
corpoiation, partnership, firm, association,
trust, estate, public or private institution,
group, the United States, or any agency
theieof, any government other than the United
States, any political subdivision of any such
government, and any legal successor, represent-
ative, agent, or agency of the foregoing, or
other entity, but shall not include the Commis-
sion or officers or employees of the Commission
in the exercise of duly authorized functions.
Please note carefully this definition
of the word "person" because for the
first time to my knowledge a congres-
sional act includes in the term "person"
the United States, or any agency there-
of, any government other than the
United States, or any political subdivi-
sion of any such government, while at
the same time this definition of the
term "person" excludes the Commis-
sion or officers or employees of the
Commission in the exercise of duly au-
thorized functions. In other words,
Mr. Chairman, this bill completely di-
vests from every person, including the
United States or any agency thereof,
and any government other than the
United States, or any political subdivi-
sion, of all their right, title, and inter-
est in and to all property, patents, and
even ideas that may have anything to
do with source material, and the pro-
duction of fissionable material, the ma-
terial itself, and every other activity
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
139
connected with atomic energy, and in-
vests all such right, title, and interest
in the Commission. In the words of the
act itself it provides "that the Commis-
sion shall be the exclusive owner of all
facilities."
Now for the purposes of this discus-
sion, let us consider that the Commis-
sion has proceeded to acquire all of
these rights, titles, and interests to
everything in the United States that
has to do even remotely with atomic
energy and then let us turn to section
8, which is captioned "International ar-
rangements." I desire to quote section
8 in full again, as follows:
As used in this act, the term "international
arrangement" shall mean any treaty approved
by the Senate or international agreement heie-
after approved by the Congress, during the
time such treaty or agreement is in full foice
and effect.
(b) Effect of international arrangements:
Any provision of this act or any action of the
Commission to the extent that it conflicts with
the provisions of any international ai range-
ment made after the date of enactment of this
act shall be deemed to be of no further force or
effect.
(c) Policies contained in international ar-
rangements: In the performance of its functions
under this act, the Commission shall give maxi-
mum effect to the policies contained in any such
international arrangement.
Section 8 is indeed the key to the en-
tire bill. That is the section which
makes it mandatory upon the Com-
mission in the performance of its func-
tions under the act, to give "maximum
effect to the policies contained in any
such international arrangement."
Please note further, and under the
assumption that all of this property,
including production facilities, patents,
and so forth, having already been ac-
quired by the Commission, and title to
which has been irrevocably vested in
the Commission, that under subsection
(b) of section 8, any provision of this
act which we are here considering as S.
1717, or any action of the Commission
to the extent that it conflicts with the
provision of any international arrange-
ment made after the date of enactment
of this act, shall be deemed to be of no
further force or effect.
In other words, Mr. Chairman, this
bill carries out absolutely the intent of
the report on the International Control
of Atomic Energy prepared by the Lili-
enthal committee for the Secretary of
State, from which I have already
quoted, and which provides that the
International Atomic Development Au-
thority must "own and lease property,
carry on mining, manufacturing, re-
search, licensing, inspecting, selling,
or any other necessary operations," and
the bill provides quite definitely that
when any such international authority
is agreed to by the Congress of the
United States that it shall be manda-
tory for the Commission to turn over to
the International Authority all such
property and rights as have been ac-
quired by the Commission, and in turn
provides for the repeal of any provision
of this act to the extent that it conflicts
with the provision of any such interna-
tional arrangement.
That, Mr. Chairman, is the essence
of S. 1717 as I read the bill.
Perhaps the provisions of S. 1717 are
the same provisions that this Congress,
or two-thirds of the Senate, as the case
may be, will approve in years to come.
Perhaps it is the only answer to the new
era which is so terrible to contemplate
—the atomic age. I am sure that I am
not wise enough to know. The entire
subject is awful to contemplate. I
wish that this bill were not before us
just now. I wish that every Member
[p. 9345]
of the House could have time to con-
sider further, to study, and indeed to
pray over this subject. Indeed, I am
sure that even the great Committee on
Military Affairs, which presents this
bill, does not fully understand its im-
plications. The members of that com-
mittee admit that fact freely.
[p. 9346]
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Carolina [Mr.
RIVERS] has expired.
-------
140
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
All time has expired.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
DECLARATION OF POLICY
SECTION I. (a) Findings and declaration:
Research and experimentation in the field of
nuclear chain reaction have attained the stage
at which the release of atomic energy on a
large scale is practical. The significance of the
atomic bomb for military purposes is evident.
The effect of the use of atomic energy for civil-
ian purposes upon the social, economic, and
political structures of today cannot now be de-
termined. It is a field in which unknown factors
are involved. Therefore, any legislation will
necessarily be subject to revision from time to
time. It is reasonable to anticipate, however,
that tapping this new souice of energy will
cause profound changes in our present way of
life. Accordingly, it is hereby declared to be
the policy of the people of the United States
that, subject at all times to the paramount
objective of assuring the common defense and
security, the development and utilization of
atomic energy shall, so far as practicable, be
directed toward improving the public welfare,
increasing the standard of living, strengthening
free competition in private enterprise, and pro-
moting world peace.
(b) Purpose of act: It is the purpose of this
act to effectuate the policies set out in section 1
(a) by providing, among others, for the fol-
lowing major programs relating to atomic
energy:
(1) A program of assisting and fostering
private research and development to encourage
maximum scientific progress;
(2) A program for the control of scientific
and technical information which will permit
the dissemination of such information to
encourage scientific progress, and for the shar-
ing on a reciprocal basis of information con-
cerning the practical industrial application of
atomic energy as soon as effective and enforce-
able safeguards against its use for destructive
purposes can be devised;
(3) A program of federally conducted re-
search and development to assure the Gov-
ernment of adequate scientific and technical
accomplishment;
1 (4) A program for Government control of
the production, ownership, and use of fission-
able material to assure the common defense
and security and to insure the broadest possible
exploitation of the field; and
(5) A program of administration which will
be consistent with the foregoing policies and
with international arrangements made by the
United States, and which will enable the Con-
gress to be currently informed so as to take
further legislative action as may hereafter be
appropriate.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, a
preferential motion.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
report the motion offered by the gen-
tleman from Mississippi.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. RANKIN moves that the Committee do
now rise and report the bill back to the House
with the recommendation that the enacting
clause be stricken out.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, the
best thing we can do is to send this bill
back to the committee and let it rest
there, for the time being at least.
There is no hurry about sacrificing
what America has gained in the devel-
opment of atomic energy. There can-
not possibly be any danger to world
peace by the United States maintain-
ing its position and holding the secrets
of the atomic bomb as she has them
today. Every intelligent individual
knows that America is not going to use
this bomb for aggressive purposes.
Every intelligent individual knows
that the world is safer with this
weapon in the hands of the United
States than it would be with it in any
other hands in the world. If a vote
were taken of the entire English-
speaking world I dare say it would be
overwhelmingly in favor of leaving
this atomic bomb exactly where it is, at
least for the time being.
There is no hurry about legislation of
this kind. You might pick out the
average American district and go to
the doughboys, if you please, who
fought this war, and take a vote on
whether or not you should give the se-
crets of this atomic bomb to those
enemies who are seeking to get their
hands on it, and you would not get
enough votes for it in the average con-
gressional district to wad a shotgun.
We spent $2,000,000,000 building this
plant. The atomic bomb is the greatest
weapon the world has ever known.
From this time on, marching armies
will probably be a thing of the past.
The entire procedure of naval warfare
is now obsolete. We have this power-
ful weapon in our hands and it is in the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
141
hands of the Military Establishment of
[p. 9355]
the United States and is controlled by
men whose patriotism cannot be ques-
tioned. We have all the materials nec-
essary, -we have the bomb, we have the
planes to drop it, \ve have the know-
how; but everybody on earth knows
that if this bill is recommitted and this
proposition left as it is today that the
world is safer from war at our hands
than it would be from any other nation
on earth with this weapon in its pos-
session.
So I am making this motion that we
may send this bill back to the commit-
tee for further study.
Mr. BARDEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. RANKIN. I yield to the gentle-
man from North Carolina.
Mr. BARDEN. Does not the gentle-
man believe that we could well afford to
put first on our objectives the securing
of the peace, and second the distribu-
tion of any weapons we may have?
Mr. RANKIN. Absolutely. The
gentleman from North Carolina has
expressed it in terms that no one can
deny. We had better first let the world
settle down before we begin to give
them weapons to carry on the kind of
warfare that some of them are trying
to carry on today.
I told you yesterday of the murder of
General Mihailovitch at the hands of
the Communists in a country he had
given his life to defend. We had the
leader of his nation stand at this desk
and praise him as a great patriot. All
over America today there are Amer-
ican boys whose lives he saved when
they were shot down in that country.
Are we going to turn over to those who
murdered him the greatest weapon the
world has ever seen? Are we going to
turn over to the other nations this
power to blow cities from the face of
the earth? No. It is in civilized hands
now. Let us keep it there.
God Almighty placed this great
weapon in our hands. Let us keep it
there at least for the time being. Then
we can protect our own country and
help to perpetuate the peace of the
world.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Mississippi has ex-
pired.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in
opposition to the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Mississippi.
Mr. Chairman, I said in the very be-
ginning of my opening statement on
this legislation that I wanted the House
to have an opportunity to work its will
with respect to what it wanted on
atomic bomb legislation. I stated
equally emphatically that I wras in fa-
vor of some sort of military control
with respect to the secrets of the
atomic bomb. I do not think the House
ought to go haywire, so to speak, and
strike the enacting clause, making it
impossible for the House to work on
this bill and do what it wants to do
about it.
As I said before, the big issue comes
on the very first amendment in section
2. Let me see what this bill declares
here in the very first section entitled
"Declaration of Policy." After recit-
ing the dangers of the thing involved
and the seriousness of the questions in-
volved it states:
Accordingly, it is hereby declared to be the
policy of the people of the United States that,
subject at all times to the paramount—
And I emphasize that word "para-
mount"—
objective of assuring: the common defense and
security—
And so forth. Then it provides for
the development and utilization of
atomic energy for civilian use. You
have a bill before you and if you strike
out the enacting clause you simply
leave things in status quo, whereas, if
you continue to debate the bill and con-
sider the amendment which puts the
Military Establishment in some sort of
communication with the matter, then
you will have done your duty. I think
you ought to retain military control to
the extent that the committee has done
-------
142
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
so, but unless you go ahead with debate
the bill as is will be left exactly where
it is.
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. MAY. I yield to the gentleman
from Missouri.
Mr. SHORT. I want to announce to
the membership that if the pending mo-
tion prevails and we go back into the
House, I propose to offer a motion to
recommit the bill to the committee for
further study, which will be voted upon
before the recommendation of the com-
mittee.
Mr. MAY. I do not know what the
parliamentary situation will be there.
Mr. RANKIN. Let me say to the
gentleman from Missouri that if my
motion prevails, the bill goes back to
the committee presided over by the gen-
tleman from Kentucky [Mr. MAY] for
further consideration. The measure
will be left there and we will still have
the question before us at the next Con-
gress.
Mr. MAY. It is my understanding
that if the motion to strike out the en-
acting clause prevails, it kills the legis-
lation.
Mr. HINSHAW. That is my under-
standing.
Mr. MAY. That is all I care to say.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MAY. I yield to the gentleman
from Indiana.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. After
the weeks we spent on this bill, does not
the gentleman feel it would be utterly
impossible to perfect the present bill in
the House? Would it not be better to
send this bill back to the committee and
to either adopt this or any other
amendment or motion than to try to
perfect a bill here that has the wrong
approach to this whole problem?
Mr. MAY. I would be utterly incon-
sistent in what I have done heretofore
and in what I have heretofore said if I
did not take the position that this
House ought to legislate on the subject
because I have said from the beginning
that I felt the House of Representatives
would do what it wanted to do about
the bill, and would probably do the
right thing when it got to it.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MAY. I yield to the gentleman
from California.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Ev-
ery single phrase and sentence in this
bill was read thoroughly by the com-
mittee and agreed on, was it not?
Mr. MAY. It was argued, it was
read and reread, it was considered and
reconsidered, it was studied and re-
studied, and we have done the very
best we could. I doubt if we can do
anything else.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Kentucky has expired.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, if the pending motion should
be adopted and the enacting clause is
stricken out, would not this bill, S. 1717,
be dead? Would not the number be
killed?
The CHAIRMAN. If the House
agrees to the recommendation of the
Committee of the Whole, yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. RANKIN. It would not be dead.
It would merely go back to the commit-
tee for future legislation. The whole
question would be in the hands of the
Military Affairs Committee.
Mr. BARDEN. Mr. Chairman, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. BARDEN. As I understand the
parliamentary situation, if this motion
prevails, when we go back into the
House it would be proper to introduce
a motion to recommit the bill back to
the committee for further considera-
tion; is that not correct?
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
143
The CHAIRMAN. That is correct.
Mr. SHORT. That is exactly what I
propose to do.
The CHAIRMAN. When we go back
into the House, the House will vote
whether or not they want to strike out
the enacting clause.
Mr. HARDEN. Mr. Chairman, in-
stead of voting whether or not we want
to strike out the enacting- clause, will it
not be a vote to recommit to the com-
mittee?
The CHAIRMAN. After we go back
into the House, a motion to recommit
would be in order.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. THOMASON. Is it not a fact
that if the Committee of the Whole
adopts the motion offered by the gen-
tleman from Mississippi, we then go
back into the House, and if the House
approves that motion, this bill is dead?
The CHAIRMAN. That is correct.
Mr. SHORT. The bill would be
dead, but I am not letting them kill the
bill.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the motion offered by the gentleman
from Mississippi [Mr. RANKIN].
[p. 9356]
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. RANKIN)
there were—ayes 93, noes 102.
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chairman, I de-
mand tellers.
Tellers were ordered, and the Chair-
man appointed as tellers Mr. MAY and
Mr. RANKIN.
The Committee again divided; and
the tellers reported that there were—
ayes 102, noes 131.
So the motion was rejected.
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I move
that the Committee do now rise.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the motion offered by the gentleman
from Missouri [Mr. SHORT].
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. SHORT)
there were—ayes 50, noes 107.
So the motion was rejected.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. JOHNSON of
California: That lines 5 to 11, inclusive, on
page 1 and line 1 to 4, inclusive, and the first
three words of line 5, page 2, be stricken out.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, the purpose of this amend-
ment is to strike out all irrelevant
matter in section 1. In fact, I do not
believe in having any statement of pol-
icy at all. The purpose of a statute is
to lay down a principle or rule of ac-
tion, and the words used in the law
itself indicate what you have in mind
without putting in any statement of
principle or purposes. However, it
seems to be the custom in framing bills
to set down some matters of principle
or a statement of policy. These things
that I refer to are absolutely irrelevant
and have no place in the law. For
instance, the first sentence says:
Research and experimentation in the field of
nuclear chain reaction have attained the stage
at which the release of atomic eneigy on a laige
scale is practical.
That has nothing to do with the prin-
ciples involved in this law.
The next sentence says:
The significance of the atomic bomb for
military purposes is evident.
Certainly it is evident. It has no
place in this law. That is in the very
background of this law and is perhaps
the reason for it.
The next sentence I want to strike
out says:
The effect of the use of atomic energy for
civilian purposes upon the social, economic,
and political structures of today cannot now be
determined.
Well, we all know that, and that has
no place in the law.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. JOHNSON of California. I
yield.
-------
144
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mrs. LUCE. With reference to the
statement that the use of atomic en-
ergy for civilian purposes upon the
social, economic, and political structure
of today cannot now be determined,
does not the gentleman agree that this
bill will determine precisely the politi-
cal effects upon our society?
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Not
necessarily. It will have some effect on
our society. But that refers to the
effect of atomic energy in our life and
in a subordinate way by virtue of the
legislation our political and social life
may be effected.
The next sentence reads:
It is a field in which unknown factors are
involved.
Every one of those statements and
the additional sentence, that I need not
read, shows clearly that they are not
fundamental basic statements of prin-
ciples or facts. They are merely prop-
aganda. They are merely statements
of the evidence. In my opinion, they
have no place in the statute at all.
What I propose to leave in is a fair
statement of principle, so that the sec-
tion will read as follows:
It is hereby declared to be the policy of the
people of the United States that, subject at all
times to the paramount objective of assuring
the common defense and security, the develop-
ment and utilization of atomic energy shall, so
far as practicable, be directed toward improving
the public welfare, and promoting world peace.
I believe those are the purposes for
which this law is designed to be carried
out, and they are the only ones that
have any place in the preamble of this
act. It is for that reason that I hope
the Committee will strike out not only
what is proposed in this amendment,
but also two additional clauses that I
propose to move to strike out in the
next section.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.
Mr. MATHEWS. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, of all the bills that
have come before this House in which
the statement of purposes and policies
in the act was frustrated by the provi-
sions of the act itself, this is about the
worst. I do not have much time. I
will hasten.
Why did we become superior with
the atomic bomb? Because we were
one step ahead and kept one step ahead.
Now, what will this act do? I am not
going into theory. I am going into ac-
tual facts. The moment this act is
passed there is to be a Commission of
five persons, to be appointed by the
President and confirmed by the Senate.
That will take some time. The Presi-
dent has to make a careful selection of
a Commission as important as this.
The Senate should, and probably will,
hold hearings on those appointments.
An advisory committee must be ap-
pointed. The whole organization must
be set up. There must be any number
of employees hired. Some of them will
have to be investigated by the FBI.
I cannot go into all of the ramifica-
tions because I do not have the time,
but what happens in the meantime?
The moment this act goes into effect
every bit of ownership of material goes
into the hands of this Commission,
which does not exist. What is the
manufacturer, the man who has the
facilities, going to do? He does not
know what to do. The act is so compli-
cated that he will not know what to do
with his facilities or with his material
for months and months, and probably a
year, before this Commission is formed.
He cannot take any chances, unless he
risks going to jail for 2 years to 20
years or paying a fine of $5,000 to $20,-
000. The net result is that this is not
going to promote the development of
atomic energy. It will stop it.
As to the patent clause, that adds to
the confusion. There will be no incen-
tive for further inventions. It revokes
patents even in existence. If a person
wanted a new patent there is no incen-
tive for him to get it, because the mo-
ment he gets it it will be taken from
him. Mr. Chairman, this will throw the
whole question of atomic energy into
the most unutterable confusion and will
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
145
create a situation which the very pur-
poses of this act are said to avoid.
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MATHEWS. I yield.
Mr. ELSTON. The gentleman said
it would take some time for the FBI to
investigate the personnel of the Com-
mission. Does not the gentleman recall
that recently the Civil Service Commis-
sion reported that it did not have ade-
quate funds or adequate personnel to
make investigations of civil-service
employees?
Mr. MATHEWS. That is right.
Mr. ELSTON. And would not the
net result be that this Commission
would be hiring people whose activities
are not known?
Mr. MATHEWS. That is right.
Mr. ELSTON. And would that not
be an exceedingly dangerous thing in
itself?
Mr. MATHEWS. It certainly would,
because in a proposition like this the
very essence of it is national defense
and national security. You must have
in that vast organization that you will
form only the right kind of people.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MATHEWS. I yield.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Does not the
gentleman know that the incentive to
inventors and industry is written right
in this bill?
Mr. MATHEWS. No; it is not.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. It is. If you
will read it you will see it.
Mr. MATHEWS. I have read it
carefully, and I cannot agree with the
gentleman's conclusion.
It takes away from all persons any
title in or to fissionable materials. It
also becomes unlawful for any person
except under certain circumstances to
manufacture, process, or transfer any
fissionable material except as author-
ized by the Commission or export or
import fissionable material or directly
or indirectly engage in the production
of fissionable material outside the
United States.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MATHEWS. I cannot yield fur-
ther. My time is limited. If I can get
further time I will be glad to yield.
This is so important, this is so ob-
vious that the moment this goes into
effect the whole atomic energy industry
[p. 9357]
of this country will be affected. Every
little firm that has a small device or a
small quantity of fissionable material
will be uncertain as to what it can do
and it therefore will do nothing with-
out great jeopardy to itself, and that
will continue until this Commission is
formed, completely organized, and
ready to operate. It will be months,
and months, and months before it will
issue a single license, and then it can
only issue a license after it has made
an official investigation. I say it will
bring about utter chaos. I hope this
bill will be recommitted to the com-
mittee.
Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MATHEWS. I yield.
Mr. GAVIN. Does not the gentle-
man believe that this matter should be
left in the hands of the War Depart-
ment where it rightfully belongs?
Mr. MATHEWS. I cannot go quite
that far.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield further?
Mr. MATHEWS. I yield.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. The gentle-
man's fears are fears only insofar as
the protection of inventors and private
industry is concerned. If the gentle-
man will read the bill, however, he will
find that inventors are to be paid for
their inventions and that industry will
receive a royalty on any invention. So
they are taken care of and the incen-
tive is there.
Mr. MATHEWS. I am afraid the
gentleman has misconstrued my posi-
tion entirely. The fact that the inven-
tor will, at some unknown future time,
have to take an unknown sum deter-
-------
146
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
mined by a body not yet formed, unless
he appeals to a court, which causes
further delay, is certainly anything but
an incentive to him.
Mr. PRICE of Illinois. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MATHEWS. I yield.
Mr. PRICE of Illinois. If the gen-
tleman will read section 11 of the bill,
he will discover that the gentleman
from Connecticut [Mr. KOPPLEMANN]
was right in his contentions.
Mr. MATHEWS. I have read the
bill very carefully and I still cannot
agree with the contentions of the gen-
tleman from Connecticut. To say an
inventor is protected when he is forced
to accept an arbitrary amount for his
patent, instead of what he can make
from it, as was intended by the patent
law, seems to me a strange view of
what protection is. And it certainly
will not alleviate the confusion private
industry will be in between the passage
of this act and the organization of the
Commission to the point where it can
properly issue licenses.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from New Jersey has
expired.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
word.
Mr. Chairman, I have been trying to
find some reason why there should be
all this hurry in passing this bill. The
nearest approach to a direct suggestion
as to why the bill should be passed at
this time which I have heard, was in
the remarks of the gentleman from
Tennessee [Mr. KEFAUVER] and I am
not sure that I understood him cor-
rectly. So I raise the question. I un-
derstood the gentleman to say that if
this bill should be passed that we might
enter into some international agree-
ment on atomic energy. I want to ask
the chairman of the Committee on Mili-
tary Affairs or some member of the
committee whether or not the passage
of this bill will make it possible for this
Commission to turn over to an interna-
tional commission some agreement with
respect to our handling of nuclear
energy.
Mr. MAY. There is nothing in the
legislation as I understand it, that
authorizes or even directs turning over
the atomic bomb to any international
organization; but it does provide that
on a reciprocal basis there may be
exchanges with respect to the civilian
uses of atomic energy.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. But the
Commission does not have the power or
would not have the power by this act to
commit us to any exchange or to control
without an approval by the Congress?
Mr. MAY. I think not, undoubtedly.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. One
thing is self-evident; Congress cannot
pass any law that is going to bind the
hands of other nations. We cannot
determine what they do. That was the
compelling factor I think when the
Appropriations Committee proceeded
in its appropriations for Manhattan
project. There was a time back in 1944
and early 1945, when some persons
were very leery about going any fur-
ther with the Manhattan project. One
member of the subcommittee handling
appropriations for the War Depart-
ment raised the question during our
deliberations because he was afraid
that if the thing flopped we would be
severely criticized for throwing good
money after bad. We had then spent
over a billion dollars and at least an-
other billion was involved.
As a result of that we had some
secret sessions with Secretary Patter-
son and General Marshall. The one
consideration that appealed to us was
that if we did not do this Germany
might. Everything pointed to their
trying to do it, and, as I said a few
minutes ago, General Marshall said it
was a race for time. That is the con-
sideration which prevailed and that is
why we continued to appropriate
money for the Manhattan project.
By the same token we still cannot
control what other countries do. That
is why I am very reluctant to vote for
any legislation which may shackle the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
147
development of nuclear energy in this
country.
No matter what we do here the scien-
tists, the engineers, the resources of
every other country will be devoted to
the development of atomic energy. I
hope we do not handcuff the United
States by any legislation which we pro-
pose here.
That is why I would be opposed to
any legislation that would place this
matter exclusively in the hands of the
War Department, or any other single
group, on the evidence now before me.
Why is there any hurry right now to
pass this bill? I would like to have
some real reason for taking action.
There may be such a reason. I ask for
information.
It has been said repeatedly on the
floor here that Members are confused.
Several members of the Military Af-
fairs Committee have told us during
this debate that they did not know
which way to vote.
How, then, can the average Member
of Congress, on the basis of the debate
that has developed so far, know
whether or not we should vote to do
anything at this time?
What is the harm in letting things
ride a little while? The War Depart-
ment has these projects under way.
The General Electric has taken over
operation of the project at Hanford,
Wash. General Electric and other
organizations are pursuing their re-
search and development. What is the
reason for doing anything about this
now? I ask for information. We all
want to do the right thing in this
matter.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. If the
gentleman can answer that question, I
am glad to yield to him.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. My
answer to that is this, and I do not like
to interrupt the gentleman: On Octo-
ber 3 last the President wrote a letter
to our committee or to the Congress in
which he requested what he called in-
terim legislation, which resulted in the
May-Johnson bill, a bill somewhat like
this one. He claimed in the letter and
by public statements, and witnesses
claimed, including the Secretary of
War, that this legislation is necessary
as a forerunner of the efforts that our
State Department is going to make to
try to outlaw atomic-bomb warfare.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Then
the gentleman is more or less support-
ing the position taken by the gentleman
from Tennessee.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from South Dakota has
expired.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to
proceed for two additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from South Dakota?
There was no objection.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I yield
to the gentleman from California.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. It
seems to me not only is that an impor-
tant reason for passing the bill now,
but it is also true that unless effective
domestic control over this admittedly
very dangerous proposition is estab-
lished, there is not any assurance that
the whole business will not get com-
pletely out of hand at home, rendering
it more difficult to enter into an effec-
tive international agreement; further-
more, under present circumstances
there is nothing in law to prevent the
possession of fissionable material by
any one or preventing development
taking place.
[p. 9358]
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. This
bill does not cover that.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Yes,
it does.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. No.
This bill on page 20 says, "except that
with respect to any location, entry, or
-------
148
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
settlement made prior to the date of
enactment of this act no reservation
shall be deemed to have been made."
That is, existing mining claims are
respected. And this bill does not re-
quire that the Secretary of Agriculture
in administering claims in the national
forests shall make any reservation of
rights.
So, if it were desirable that all pri-
vate interests were extinguished, it
does not seem to me that this bill does
it completely. And certainly it is de-
batable whether all private rights in
the field should be extinguished.
The arguments that have been of-
fered do not seem to me to be persua-
sive. Why should we create a control
commission to put handcuffs on the
development of some great new force
or power? That is the question I have
not heard answered.
I repeat the question, seeking an
answer. Why should we handcuff our-
selves unless we can have some assur-
ance that other nations are going to
handcuff themselves? No law that we
can pass here will handcuff develop-
ment in other countries.
We do not want the United States to
get behind in this procession. If pri-
vate interests are going to be able to
develop nuclear energy in other coun-
tries, why should they not be free to do
so here? I do not think that we ought
to adopt a policy of fear here but that
we ought to take plenty of time in
deliberating on the question.
Every page in the bill carries lan-
guage giving the Atomic Energy Com-
mission the power to make final deter-
mination on one matter or another.
Together they constitute the most com-
plete delegation of power to a bureau
or agency that has ever been proposed
in this country. The character of the
problem may give us no choice. Per-
haps we have to go the whole way or
not at all. But should we set up such a
colossus of bureaucracy with all these
powers until we thoroughly explore the
proposition?
Again I ask, what is the reason for
doing this now? I do not seek to argue,
I simply want to know.
TAKE THE PROFIT OUT OF WAR—OUR
NATIONAL SECURITY AND SAFETY IS
PARAMOUNT
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, on yes-
terday reference was made to a mem-
ber of the American Bar Association as
opposing some of the features of this
bill, so I respectfully call your atten-
tion to the American Bar Association
Journal of May 1946, at page 292
thereof, to an article entitled "One
World or None" by Reginald Smith of
the Massachusetts bar, "The Need for
World Law," and briefly quote as
follows:
A symposium on the atomic bomb has been
written by 13 preeminent scientists, the Fed-
eration of American Scientists, one military
man (Gen. H. H. Arnold) and one political
scientist (Walter Lippmann). The foreword
is by Niels Bohr and the introduction is by
Arthur H. Compton, both winners of Nobel
prizes.
It is the latest word, in a real sense the last
word, on the subject now the most important
in the world. Its emphasis is not on how to
make the bomb but on how to make some protec-
tion for civilization against the bomb. The
concluding words are: "Time is short. And
survival is at stake."
How much time have we? The answer is
given: "We are led by quite straightforward
reasoning to the conclusion that any one of
several determined foreign nations could dupli-
cate our work in a period of about 5 years"
(p. 46).
Being a member of the Patents Com-
mittee of this House and also having
practiced civil law for about 25 years;
having had the benefit and pleasure of
drafting very many contracts and li-
censes relative to patents and patent
rights during that law practice, 1 do
not feel as though studying S. 1717 on
its patent and rights provisions is en-
tirely a new subject to me. Already in
this debate, there has been much em-
phasis by those who oppose the bill, or
by those who want to postpone action
and delay legislation or even kill the
bill, that the business, industrial, man-
ufacturing, and patent interests of this
Nation do not favor or approve so-
called compulsory license provisions of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
149
this bill's proposal as contained an sec-
tion 11 of the bill.
On yesterday the distinguished gen-
tleman from Texas [Mr. LANHAM] re-
ferred to a letter from the chairman of
the patents committee of the American
Bar Association. I have in my hands
two letters from the chairman of the
committee on patents and research of
the National Association of Manufac-
turers from its office in New York.
The first letter to me is dated June 27,
1946, and the second July 16, 1946.
That portion of these letters which I
here and now quote is exactly the same
in both letters. So there has been no
change of opinion by the National As-
sociation of Manufacturers between
the dates of its letter of June 27 and the
one of July 16. Furthermore, we have
the official opinion of two of the distin-
guished executives of the National As-
sociation of Manufacturers on the same
subject for the letter to me of June 27,
was signed by Edward Stone, commit-
tee executive, committee on patents and
research and the letter of July 16 was
signed by R. J. Dearborn, chairman of
committee on patents and research. I
again call your attention to the fact,
that both of these distinguished au-
thorities on patents, and both of them
representing this Nation-wide associa-
tion of manufacturers, take exactly the
same position on the same subject of
the licensing provisions of this bill.
First, subdivision (b) of both letters
is as follows:
(b) The sections on controls of source ma-
terials, production of fissionable materials,
and Government ownership of all fissionable
materials should be changed so as to permit
private acquisition, production by private en-
terprise, and use by private enterprise under
adequate licensing provisions by the Com-
mission.
I emphatically call to your attention
that not only do they frankly state that
the control of source materials of
atomic energy should be under Govern-
ment ownership, but they frankly state
that Government ownership should
only allow production by private enter-
prise under adequate licensing provi-
sions by the Commission on Atomic
Energy proposed under this bill we are
now debating. So, gentlemen, under
this section (b), the National Associa-
tion of Manufacturers recognizes that
it is sound public policy and certainly
not against the interest of free enter-
prise or private industry to have the
control of the source materials and the
production of fissionable materials un-
der Government ownership, nor the
rights by private enterprise to use the
same subject to adequate license by the
Commission representing the American
people.
And just as subdivision (b), above-
quoted, is identically the same in both
letters, so subdivision (c) in both let-
ters is exactly the same, to wit:
(c) Similarly, utilization of atomic energy
should be permitted by private enterprise under
appropriate licensing.
Therefore, I think it is not entirely
sound or accurate reasoning for anyone
to claim again in this debate that
American industry and American man-
ufacturers are opposed to either Gov-
ernment ownership of atomic materials
or of exclusive Government control of
its source nor of Government licensing
by the Commission proposed. These
two paragraphs in these two letters
make it crystal clear that the National
Association of Manufacturers recog-
nizes two fundamental requirements in
the interest of national security and
safety and in the interests of private
and free enterprise development by
reason of their position stated in para-
graphs (b) and (c), respectively.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DOYLE. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Un-
der the situation now prevailing, any-
body could make an atomic bomb.
Mr. DOYLE. That is correct.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. We
want some way to control it so that pri-
vate individuals cannot make it.
Mr. DOYLE. I agree with the gen-
tleman.
-------
150
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
The objectives of this bill can be
properly divided into two sections, to
wit: first, as relates to production and
development of atomic energy for mili-
tary uses. And secondly, for industrial
and scientific uses and purposes.
Does anyone disagree with me?
Should we let the manufacturers of
military arms and munitions and of
weapons for use in times of war have
the right and privilege of acquiring
and developing this God-given energy
—an asset for the world's blessing—in
order to produce munitions of war for
the purpose of filling their pockets with
more money gained? I say "No!" It is
absolutely necessary, sound, and sen-
sible, and in the interests of self-pres-
ervation of ourselves and of our world
neighbors as well, that no right to pro-
duce, control, or use this energy shall
be given to any person whatsoever
directly or indirectly for the purpose of
developing it for arms or military use
—unless it is through the Commission
[p. 9359]
proposed in this bill. In this way, we
can help to begin to take the motive of
money profit out of war. This I believe
to be absolutely essential in sound steps
to help eliminate causes of war. Under
section 4, this bill provides for the
exclusive ownership in the United
States of all facilities for the produc-
tion of fissionable material in quanti-
ties sufficient to produce an atomic
bomb or any other weapon by the Com-
mission representing our beloved Na-
tion, while section 5 provides that any
person owning any interest in any fis-
sionable material at the time of the en-
actment of this act or who lawfully
produces any fissionable material inci-
dent to privately financed research
"shall be paid just compensation there-
for." And this bill does not intend to
confiscate any private property but, as
is necessary for war materials and in
the interest of national defense and
security, the bill proposes that any per-
son having such material at this time
shall be paid a just compensation there-
for. This is sound. This is sensible.
This is in accordance with American
principles of fair dealing. Subdivision
(2) of section 5 on page 17 of the bill
provides that no person shall transfer
or deliver title to any "source material"
from its "deposit in nature" except by
permission from the Commission. And
why not? Again, for purposes of "na-
tional security and safety," it is imper-
ative that our Nation be in the
exclusive control of the "source of the
material" in order to assure exclusive
control and access in times of war or
for needs of "national security and
safety." Does any Member of this
House now propose that private money
gain or profits shall be placed para-
mount and above the national security
and safety by allowing private owner-
ship and production of this dangerous
material at its source?
Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DOYLE. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. McDONOUGH. The gentleman
is an attorney, and he knows that the
manufacture of firearms or explosive
materials in all States is now controlled
by statute. There is law now that con-
trols that manufacture.
Mr. DOYLE. Those laws are not
adequate to cover this subject. State
laws cannot do it.
Mr. McDONOUGH. But there are
laws.
Mr. DOYLE. Yes, but inadequate
laws—ridiculously inadequate. We
must take the profit out of war. Nor is
that theoretical, either. I have no
objection to my Government being
placed in a position of maximum imme-
diate ability to protect the safety and
security of our Nation in its new world
relationships.
Now, as to section 10, which relates
to control of information about atomic
energy and without being disrespect-
ful, I really believe that some of the
gentlemen who have talked against this
section in the bill in this debate had not
recently carefully read the full text of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
151
that section 10, for it expressly states
on page 30 of the bill, as follows:
SEC. 10. (a) Policy: It shall be the policy
of the Commission to control the dissemina-
tion of restricted data in such a manner as
to assure the common defense and security.
Consistent with such policy, the Commission
shall be guided by the following principles:
(1) That information with respect to the
use of atomic eneigy for industrial purposes
should be shared with other nations on a
reciprocal basis as soon as the Congress de-
clares by joint resolution that effective and
enforceable international safeguards against
the use of such energy for destructive pui poses
have been established.
You will note, gentlemen, that any
dissemination of any information is
first restricted so as to assure the com-
mon defense and security. This, then,
is the controlling policy. No, not even
any information about it for industrial
purposes may be shared or dissemi-
nated by the commission, excepting
Congress first declares by joint resolu-
tion that effective and enforceable in-
ternational safeguards against the use
of such energy for destructive purposes
have been established. The term "Con-
gress," as used in this bill, Mr. Speaker,
refers not only to this House of Repre-
sentatives, but to the United States
Senate. What chance does the Com-
mission have to be put in a position of
disseminating any atomic energy infor-
mation for industrial purposes before
it should, when a joint resolution of
both Houses of this Congress must
first be obtained, which clearly de-
clares that enforceable international
safeguards against the use of such
energy for destructive purposes have
been established.
Therefore, it does not appear that
the arguments so far made that this
Commission will be promptly releasing
atomic energy information to foreign
nations are well founded. It is in fact
without any foundation, for under sec-
tion 10 Congress controls the time and
event when any such information shall
be shared with other nations on a recip-
rocal basis. Furthermore, subdivision
(c) of said section 10 on page 31 of the
bill provides that the Commission is
only authorized to establish informa-
tion service as it may deem necessary
as to nonrestricted data. And at line
10 on page 31 it further provides:
(1) The term "restricted data" as used in
this section means all data concerning the
manufacture or utilization of atomic weapons,
the production of fissionable material, or the
use of fissionable material in the production of
power, but shall not include any data which
the Commission from time to time determines
may be published without adversely affecting
the common defense and security.
Therefore, section 10 makes it clear
to any who desire to see it that there
can be no dissemination of any data for
either war or industrial purposes until
joint resolution by both of the Houses
of the United States Congress has first
so declared, and the basis of this joint
resolution thus required is that enforce-
able international safeguards against
the use of such energy for destructive
purposes have first been established.
Mr. Chairman, this time may come
after many years, or it may come before
we realize it.
The matter of the patent section of
this bill has frequently been mentioned
on this floor. It is claimed that the pro-
visions of section 11 will destroy the
fundamentals of the American patent
system. I disagree with this conten-
tion and no man in this House feels
more strongly than I do that we must
preserve our competitive free enter-
prise, principles, and economy. But,
gentlemen, we cannot perpetuate or
preserve that free enterprise as it re-
lates to our patent system if we make
it easier than ever for there to grow up
monopoly, restraint of trade, unlawful
competition, or other restraints against
free enterprise and free competitive
economy by reason of allowing private
or individual ownership and control of
this atomic energy through patents in
private control. There are four pri-
mary functions of a patent system, as I
understand it, as follows:
A. To induce disclosure of inven-
tions.
B. To induce the investment of ven-
ture capital.
-------
152
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
C. To promote what has been called
enforced diversity of innovation, for
instance, where the improvement is
already patented, B will he forced to
invent a new and different improve-
ment in order to maintain his competi-
tive position.
D. To reward the inventor.
Right here gentlemen, let me call
your careful attention to page 27 of
the hill beginning at line 6 to line 22,
inclusive, wherein it is provided as
follows:
Where activities under any license might
serve to maintain or to foster the growth of
monopoly, restraint of trade, unlawful competi-
tion, or other trade position inimical to the
entry of new, freely competitive enterprises in
the field, the Commission is authorized and di-
rected to refuse to issue such license or to
establish such conditions to prevent these
results as the Commission, in consultation with
the Attorney General, may determine. The
Commission shall report promptly to the At-
torney General any information it may have
•with respect to any utilization of fissionable
material or atomic energy which appears to
have these results. No license may be given to
any person for activities which are not under
or within the jurisdiction of the United States,
to any foreign government, or to persons within
the jurisdiction of the United States where the
issuance thereof would be inimical to the com-
mon defense and security.
Assuming that no Member of this
Congress desires to have any control
of this destructive energy in hands of
private money profit for war-muni-
tions-making purposes, it is likewise
my hope that no Member is thinking
that this energy is a subject of proper
monopoly or cartel for purposes of
peace. Yet, I do know that in our sys-
tem of free enterprise the facts have
proven that some men get so greedy
for material gain and economic power
and dominion, that they interpret free
enterprise to mean that they can and
should be allowed to create monopolies
or cartels and restrain free enterprise
or competition with their particular
business. Free enterprise in the high-
est sense should be encouraged in this
new field of peaceful endeavor. It can
be under the terms of this bill. Monop-
oly must not fasten its hands over free
enterprise in the field of peaceful pur-
suits to be blessed by use of atomic
energy.
[p. 9360]
But slight mention has yet been made
of section 15, which establishes a joint
committee of the Senate and House
which by the terms of this bill is ex-
pressly charged with making continu-
ing studies of the activities of the
Atomic Energy Commission and of
problems relating to the development,
use, and control of atomic energy. And
not only is this joint committee of Con-
gress so chargeable, but it charges the
Atomic Energy Commission with keep-
ing this very same joint committee of
the Senate and House fully and cur-
rently informed with respect to the
Commission's activities. Thus, Con-
gress itself is placed in an intimate and
continuing position of full and current
contact with the Commission's plans
and policies and actions. Furthermore,
section (e), on page 47 of the bill,
expressly empowers this joint congres-
sional committee to appoint and fix the
compensation of such experts, consult-
ants, and technicians and clerks, as it
deems necessary. So, from our view-
point, Congress is made a watchdog of
the Commission, and in another sense
a trustee in the same field as is the
Atomic Energy Commission itself—
even though to a more limited degree,
of course.
So much has been so splendidly said
about the place and province of atomic
energy from here on and forward in the
life of our Nation and the world that I
will not dwell at length along the same
lines. But you and I are in a new era
from which we cannot extricate our-
selves if we would. Nor can nations
withdraw from a world neighborhood,
for in the twinkling of an eye, whole
cities can now be obliterated. Rifle
bullets kill men singly, while atomic
bombs obliterate hundreds of thousands
of people and crush concrete buildings
into dust instantly. Use of atomic
energy for peaceful pursuits must come
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
153
to be the first and only use from here on
all over the world—else there will be
no survival of civilization. World un-
derstanding and cooperation is essen-
tial for either national or international
existence as civilized people.
Mr. JUDD. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last two words.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to ap-
proach this whole subject of atomic
energy from a little different stand-
point than has been touched upon so
far. Most of the discussion has been
about the explosive, the blasting effects
of the release of atomic energy. But
there is a possibly even more devastat-
ing force released in nuclear fission and
that is radioactive energy. It so hap-
pens I have had considerable personal
experience with one form of radioactive
energy and bear about in my body the
marks of overexposure to it. So I have
been interested in it for a great many
years.
The physical and biological history
of this planet has been one of decreas-
ing radioactive energy. The earth
originally was and still is at its center
a ball of fire—that is a body gradually
disintegrating by atomic fission. The
sun supposedly is a body engaged in
violent atomic fission. Gradually
through the centuries the materials in
this earth have been losing their radio-
active energy, even as radium con-
stantly gives off radioactive energy
until it becomes exhausted through
hundreds and thousands of years, and
then becomes lead. From the radio-
active energy standpoint, our planet, so
to speak, has been running down since
its original formation. It was only
when radioactive energy fell below a
certain level that it became possible for
vegetation to grow on the planet, and
then after more millenniums of run-
ning down, the level of radioactive
energy was low enough so that animal
life could exist.
As many of you know, I am sure,
radioactive energy can have a special
effect upon germ cells, the cells that
bring into being new life, a new organ-
ism. It can cause internal changes in
germ cells which produce mutations,
sports, or biological monsters. Thus
the period when radioactive energy
became just low enough to permit ani-
mal life, but was still high enough to
act on the chromosomes in germ cells,
was the period when dinosaurs and all
sorts of bizarre biological freaks inhab-
ited the earth—a period when great
varieties of new species appeared.
Doubtless it was one of those mutations
that produced the new species, man.
In the beginning, God created the
heavens and the earth, and all that live
therein. Perhaps it was through the
operation of His radioactive energy
that He produced all that live.
In any case, here we now are after
all the millenniums. There has been
one steady process of gradual exhaus-
tion of the radioactive energy stored in
the earth in a form which was released
naturally.
Now for the first time in man's his-
tory he has discovered how to release
radioactive energy artificially. This is
a reversal of the direction in which
physical processes on the planet have
been going since its formation. It
involves profoundly not just this Na-
tion but life itself from the standpoint
of sheer existence.
Hitherto most of the radioactive
energy we have had was that which we
discovered already active in such ele-
ments as radium. We could use what
existed. Now we have found a way to
increase the amount in existence, a way
to release new radioactive energy.
Heretofore it has been gradually
dying down; now we can start building
it up, in active form and at a terrible
rate.
This can mean far more to us ulti-
mately than just the blasting effect of
bomb explosions, destructive as they
are.
If too much radioactive energy is
released in an uncontrolled form, what
may it do to human life itself; in fact,
to all life?
Incidentally, I have been told that
-------
154
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the reason they had the Hiroshima
bomb go off about 1,500 feet in the air
instead of closer to the ground was that
they wanted only the blasting effect
and were afraid of the possible radio-
active effect. If it exploded high in the
air, most of the radioactive particles
would be carried miles high and dis-
persed. If it went off too low down, it
might spread over the area so much
radioactive energy that the land would
not again support even plant life, to
say nothing of animal life. No one yet
knows. To find out is one of the great
tasks with which this Commission is to
be charged. That is why we want the
greatest scientists and statesmen on it.
We want to know the possible uses of
atomic energy in military weapons, in
industry and commerce, and in medi-
cine. We also must make sure that
radioactive energy is not released in
such forms and quantities that the sur-
face of the earth returns to where it
was ages ago. One or the other of two
things would result, extermination of
all life or, in an intermediate stage,
drastic effects on germ cells of species
which have long been stable, so that
mutations would result, and the human
being as we know him be changed to a
biological sport, or a freak of some
sort, other than the freak he already is
at times.
I do not know whether I have been
able to make clear what I have in mind
and my great concern lest we bungle
the handling of this great power with
truly cataclysmic results. This is the
only reason I would consider giving
any commission such monopolistic
power. It is the chief reason in my
own mind which requires that we set
up this Commission for controlling the
development of atomic energy for ci-
vilian use as well as for military use.
Several Members have said they
want to have everything under mili-
tary control. Others have said they
do not want to have anything under
military control. I do not think either
of those extreme positions is tenable.
This force has enormous significance
for our industry and our economy. It
has terrible implications for civilian
life, as well as for military security.
We have to deal with both of them in a
reasonable sort of balance. I do not
see any better way to handle this titanic
power than to put it under the control
of a commission of truly great men who
will have available the knowledge and
services both of the military and of the
civilian scientists who are acutely
aware of all the dangers I have men-
tioned and more. They developed this
process; they have lived with it day
and night for years; they see far-
reaching implications which we in our
debate as to what the Bikini explosion
means to the future of our Navy do not
adequately appreciate. I do not know
any safer hands in which to place it.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
two words. What the gentleman from
Minnesota, himself an eminent physi-
cian, just said only underlines the im-
portance for the time being and until
people know something about what
atomic energy is and will do, and until
such time as nations have grown up
sufficiently in their international rela-
tionships to control it; what the gentle-
man has said only underlines the
necessity of effective controls over this
thing during the period that lies imme-
diately ahead.
Mr. JUDD. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I yield
gladly.
Mr. JUDD. This is the only possible
justification, if there is an adequate
justification, for the patent provisions
of this bill.
[p. 9361]
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I
agree with the gentleman that it justi-
fies that section.
Mr. JUDD. Because if we knew
more about atomic energy, and if we
knew what the effect would be on hu-
man lives as well as in war, we could
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
155
not have section 11. I am not sure that
we can have it even so. But this is
the only justification until we do know
more of what the ultimate significance
is and we dare not allow anybody at
their own will to begin experimenting
out in their own backyards. Our very
existence does not permit us to allow it.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I
agree with the gentleman. I think
there is another reason for the patent
provisions. At least, it will prevent the
private monopolization of a thing so
fundamental and so revolutionary as
atomic energy. I believe that would be
wrong—morally wrong and economi-
cally wrong. I am not talking about
applications of atomic energy, but I am
talking about the patent on fissionable
material itself, on the very energy iself.
I want to make this first point, that
the bill does provide, and I quote: "That
the Commission is authorized and di-
rected to purchase, take, requisition,
condemn, or otherwise acquire, supplies
of source materials or any interest in
real property containing deposits of
source materials to the extent it deems
necessary to effectuate the provisions
of this act."
It will give the possibility of control
over sporadic, dangerous uses of atomic
energy, just as the gentleman from
California suggested a while ago.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I
yield.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. As-
suming that that control were desir-
able, if it could be obtained, how does
the gentleman propose to establish con-
trol in Argentina, in Spain, or in Rus-
sia, or in any other part of the world
other than the United States?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. That
is precisely what we are attempting to
do through the Baruch proposals. Fur-
ther answering the gentleman, the gen-
tleman makes the point that he did not
want us to block our own development
while other nations had not agreed to
any type of international control. I am
in full accord with that. I would not
be in support of this bill if it were not
for the fact that all of the testimony of
every reputable scientist that I know
of is to the effect that under the terms
of this bill atomic-energy development
will be encouraged in the scientific field
where it is all important. That testi-
mony has been given over and over
again. It is true that that development
is safeguarded in certain respects. It
is true there are controls more far-
reaching than the Congress would au-
thorize under any other circumstances.
Those who seem to feel that atomic
energy is comparable to natural gas or
firecrackers will find it hard, naturally,
to understand. But those who have at
least an inkling1 of what this energy is
will know why it is necessary that there
be control of private development and
regulation of the possibility of anyone
going out and dealing with fissionable
material as he sees fit. I personally
think such control absolutely essential
for the time being if the national inter-
ests are to be effectively protected, but
I am convinced that the passage of this
bill will make much more possible than
it is today the continuance of atomic-
energy development in the United
States and that it provides the only
way that can be done. May I say fur-
ther, it disturbs me very much to find
some people who are concerned about
the preservation of what they term the
secret of the atomic bomb, arguing in
the next breath that atomic energy it-
self should be patentable under which
circumstances the patented devices and
the patented processes have to be made
a matter of public record in the Patent
Office. It does not seem to me that
those two things possibly can be fitted
together. I think this bill goes as well
as it can down the middle of the road,
providing for the kind of control that
is necessary under existing circum-
stances and on the other hand, assuring
provision for the continuance of scien-
tific development.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
-------
156
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I
yield.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Does
not the gentleman feel that the agree-
ment for international control should
precede our handcuffing of our own
research and development?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I do
not think we are handcuffing our own
research and development. I think that
it is severely crippled for the want of
legislation precisely like this. Most of
our scientists have left the project. I
believe they will return if this bill is
passed. Obviously, it is most important
that they do so. I believe further that
American leadership in working for in-
ternational control now is most impor-
tant. Indeed, it is the only leadership
there can be. I think it necessary that
this Congress rise to a plane of vision
where it can see that our country, after
all, is the sole possessor of this thing
and has the responsibility and opportu-
nity of leadership for the possibility of
peace, and unless the structure of peace
is built there can, as other speakers
have said, be no safety for anyone, any-
where. It seems clear to me that ad-
equate domestic control must precede,
not follow, international control.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California [Mr. VOOK-
His] has expired.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts.
Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the
last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to ask the gen-
tleman from Minnesota, Dr. JUDD, a
question, if he will answer it, as he has
had experience with overradiation. I
would like to ask the gentleman if he
does not feel that it is important to keep
the Army, at least in a measure, in con-
trol for the time being. It seems to me
the Army did an amazing job in pro-
tecting human beings during the Man-
hattan project. I would like to have
that protection continued; also, the
military forces are responsible for the
security and protection of America.
They are the ones who follow con-
stantly the danger to our country.
Mr. JUDD. I think it has done a
magnificent job in protecting all those
who were working on that project. As
you know, there was a great corps of
physicians meticulously checking every
process in the whole project. On the
other hand, we cannot sit down and say
that because we have achieved this
high stage of development in atomic
energy nobody else has caught up or
will catch up with us. We ought to
move ahead, and we are going to move
ahead, in its development for civilian
use, as well as military.
The two should be integrated and
carried on together. The bill protects
the military aspects, but does not keep
it solely under the military. It will en-
able those working with it for civilian
purposes to have the benefit of the
knowledge and experience gained in
the Manhattan project. It was civilian
scientists who were responsible for
most of this excellent protective work
done by the military. I believe the mili-
tary need to have their share in the
work and the civilians have their share.
I think on the whole the bill achieves
that general integration and balance.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts.
But who would have the last word?
Mr. JUDD. The last word would be
with the military of course.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts.
But not in this bill, as I understand it.
Mr. JUDD. Yes, it can go to the
President. The Military Liaison Com-
mittee, which has access to all the in-
formation, can always appeal to the
President, if it is not satisfied.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. I
am very much afraid, if the military
does not have control, that the Presi-
dent will side with civilians. It may be
hard for the military to place the se-
curity angle before him. It will give
enormous power to any civilian board—
power for evil as well as power for
good. I am very much afraid of it.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentlewoman yield.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. I
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
157
am glad to yield. I am seeking infor-
mation.
Mr. MAY. I wanted the lady to
yield to me that I might ask the gen-
tleman from Minnesota, Dr. JUDD, a
question.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. I
yield.
Mr. MAY. The gentleman from Min-
nesota made the statement in his most
excellent address that there ought to be
reasonable balance of control between
the civilian and military aspects of the
problem. May I ask the gentleman if
the provision which the House commit-
tee wrote into the bill providing for
some sort of military control, would be
a reasonable balance on that subject,
with the provision for letting it out to
laboratories and so forth?
Mr. JUDD. Yes. I also think it is
adequately taken care of in the original
McMahon bill. I expect to vote to
strike out the committee amendment.
[p. 9362]
On the other hand, if it stays in I do not
think it makes any great difference.
All members of the Commission will
be serving first of all as Americans and
I cannot believe that any damage would
be done by having one or two members
of the military forces on this Commis-
sion. On the other hand, I cannot be-
lieve any damage would be done by
having them all civilians with the Mili-
tary Liaison Committee also on the job.
I do not think that is the really great
consideration here, although it has been
made the chief bone of contention. I
think the great consideration is to see
that we begin to get progress in an in-
tegrated, balanced way between the
military and civilian uses of atomic
energy.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. I
wish to say that I have always found
the Army and Navy extremely anxious
to allow civilians to get the advantage
of any of their developments. Recently
in the matter of prosthetic appliances,
Secretary of War Patterson has done a
magnificent job in connection with civil-
ians who are working with artificial
arms and legs. In 2 years some of the
experimental prosthetic appliances I
hope will be perfected. That is one of
the reasons why I am so anxious to
have automobiles for the amputees to
allow those veterans a couple of years
in which they may get about before ar-
tificial legs are perfected. That is just
one instance—and there are thousands
of others—where the Army and Navy
were very anxious to cooperate with
civilians. They have given Army and
Navy orders to many civilian firms,
and have sponsored great inventions in
such things as radar, robots, and so
forth. I, for one, am duly grateful to
the Army and Navy for their scientific
work.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentlewoman from Massachusetts has
expired.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent to proceed for one additional min-
ute.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentlewoman
from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. I
should like also to ask the members of
the Military Affairs Committee if there
has been anything in connection with
the United Nations organization that
would set up a commission that would
handle the exchange of military secrets
among the nations? I think it is a
very pertinent question. Why should
we do it in the matter of this and not
all other military secrets?
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. I
am very glad to yield, for I want all
the information I can get.
Mrs. LUCE. Anyone who has fol-
lowed carefully the Baruch proposals
and the comments in the press by ex-
perts in that field realizes that there
will be set up in the UN a framework
for the control of all forms of heavy
armaments and weapons, including the
-------
158
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
atomic bomb, which in effect does mean
that if that control works, all of our
military secrets will probably be
shared; and as further proof of that
you will find in the Lilienthal report or
rather the Acheson report on the
atomic bomb that such is the intention
of the authorities.
Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts.
Again I say apparently the so-called
friendly nations will be given all our
secrets. Truly this measure is starting
an endless giving to other countries of
our resources besides our loans and
gifts of money. We shall be an im-
poverished Nation.
The following is the letter from Col.
Robert S. Allen who has done such
dynamic work in prosthetic-appliance
development. The amputees in the
service and civilian amputees owe him
much. He is the chairman of the ad-
visory board of the Prosthetic Appli-
ance Service under Assistant Direc-
tor of the Veterans' Administration,
Walter Bura. Both the gentleman
from Pennsylvania and I are members
of that board.
WASHINGTON, B.C., July 15, 1946.
My DEAR MBS. ROGERS: Through the kind-
ness of Judge Patterson, Secretary of War, I
had the opportunity to attend the July meeting
of the Committee on Prosthetic Devices. The
meeting consisted of two sessions, a symposium
in San Fiancisco and a visit to the Northrop
prosthesis laboratory in Los Angeles. This
letter is a brief report on my observations.
I was tremendously thrilled and inspired by
what I saw and heard. At the San Francisco
symposium I saw the artificial arm developed
by Northrop, which unquestionably is the best
device of its kind in existence today. It weighs
about 2 pounds, with the hook, has an auto-
matic elbow-locking mechanism, and is a great
advance over existing artificial arms. It is
already being distributed to Army amputees,
and a project has been initiated under which
the United Drug Co. will undertake the market-
ing of these devices at cost to all arm amputees,
civilian as well as military. Northrop also has
begun work on a mechanical hand to replace the
unsightly hook. This is still in the early stages,
but on the basis of the outstanding results
already achieved by the company, I am sure
that in the not-too-distant future they will pro-
duce an efficient and practical artificial hand.
Northrop also has developed an artificial leg
with a suction mechanism. This mechanism is
a German device. The Germans have been
using a suction leg for some 10 years. Northrop
is now applying it to American climatic condi-
tions and, on the basis of its preliminary experi-
ments, is confident that it can produce a work-
able suction leg in a relatively short time. The
advantages of such a prosthesis are obvious. It
would eliminate the cumbersome and trying
harness now necessary and be a great boon to
the leg amputee.
In addition, several other concerns, working
under contracts from the committee, have made
consideiable progress in developing a self-
locking knee. Northrop has a device of this
kind already in use by test pilots with very good
results. There is no reason why in the next 12
months these projects should not develop a re-
liable and practical self-locking knee. This
device combined with the suction mechanism.
should give the leg amputee an artificial limb
that would be a tremendous advance on any-
thing now in existence.
The most exciting and stirring demonstra-
tion at the meeting was an electrical arm pro-
duced by International Business Machines
Corp, This was only a mock-up model; ac-
tually, only a few days old. That is, it was
completed only a few days before the meeting.
It is still only a promise. But it is a tangible
promise that bears every hope of full lealization
in a matter of a year or so.
The basic essentials of this device, the motor
and batteries, are available. The problem now
is merely of developing the prosthesis to the
point where it is durable and can be produced
in quantity at a reasonable cost. The model
weighed about 4 pounds and the engineers were
confident that they could bring this down to 3
pounds. The whole mechanism is revolutionary
in design and operation. Instead of hanging
on the stump, it rests on a cradle that extends
from a belt around the waist. This not only
eliminates the onerous feature of dead weight
hanging from a stump, but also gives the
wearer complete freedom of shoulder movement.
The committee also has a number of studies
under way. One of the basic motions of the leg
by the University of California, and another by
UCLA on the arm and hand. These studies
already have been extremely useful to the con-
tractors and I am sure will be increasingly so
as they develop new facts and data.
All in all, as I said, I was tremendously in-
spired and heartened by what I saw and learned.
I have every confidence that if this research and
development work is continued without hitch
for another year or so that truly modern and
scientific prostheses will be evolved. The im-
portant thing now is continuity; that is, to in-
sure that the work of the committee is continued
without hitch or impairment. That is the crux
of the whole situation and that is the thing on
which everyone interested in this field must
concentrate at this time. I have made a few
recommendations to Judge Patterson toward
this end and I have every belief that these sug-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
159
gestions will be instituted. They call for no
radical departures but aie implementations
which members of the committee feel would
greatly assist their woik.
With warmest personal regards
Sincerely,
ROBERT S. ALLEN.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentlewoman from Massachusetts has
expired.
Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
three words.
Mr. Chairman, I am not a scientist
nor do I claim to be one. We are being
advised today, however, by a good many
individuals and groups who are not
scientists but who claim to know all
about atomic energy and demand from
us that we should pass certain legisla-
tion on the subject. They know very
little about it, probably less than we do
who are seeking the true and the best
solution to handle atomic energy for the
general good. As I see it, the thing
that should come first with all of us is
the question of the security for our
country.
Up to about 2 weeks ago I thought
that I would support the McMahon bill.
It seemed to me that was a good meas-
ure and that to turn control of atomic
energy over to a civilian commission
might be the best plan, but after hear-
ing the debate and talking with mem-
bers of the Military Affairs Committee
and also talking to certain members of
the FBI, I have come to the conclusion
that it might be better for the safety
of our country to delay action on the
pending bill until matters among the
allied countries reach a more satisfac-
tory conclusion.
[p. 9363]
We are given some information from
behind the iron curtain as to what is
going on and we know that the world
situation in our effort to secure peace is
not progressing satisfactorily. We also
learn that there are thousands of for-
eign agents running loose throughout
the United States who are working to
get all the secret information they can
on the atomic bomb so they can pass it
back to their respective countries. I
doubt very much if our agents are hav-
ing the same freedom in some of the
Allied countries as we are giving for-
eign agents sent over here to the
United States. I am not naming any
countries. You may draw your own
conclusions.
Mr. Chairman, I do not see any par-
ticular harm in delaying action on this
legislation for 3 or 4 months or until a
peace treaty is written. We have been
running along from the beginning of
time—I do not know how long it is,
whether it is 9,000 years or 100,000,000
years—without any knowledge on
atomic energy. Now, what harm can
there be if we wait 3, 4, or 5 months
until there is a peace conference to de-
termine whether or not the nations of
the world can work together on a peace-
ful basis before we go into this matter
of turning deadly secrets over to any
group? The larger the group the eas-
ier it will be to divulge the secrets to
some of these organizations or coun-
tries that are so anxious today to get
hold of them.
I have a high regard for scientists.
There are many good Americans among
them, probably all of them are good, pa-
triotic Americans that will be on the
commission, but I also know some scien-
tists in our country, in the United
States, who are as red as you can make
them. If they were to get any informa-
tion about atomic energy, I know that it
would go outside the United States just
as quickly as they could hand it to some
agent who would be willing to pass it
along.
When conditions become settled in
the world, especially between the Big
Three nations, we can begin talking
about sharing our atomic secrets with
scientists, and until that time occurs, I
strongly believe that it will be in the
interest of our national security to
leave matters as they now stand. A
few months delay in turning the han-
dling of the secrets of atomic energy
-------
160
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
over to a civilian commission, will not
retard human progress.
Speaking for myself, I am unalter-
ably opposed to sharing the secrets of
the atomic bomb with Russia or any
other country. The safety and future
security of the world will depend upon
our retention of this destructive force
and the know-how to produce it. I do
not believe it will be in the interest of
peace for us to make the secret avail-
able to any country.
I may support the McMahon bill for
the control of atomic energy, when con-
ditions become more settled in the
world, but for the time being, I suggest
that no legislation be considered until
after the peace conference.
The CHAIEMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Minnesota has expired.
Mr. HERTER. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last seven words.
Mr. Chairman, throughout this whole
debate all those who have spoken have
admitted very freely and very frankly
that they were confused, that they were
not in full possession of the so-called
secrets that all of us feel should be
zealously guarded in this country, and
that because of this confusion and un-
certainty, and in many cases a very
real fear that the secret will be di-
vulged to those who might use it badly,
they argue that all legislation ought to
be postponed. I cannot agree with
that point of view. I have not any
more information than any other Mem-
ber of this House, but when reaching a
final judgment on this subject it seems
to me we ought to give some considera-
tion as to where this legislation orig-
inated, and who the individuals are who
feel it is desirable that we pass this
type of legislation.
The individual principally involved
in the drafting of the original May-
Johnson bill was Mr. George Harrison,
president of the New York Life Insur-
ance Co., formerly president of the Fed-
eral Reserve Bank of New York, who
worked for 2 years as personal assist-
ant to Secretary Stimson and sat as
Mr. Stimson's alternate delegate on the
Board that recommended this legisla-
tion. He was representing a hard-
headed, practical point of view as to
why the control over this newly found
power should be put into the hands of
a civilian commission. Working with
him were the two men who did more to
develop the scientific coordination that
made possible the building of the bomb
than any two others, namely, President
Conant, of Harvard University, and
President Compton, of the Massachu-
setts Institute of Technology, both of
them very distinguished scientists in
their own right.
The recommendations of those gen-
tlemen, which led to this legislation
that we have before us, were, as I said,
based on the fundamental thesis that
we are now embarking on an era of
scientific rivalry where all nations are
trying to get ahead in this particular
matter. Testimony has been given that
the development of the bomb did not
come from a single new scientific dis-
covery ; that everything scientific about
it was known before the war period;
that the development of the bomb came
entirely through the development of
technological processes for putting that
scientific information into effective use.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HERTER. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. I
thank the gentleman for that state-
ment. That is exactly the idea that
General Groves expressed to us at the
very first hearing on the May-Johnson
bill, only he elaborated on it a little
more. But it is the same idea that the
gentleman expresses here.
Mr. HERTER. There is no question
in my mind about it that if we are
really interested in the security of this
country we have to do everything that
we can to encourage our scientific peo-
ple to devote their energy toward see-
ing what further progress can be made
in this particular field until satisfac-
tory international controls have been
developed. To my mind, to delay, or
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
161
not to enact any legislation—and I am
not worrying too much about any
amendments to be offered; I am merely
speaking of some form of legislation—
at this moment, is playing with our
security rather than enhancing our
security.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HERTER. I yield to the gentle-
man from South Dakota.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. In
what way does this bill offer induce-
ments for private research or scientific
research that would not exist without
this bill?
Mr. HERTER. It does this: this
particular Commission will have con-
trol through license of all fissionable
materials, but at the present time, un-
der War Department controls, General
Groves, or whoever the responsible
official may be, cannot divulge any-
thing that he has got, nor can he allow
the scientists of the country to use fis-
sionable material to experiment with.
Today the War Department, under
existing regulations, is extremely tight.
But the minute the war is over, from
the point of view of the realistic situa-
tion that we are up against here, the
controls that the War Department has
over this thing disappear like that, and
you have an absolutely free field in this
country which is not covered by any
peacetime legislation.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Massachusetts has ex-
pired.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Mr.
Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the gentleman be permitted to pro-
ceed for one additional minute.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from New Jersey?
There wyas no objection.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. The
gentleman said that the War Depart-
ment at the present time—he mentioned
General Groves—did not have any right
to permit any experimentation and give
out any secrets. The gentleman is
absolutely wrong about that. At the
present time industrial experiments
are being made, and much of that in-
formation has been given out.
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HERTER. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ohio.
Mr. ELSTON. As a matter of fact,
the testimony before the Committee on
Appropriations given by General
Groves was to the effect that the War
Department is giving out whatever
may be needed by industry to develop
atomic energy for industrial purposes.
Mr. HERTER. That may be very
true. The War Department at the mo-
ment, under war powers, has control of
this situation. The minute those war
powers are over, that control is gone.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, if the gentleman will yield
further, what would be wrong with
such a situation? I am asking for in-
formation. Is that not a situation that
is going to obtain in every other coun-
try? Is there any control or restriction
[p. 9364]
upon the use of atomic energy in other
countries? Or at least any that we can
dictate?
Mr. HERTER. There is absolutely
no control that I know of.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Why
should we have restriction in this coun-
try when it does not exist in other
countries?
Mr. HERTER. I feel that this is an
orderly expansion of research.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HERTER. I yield to the gentle-
woman from Connecticut.
Mrs. LUCE. I think perhaps the
gentleman excepts totalitarian coun-
tries when he says there is no control
of research in other countries.
Mr, HERTER. I meant to say no re-
striction of research in other countries.
I think certainly every country is doing
everything it can to encourage its scien-
tists to work as hard and as fast as
-------
162
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
they can in this particular field; in
fact, they are making very large grants
of money in every country, I think, for
the development of this field.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I cer-
tainly would agree with the gentleman
that the War Department should not
have permanent control. I do not be-
lieve in that. However, we ought not
to handicap ourselves when other na-
tions do not.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that all debate on
pro forma amendments to section 1 do
now close, and that bona fide amend-
ments to the section be reported for
discussion.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Kentucky?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from California [Mr. JOHN-
SON].
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. FULTON: On
page 1, line 4, after "Section 1. (a) Findings
and declaration", strike out the remainder of
paragraph (a) and insert: "It is hereby de-
clared to be the policy of the people of the
United States that the development and utili-
zation of atomic energy shall be directed toward
the public welfare and increasing the standard
of living of all peoples, and for the promotion
of world peace, including assuring the common
defense, security, and protection of all peace-
loving nations."
Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, this
amendment is to make a restatement of
the declaration of policy found at the
beginning of the bill. If you look at
the declaration of policy as we now
have stated in the bill you will find
that it is nothing but pious platitude.
Read it with me:
Research and experimentation in the field
of nuclear chain reaction have attained the
stage at which the release of atomic energy on
a large scale is practicable.
It would take a fool not to know that
is true.
The significance of the atomic bomb for
military purposes is evident.
If it is evident, why do we say it? To
me, legislation should be passed for a
particular purpose with a policy defi-
nitely stated. We should not in legis-
lation keep repeating things that are
self-evident and are mere drapings.
I read further:
The effect of the use of atomic energy for
civilian purposes upon the social, economic, and
political structures of today cannot now be
determined.
Of course that is true. If we need
anybody to tell us that it surely ought
not to be in a measure cluttered up
with things like that.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FULTON. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Does
the gentleman realize that the Commit-
tee of the Whole voted just a few min-
utes ago to retain that language in the
bill and turned down the amendment
I offered to strike it out?
Mr. FULTON. I am putting some-
thing else in its place.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. I
wanted to put something else in its
place. Let me tell the gentleman what
happened.
Mr. FULTON. I realize what hap-
pened, but the question is, should this
be substituted when the gentleman's
language was not accepted?
Mr. JOHNSON of California. I will
vote for the gentleman's amendment. I
think it is all right.
Mr. FULTON. I thank the gentle-
man. [Reading further:]
This is a field in which unknown factors are
involved.
I agree with what the gentlewoman
from Connecticut [Mrs. LUCE] said yes-
terday, that there are unknown factors
in everything. Important legislation
will necessarily be subject to revision
from time to time. I have yet to see
any legislation in this House, even the
Constitution of the United States, that
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
163
would not be subject to revision from
time to time. Then the declaration of
policy says it is reasonable to antic-
ipate, however, that adopting this new
source of energy will cause definite
changes in our present way of life.
Our life is full of changes and, of
course, that is to be understood. But
why put it in here and clutter up the
bill? Now, what we should do, of
course, is to assure the people of the
world and the people of this country
that we are going to use atomic energy
for the public welfare, not only of our-
selves, but of all peoples, and also to
increase the standards of living of our-
selves and of all peoples. We should
put that first. Then we should say we
want it for the promotion of world
peace and we want it for security and
protection. But we should say that
we want it not only for ourselves but
for all peace-loving nations. That
does not mean that we will let foreign
nations have the secrets at this time,
but it certainly says what our aims are
and states them specifically, shortly,
and directly.
Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield ?
Mr. FULTON. I yield to the distin-
guished gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. DONDERO. The gentleman
mentions world peace. Do you think
we should share the secrets of this
bomb if the peace conference which will
convene in Paris on the 29th of this
month fails because of the veto power
of one or more of our allies, as it has
failed up to the present time?
Mr. PULTON. I agree with the in-
tent of the question and with the pre-
sumption made by the gentleman from
Michigan that we should not share it.
But because we have this stewardship
and trusteeship, we should let the peo-
ple of the world know that in the pro-
tections that we are throwing around
the development of atomic energy and
the secrets of atomic energy we will see
that it is done for the good of the world.
I hope we will do just contrary to
what some other countries might want
to do, who would keep it selfishly for
themselves and then use it, not for the
good of the people in raising the stand-
ards of living for the people, but for
aims that they might call protection
but which really were for purposes of
aggression.
Mr. DONDERO. I think the whole
world knows now that the secret of this
bomb is in the hands of a government
that does not think it is necessary for
the whole world to adopt our form of
government in order to insure world
peace.
Mr. FULTON. I think the gentle-
man's remarks are very much to the
point and agree with them. May I then
ask the chairman of the Committee on
Military Affairs two questions?
On page 3 is found this language
which my Harvard training will not
permit me to read and make any sense
out of. The language is as follows:
A program of federally conducted research
and development to assure the Government
(with a capital "g") of adequate scientific and
technical accomplishment.
Is the word "Government" there used
in the sense of the Federal Govern-
ment, or is the word "Government"
used to mean the control of accomplish-
ment?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania has ex-
pired.
Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for three
additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objec-
tion, it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
Mr. MAY. I might answer the gen-
tleman's question, although I am not a
Harvard man, by saying that I would
understand from the language in line
13 on page 2 that it is the purpose of
the act to effectuate the policies set out
in section 1 (a), which is the preceding
section, which provides, among other
things, for the following major pro-
grams relating to atomic energy. Then
when you go to subsection (3) it would
be a program of federally conducted
-------
164
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
research. That means the Government
would carry on the program of scien-
tific research and development to assure
[p. 9365]
the Government of adequate scientific
and technical accomplishment.
Mr. FULTON. Do you mean to as-
sure the Government adequate scien-
tific and technical accomplishment, or
do you mean to assure the Government
—meaning "control"—of adequate sci-
entific and technical accomplishment?
If you mean the Federal Government,
you have to strike out the word "of."
Mr. MAY. All it does is to assure a
program of federally conducted re-
search and development. That is all.
Mr. FULTON. Then may I recom-
mend that the conferees, when they
meet, change that section (3) to read:
"to assure the Federal Government"
and strike out the word "of." The
word "of" does not fit there according
to the meaning that you have given.
Subsection (5) on page 3 refers to a
program of administration which will
be consistent with the foregoing pol-
icies "and international arrangement
made by the United States." I ask the
chairman of the Military Affairs Com-
mittee whether any arrangements al-
ready have been made internationally,
by the United States. Have there been
any international arrangements al-
ready made by the United States in
respect to atomic energy? In this act
the committee seems to assume that
there have been.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. FULTON. Yes.
Mr. MAY. This bill by a subsequent
provision provides adequate facilities
and plans, under licensed systems of
authority, to research laboratories, in-
dustries, colleges, and universities.
This is merely a statement of federally
conducted experiments through this
Commission. The Commission will de-
termine who is licensed and under what
conditions.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
FULTON] has again expired.
Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for two
additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. FULTON. But you say, "inter-
national arrangements made," not to be
made, which infers they already have
been made by the United States. That
is international agreements with re-
spect to atomic energy. Why do you
use the statement, "made"? If they
are to be made, let us say it, but if they
are already made, then I ask you,
what are those international arrange-
ments already made in respect to
atomic energy, by the United States?
Are there any? Let me hear directly.
Mr. MAY. Let me call the gentle-
man's attention to section 8:
As used in this act, the term "international
anangement" shall mean any treaty approved
by the Senate or international agreements
hereafter approved by the Congress during the
time such treaty or agreement is in full force
and effect.
That is the answer.
Mr. FULTON. May I state to the
chairman of the Military Affairs Com-
mittee, as a practicing attorney, that is
what the definition would be if the act
were passed. The act is not now in
effect. So I again ask the chairman of
the Military Affairs Committee, Are
there any international agreements in
respect to atomic matters that are now
in existence? I would appreciate a yes
or no answer.
Mr. MAY. Well, you are not going
to get a yes or no answer out of me, be-
causa I am not on the witness stand to
be cross-examined. In the second place,
this bill provides what the Commission
may or may not do. It does not make it
mandatory.
Mr. FULTON. May I then request,
whom shall I ask to find out as to the
possible existence of these international
atomic agreements?
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
165
Mr. MAY. I suggest to the gentle-
man that he study the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania has
again expired.
Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for three
additional minutes to answer the ques-
tions of several Members now on their
feet.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Pennsylvania?
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
object.
Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in opposition to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Michigan is recognized for 5 min-
utes.
Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Chairman, the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
FULTON] asked the chairman of the
Military Affairs Committee if there
had been any international agreements
entered into in connection with the
atomic energy. Apparently there have
been. If my understanding is correct,
we have agreements with Great Britain
and Canada. Is that not true?
Mr. MAY. That is my understand-
ing, but I do not know what they are.
Mr. SHAFER. Everyone seems to
be greatly interested in what we are
going to do with the atomic bomb. I
hold in my hand a message from Mr.
Ernest Adamson, chief counsel of the
Un-American Activities Committee,
and I think it should be read at this
point in the debate. The message,
written today, reads:
I have just learned through the State De-
partment channels that an Intel national Scien-
tists Conference will be held in Palis during the
month of September to discuss contiol of the
atom bomb. The head of the conference is one
Joliot-Curie, an active member of the French
Communist Party. A laige tfioup of dele#at?s
from the United States is expected to attend.
Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN.
Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. SHAFER. I yield.
Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN.
Does the gentleman have any suspi-
cions that there might be some secret
agreement which was made over in
Potsdam or some other place?
Mr. SHAFER. I do not know
whether there are secret agreements.
I have my own opinions, but I do not
care to state them here.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SHAFER. I yield.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Is
this a conference of private individuals
or an official government conference?
Mr. SHAFER. It is called an Inter-
national Conference of Scientists. I do
not know whether it is a government
conference; it is an international con-
ference.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. SHAFER. I yield.
Mr. BROOKS. The gentleman
knows that while this matter was under
consideration by the House Military
Affairs Committee we made special in-
quiries of the State Department as to
whether or not there were any secret
agreements affecting the atomic bomb
that had not been published in any re-
spect and we received definite and posi-
tive word without qualification to the
effect that there was nothing affecting
this legislation that had not been com-
pletely published and publicized. Is
that correct?
Mr. SHAFER. That is what we
were told.
Mr. BARDEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. SHAFER. I yield.
Mr. BARDEN. That leaves me
somewhat at a loss to understand why
the chairman of the committee would
say he does not know what they are.
Mr. SHAFER. That is the reason
why I called attention to the fact that
we do have agreements with Great
Britain and Canada.
Mr. BROOKS. The chairman had
those in mind when he referred to
agreements.
-------
166
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. BARDEN. Possibly the gentle-
man from Louisiana would know the
contents of those agreements.
Mr. SHAFER. I will yield for him
to tell us.
Mr. BROOKS. I have just told the
gentleman that the State Department
stated that there was no secret agree-
ment on the subject. As to whether or
not another agreement covers the sub-
ject, the gentleman is aware of what
has been published in the daily press
just as W3ll as I, and I presume he has
read them as carefully as I did.
Mr. BARDEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield further?
Mr. SHAFER. I yield.
Mr. BARDEN. Would the gentle-
man mind giving us the benefit of the
contents of the agreements that are in
existence with Great Britain and
Canada?
Mr. BROOKS. No. I can tell the
gentleman that if he had read what has
been published, he would know just as
well as I do. I understood there was
some sort of understanding between
Canada and us because we did obtain
[p. 9366]
the original materials from Canada,
but there is nothing secret at all. It
was called to our attention at the time.
Mr. RICH. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. SHAFER. I yield.
Mr. RICH. Does not the gentleman
believe that the House should know
something about these agreements and
promises that are being made with
these foreign countries before we turn
loose what is probably the most de-
structive force that the world has ever
known?
Mr. SHAFER. If there are any
agreements or promises, I think it is
highly important to find out all about
them.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. FUL-
TON].
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. FULTON)
there were—ayes 5, noes 42.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, a parlia-
mentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. MAY. Are there further amend-
ments pending at the desk with refer-
ence to section 1?
The CHAIRMAN. There are not.
Mr. MAY. Then I ask unanimous
consent that all debate on this section
and all amendments thereto do now
close.
[p. 9367]
The Clerk read as follows:
RESEARCH
SEC. 3. (a) Rcseaich assistance: The Com-
mission is directed to exercise its powers in
such manner as to insuie the continued conduct
of research and development activities in the
fields specified below by private or public insti-
tutions or persons and to assist in the acquisi-
tion of an ever-expending fund of theoretical
and practical knowledge in such fields. To this
end the Commission is authorized and directed to
make airangements (including contracts, agree-
ments, grants-in-aid, and loans) for the conduct
of research and development activities relating
to—
{1) nuclear processes:
(2) the theory and production of atomic
energy, including processes, materials, and
devices related to such production;
(3) utilization of fissionable and radioactive
materials for medical, biological, health, or mili-
tary purposes:
(4) utilization of fissionable and radioactive
materials and processes entailed in the produc-
tion of such materials for all other purposes,
including industrial uses; and
(5) the protection of health during research
and production activities.
The Commission may make such arrange-
ments without regard to the provisions of sec-
tion 3709 of the Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title
41, sec. 5) upon certification by the Commission
that such action is necessary in the interest of
the common defense and security, or upon a
showing that advertising is not reasonably prac-
ticable, and may make partial and advance pay-
ments under such arrangements, and may make
available for use in connection therewith such
of its equipment and facilities as it may deem
desirable. Such arrangements shall contain
such provisions to protect health, to minimize
danger from explosion and other hazards to life
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
167
or property, and to require the reporting and to
permit the inspection of work performed there-
under, as the Commission may determine; but
shall not contain any provisions or conditions
which prevent the dissemination of scientific
or technical information, except to the extent
such dissemination is prohibited by law.
(b) Research by the Commission: The Com-
mission is authorized and directed to conduct,
through its own facilities, activities and stuH.es
of the types specified in subsection (a) above.
Mr. CLASON. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. CLASON: On
page 11, line 2, after the period on line 2,
insert "The armed services, as well as piivate
individuals, shall be permitted to engage in
independent militaiy research and to enter into
research and development contracts with non-
governmental organizations provided that all
such contracts ale made subject to the provi-
sions of this bill."
Mr. CLASON. Mr. Chairman, this
amendment is taken from the words in
the report of the Senate committee
which are set forth on page 58. The
amendment is based upon the statement
of Mr. Kenney, the Assistant Secretary
of the Navy. In his testimony before
our committee he pointed out that the
Navy is in a unique position; that the
Navy is the greatest user of power and
the largest power engineering organ-
ization in the world, which gives it an
interest in the development and appli-
cation of atomic energy for power uses.
Then he goes on to say that these
ships have to carry fuel, and if they can
use atomic energy it will mean much
to them. He pointed out also that there
are two propositions which, in connec-
tion with this bill, have given the Navy
great concern. The first of them has
to do with whether or not the armed
services would be adequately taken care
of on the Atomic Energy Commission.
I believe that adequate protection for
the Navy's interests will be furnished
by any commission which is appointed.
The second proposition is whether
the armed services will be free to con-
tinue its energetic program of research
and development in the field of atomic
energy. In connection with that pro-
gram he pointed out that the Navy De-
partment is at the present time en-
gaged in a very large research and
development activity. They have con-
tracts with outside private firms and
they wish to carry them on. Their
point is that unless an amendment is
offered in this bill the Navy must rely
upon an interpretation of the provi-
sions in this bill made in the report
of the Senate committee to carry
on these contracts and this research
development.
Unfortunately the House committee
in its report on page 8, section 3, re-
search, makes no mention whatsoever
as to the right of the armed services,
either the Army or the Navy, to carry
on their own development and research
work. Because of that there is no in-
terpretation by the House or its com-
mittee as to what the Army and the
Navy would be able to do.
In view of the position of the Navy
Department, Mr. Kenney stated that
the Navy Department is vitally inter-
ested in the development and use of
atomic energy for many purposes, par-
ticularly as a source of powTer in ship
propulsion. Plans are already under
way whereby an extended program of
research and development will be un-
dertaken in the near future in the field
of atomic power for use in ship pro-
pulsion.
The Navy's plans contemplate that
eventually such a program will be car-
ried out by projects placed with govern-
mental organizations, including naval
laboratories, and by means of contracts
with private educational institutions
and commercial organizations.
In view of the statement made by the
Assistant Secretary, Mr. Kenney, I feel
that the House ought to protect the
armed services in this regard. The
only purpose of this amendment is to
put in the bill words which will indicate
that the House agrees with the Senate,
that the proper interpretation of this
bill is that the armed services may go
ahead with the work which they have
already carried on with such outstand-
ing success during the war. In peace it
-------
168
LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
is going to mean much more to the
United States insofar as the Navy and
the Army are concerned if they can
continue the development and research
work which they have been heading up
over the last 5 years.
For that reason I have offered this
amendment, and unless it is in the bill,
as I see it, the Navy might be wiped
out by the absolute terms of this legis-
lation from continuing work on which
they have already expended millions of
dollars and upon which they have a
program which will also run into more
millions. I feel it is very important
that the Navy and the Army should be
allowed to carry on the work which
they have developed so well in the past.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Massachusetts [Mr.
CLASON].
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. MATHEWS. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. MATHEWS: On
page 9, line 16, stl'ike out "grants-in-aid."
Mr. MATHEWS. Mr. Chairman, the
purpose of this amendment is to pre-
vent the giving of a blank check of
unknown millions of the taxpayers' dol-
lars for unnamed purposes to an un-
formed body of men. This Commission
will be in a position of spending many
millions and billions of dollars, partic-
ularly in paying for patents and royal-
ties thereon, and for its own expenses
and salaries. I do not think we should
go so far as to give it a blank check in
the form of grants-in-aid. Therefore,
I think the amendment should be
adopted.
More important, however, I am of
the belief from talking to several Mem-
bers of this House that they and out-
[p. 9381]
siders in business and industry are
laboring under a misconception about
this bill. This misconception is simply
this. They are assuming that under
the provisions of this bill the necessity
for obtaining a license and the ability
to obtain that license will be simulta-
neous. That is not correct. The mo-
ment the President signs this bill, if it
is passed, all restrictions on ownership,
on export and import, on transfer, and
in every other respect will go into
effect. The requirements for the li-
censes will go into effect, but there will
be no place to get the licenses. That
creates the gap, the hiatus, of which I
spoke this morning, which will put the
whole industry in an uproar and con-
fusion.
A man using fissionable material or
facilities in his own industry for his
own business will go to his lawyer and
say, "Tell me what I can do under this
act without a license, or what I have to
have a license for." If his lawyer is
very, very smart he might be able to
tell him. If he tells him what he needs
a license for, the man may say, "Get
me a license." The lawyer will say, "I
cannot. The Commission is not formed,
it has no organization, it has no em-
ployees, it has no forms of application,
it has no personnel to make an inspec-
tion, and it has nobody to make a deci-
sion." That is the situation the
industry will be in if this bill is passed
and is then signed by the President.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MATHEWS. I yield to the gen-
tleman from South Dakota.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I hope
the gentleman's amendment will be
adopted, for the further reason that the
Commission is the judge of its own ex-
penditures. Under the language of the
bill on page 52, the General Accounting
Office will not have the usual account-
ing authority over the Commission.
The bill provides that—
The acts appropriating such sums may
appropriate specified portions thereof to "be
accounted for upon the certification of the
Commission only.
In other words, the Commission alone
will decide about these grants-in-aid,
and they cannot be restricted or ex-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
169
amined by the General Accounting
Office.
Mr. MATHEWS. That is right.
That is why it is a real blank check.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from New Jersey.
The question was taken; and on a di-
vision (demanded by Mr. MATHEWS)
there were—ayes 60, noes 55.
Mr. HINSHAW and Mr. BIEMILLER
demanded tellers.
Tellers were ordered, and the Chair-
man appointed as tellers Mr. MAY and
Mr. MATHEWS.
The Committee again divided, and
the tellers reported that there were—
ayes 79, noes 68.
So the amendment was agreed to.
The Clerk read as follows:
PRODUCTION OF FISSIONABLE MATERIAL
SEC. 4. (a) Definition: As used in this act,
the term "produce," when used in relation
to fissionable material, means to manufacture,
produce, or refine fissionable material, as dis-
tinguished from source materials as defined in
section 5 (b) (1), or to separate fissionable
material from other substances in which such
material may be contained or to produce new
fissionable material.
(b) Prohibition: It shall be unlawful for
any person to own any facilities for the pro-
duction of fissionable material or foi any person
to produce fissionable matei ial, except to the
extent authorized by subsection (c>.
(c) Ownership and opeiation of production
facilities:
(1) Ownership of production facilities: The
Commission shall be the exclusive owner of all
facilities for the production of fissionable ma-
terial othei than facilities which (A) are useful
in the conduct of research and development
activities in the fields specified in section 3,
and (B) do not, in the opinion of the Commis-
sion, have a potential production rate adequate
to enable the operator of such facilities to pio-
duce within a reasonable period of time a suffi-
cient quantity of fissionable material to produce
an atomic bomb or any other atomic weapon.
(2) Operation of the Commission's produc-
tion facilities: The Commission is authorized
and directed to produce or to provide for the
production of fissionable material in its own
facilities. To the extent deemed necessary, the
Commission is authorized to make, or to con-
tinue in effect, contracts with persons obligating
them to produce fissionable material in facilities
owned by the Commission. The Commission is
also authorized to enter into research and de-
velopment contracts authorizing the contractor
to produce fissionable material in facilities
owned by the Commission to the extent that the
pioduction of such fissionable material may be
incident to the conduct of lesearch and develop-
ment activities under such contracts. Any
contract enteied into under this section shall
contain provisions (A) prohibiting the con-
tractor with the Commission from subcontract-
ing any part of the work he is obligated to
perform under the contract, and (B) obligat-
ing the contractor to make such reports to the
Commission as it may deem appropriate with
respect to his activities under the contract, to
submit to frequent inspection by employees of
the Commission of all such activities, and to
comply with all safety and security regulations
which may be prescribed by the Commission.
Any contract made under the provisions of
this paragraph may be made without regard to
the provisions of section 3709 of the Revised
Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec. 5) upon cer-
tification by the Commission that such action
is necessary in the interest of the common
defense and security, or upon a showing that
advertising is not reasonably practicable, and
pai tial and advance payments may be made
under such contiacts. The President shall
determine at least once each year the quantities
of fissionable material to be produced under
this paragraph.
(3) Operation of other production facili-
ties: Fissionable material may be produced in
the conduct of research and development activi-
ties in facilities which, under paragraph (1)
above, are not required to be owned by the
Commission.
(d) Irradiation of materials: For the pur-
pose of increasing the supply of radioactive
materials, the Commission is authorized to
expose materials of any kind to the radiation
incident to the processes of producing or utiliz-
ing fissionable material.
(c) Manufacture of production facilities:
Unless authoi ized by a license issued by the
Commission, no person may manufacture,
produce, transfer, or acquire any facilities for
the production of fissionable material. Licenses
shall be issued in accordance with such proce-
dures as the Commission may by regulation
establish and shall be issued in accordance with
such standards and upon such conditions as will
restrict the production and distribution of such
facilities to effectuate the policies and purposes
of this act. Nothing in this section shall be
deemed to require a license for such man-
ufacture, production, transfer, or acquisition
incident to or for the conduct of research or
development activities in the United States of
the types specified in section 3, or to prohibit the
Commission from manufacturing or producing
such facilities for its own use.
Committee amendment:
On page 12, line 20, after the comma, insert
"except as authorized by the Commission."
-------
170
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, that
merely means that without that amend-
ment the Commission would not be able
to subcontract in the letting of li-
censes. This was put in by the commit-
tee to enable them to expand their
operations to small business.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on agreeing to the committee amend-
ment.
The committee amendment was
agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
report the next committee amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Committee amendment: Page 13, line 20,
strike out the word "is" and insert "and
persons performing pursuant to section 3
(a), section 4 (c) (1) (A) and (B), or section
7 are."
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I offer a
corrective amendment to the committee
amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. MAY as a sub-
stitute for the committee amendment: On page
13, line 20, strike out the word "is" and insert
in lieu thereof the following: "and persons
lawfully producing or utilizing fissionable ma-
terial are."
The substitute amendment was
agreed to.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. HINSHAW: On
page 11, line 18, after the word "Commission",
insert a comma and the words "as agent of
and on behalf of the United States."
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
hope the committee will agree to this
amendment. I would like to call atten-
tion to the prohibition contained in line
11, page 11, which reads:
It shall be unlawful for any person to own
any facilities for the production of fissionable
material or for any person to produce fission-
able material, except to the extent authorized
by subsection (c).
If you will note the language on page
43, lines 4, 5, and 6, the Commission is
authorized to acquire and purchase
land and hold real and personal prop-
erty as agent of, and on behalf of, the
United States.
The language I have used here is
identical with that language on page
43.
My reason for offering the amend-
ment is because of the definition in the
bill of the term "person" and referring
now back to the prohibition on page 11:
It shall be unlawful for any person to own
any facilities—
/
Please note that the definition of the
term "person" means not only any indi-
[p. 9382]
vidual, corporation, partnership, and so
forth, but it means also the United
States or any agency thereof. The
United States is included in the term
"person."
I merely ask for the insertion of
these words, Mr. Chairman, in order
that this section shall be in such form
as not to conflict with the definition of
the term "person."
I hope the chairman of the committee
will agree to accept the amendment, as
I think it clarifies the matter. It is
purely clarifying in nature.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from California.
The question was taken: and on a
division (demanded by Mr. HINSHAW)
there were—ayes 49, noes 2.
So the amendment was agreed to.
The clerk read as follows:
Page 14, line 14:
"CONTROL OF MATERIALS
"SEC. B. (a) Fissionable materials:
"(1) Definition: As used in this act, the
term 'fissionable material* means plutonium,
uranium enriched in the isotope 235, any
other material which the Commission deter-
mines to be capable of releasing substantial
quantities of energy through nuclear chain
reaction of the material or any material
artificially enriched by any of the foregoing;
but does not include source materials, as
defined in section B (b) (1).
"(2) Government ownership of all fission-
able material: All right, title, and interest
within or under the jurisdiction of the United
States, in or to any fissionable material, now
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
171
or hereafter produced, shall be the property of
the Commission, and shall be deemed to be vested
in the Commission by virtue of this act. Any
person owning any interest in any fissionable
material at the time of the enactment of this
act, or owning any interest in any material at
the time when such material is hereafter detei-
mined to be a fissionable material, or who law-
fully produces any fissionable material incident
to privately financed i eseai ch or development
activities, shall be paid just compensation
therefor. The Commission may, by action con-
sistent with the provisions of paragraph (4)
below, authorize any such person to retain
possession of such fissionable material, but no
person shall have any title in or to any fission-
able material.
" (3) Prohibition: It shall be unlawful for
any person, after 60 days from the effective
date of this act to (A) possess or transfer any
fissionable material, except as authorized by
the Commission, or (B) export from or import
into the United States any fissionable material,
or (C) directly or indirectly engage in the
production of any fissionable material outside
of the United States.
"(4) Distribution of fissionable material:
Without prejudice to its continued ownership
thereof, the Commission is authorized to dis-
tribute fissionable material, with or without
change, to applicants requesting such material
(A) for the conduct of research or development
activities either independently or under con-
tract or other arrangement with the Commis-
sion, (B) for use in medical therapy, or (C) for
use pursuant to a license issued under the au-
thority of section 7. Such material shall be
distributed in such quantities and on such terms
that no applicant will be enabled to obtain an
amount sufficient to construct a bomb or other
military weapon. The Commission is directed
to distribute sufficient fissionable material to
permit the conduct of widespiead independent
research and development activity, to the maxi-
mum extent practicable. In determining the
quantities of fissionable material to be distrib-
uted, the Commission shall make such provi-
sions for its own needs and for the conservation
of fissionable material as it may deteimine to be
necessary in the national interest foi the futuie
development of atomic energy. The Commission
shall not distribute any material to any appli-
cant, and shall recall any distributed material
from any applicant, who is not equipped to ob-
serve or who fails to observe such safety stan-
dards to protect health and to minimize danger
from explosion or other hazard to life or prop-
erty as may be established by the Commission,
or who uses such material in violation of law or
regulation of the Commission or in a manner
other than as disclosed in the application
therefor.
"(5) The Commission is authorized to pui-
chase or otherwise acquire any fissionable
material or any interest therein outside the
United States, or any interest in facilities for
the production of fissionable material, or in real
property on which such facilities are located,
without regaid to the provision of section 3709
of the Revised Statutes (U. S. C., title 41, sec.
5) upon certification by the Commission that
such action is necessary in the interest of the
common defense and security, or upon a showing
that advertising is not reasonably practicable,
and partial and advance payments may be made
under contracts for such purposes. The Com-
mission is further authorized to take, requisition,
or condemn, or othei wise acquire any interest
in such facilities or real property, and just com-
pensation shall be made therefor.
"(b) Source materials:
" (1) Definition: As used in this act, the
term 'source material' means uranium, thorium,
or any other material which is determined by the
Commission, with the approval of the President,
to be peculiarly essential to the production of
fissionable materials; but includes ores only if
they contain one or more of the foregoing ma-
terials in such concentration as the Commission
may by regulation determine from time to time.
"(2) License for transfers lequired: Unless
authorized by a license issued by the Commis-
sion, no person may transfer or deliver and no
person may receive possession of or title to any
source material after removal from its place of
deposit in nature, except that licenses shall not
be required for quantities of source materials
which, in the opinion of the Commission, are
unimportant.
" (3) Issuance of licenses: The Commis-
sion shall establish such standards for the
issuance, refusal, or revocation of licenses as it
may deem necessary to assure adequate source
matei ials for production, research, or develop-
ment activities puisuant to this act or to prevent
the use of such materials in a manner incon-
sistent with the national welfai'e. Licenses
shall be issued in accordance with such proce-
dures as the Commission may by regulation
establish.
" (4) Reporting: The Commission is au-
thorized to issue such regulations or orders
requiring repoits of ownership, possession,
extraction, refining, shipment, or other han-
dling of source materials as it may deem neces-
sary, except that such reports shall not be
required with respect to (A) any source ma-
terial prior to removal from its place of deposit
in nature, or (B) quantities of source materials
which in the opinion of the Commission are un-
important or the reporting of which will dis-
courage independent prospecting for new
deposits.
" (5) Acquisition: The Commission is au-
thorized and directed to purchase, take, requisi-
tion, condemn, or otherwise acquire, supplies of
source materials or any interest in real property
containing deposits of souice materials to the
extent it deems necessary to effectuate the provi-
sions of this act. Any purchase made under this
paragraph may be made without regard to the
provisions of section 3709 of the Revised
-------
172
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Statutes (U. S. C,, title 41, sec. 5) upon certi-
fication by the Commission that such action is
necessary in the interest of the common defense
and security, or upon a showing that advertising
is not reasonably practical, and paitial and
advance payments may be made thereunder.
The Commission may establish guaranteed
prices for all souice materials delivered to it
within a specified time. Just compensation
shall be made for any property taken, requisi-
tioned, or condemned under this paiagiaph.
" (6) Exploi ation: The Commission is au-
thorized to conduct and enter into contracts
for the conduct of exploratory operations, in-
vestigations, and inspections to determine the
location, extent, mode of occurrence, use, or
conditions of deposits or supplies of source ma-
terials, making just compensation for any dam-
age or injury occasioned thereby. Such
exploratory opei ations may be conducted only
with the consent of the owner, but such investi-
gations and inspections may be conducted with
or without such consent.
"(7) Public lands: All uranium, thorium, and
all other materials detei mined pursuant to para-
gi aph {1) of this subsection to be peculiai ly
essential to the production of fissionable mate-
rial, contained, in whatever concenti ation, in
deposits in the public lands are hereby reserved
foi the use of the United States; except that
with respect to any location, entry, or settle-
ment made prior to the date of enactment of
this act no reservation shall be deemed to have
been made, if such reservation would deprive
any peison of any existing or inchoate rights
or pi ivileges to which he would othei wise be
entitled 01 would otherwise enjoy: Provided,
however, That no person, corporation, partner-
ship, or association, which had any part, di-
rectly or indirectly, in the development of the
atomic bomb pioject, may benefit by any loca-
tion, entiy, or settlement upon the public do-
main made after such peison, corporation, part-
neiship, or association took part in such project.
The Secretary of the Interior shall cause to
be insei ted in evei y patent, conveyance, lease,
permit, or other authorization heieaftei gi anted
to use the public lands or their mineral re-
sources, under any of which there might result
the exti action of any materials so reserved, a
reservation to the United States of all such
materials, whethei or not of commei cial value,
together with the right of the United States
through its authoiized agents or representatives
at any time to enter upon the land and prospect
for, mine, and remove the same, making just
compensation for any damage or injuiy occa-
sioned thereby. Any lands so patented, con-
veyed, leased, or otherwise disposed of may be
used, and any rights under any such peimit or
a\\thoiization may be exeicised, as if no leseiva-
tion of such mateiials had been made undei this
subsection; except that when such use results in
the extraction of any such matei ial fiom the
land in quantities which may not be transferred
01 delivered without a license under this sub-
section, such material shall be the property of
the Commission and the Commission may re-
quiie delivery of such material to it by any pos-
sessor thereof after such material has been
separated as such fiom the ores in which it was
contained. If the Commission requires the de-
liveiy of such material to it, it shall pay to the
pei son mining or extracting the same, or to
such other person as the Commission deter-
mines to be entitled thereto, such sums, includ-
ing profits, as the Commission deems fair and
reasonable for the discovery, mining, develop-
ment, production, extraction, and other services
performed with respect to such material prior to
such delivery, but such payment shall not in-
clude any amount on account of the value of
such material before lemoval from its place of
[p. 9383]
deposit in nature. If the Commission does not
require delivery of such material to it, the res-
ervation made pursuant to this paragraph shall
be of no further force or effect.
"(c) Byproduct materials:
"(1) Definition: As used in this act, the term
'byproduct material' means any ladioactive ma-
terial (except fissionable material) yielded in or
made radioactive by exposuie to the radiation
incident to the processes of producing or utiliz-
ing fissionable material."
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman, I
ask unanimous consent that the fur-
ther reading of the bill be dispensed
with, with the understanding that any
amendments may be offered at the ap-
propriate places.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Texas?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Mr.
Chairman, reserving the right to object,
how many amendments are there at the
Clerk's desk?
The CHAIRMAN. There are 16
amendments.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. How
many committee amendments are
there?
Mr. THOMASON. Three more.
The CHAIRMAN. There are three
more.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman,
this is not an effort to deprive any one
from offering an amendment at the ap-
propriate place in the bill, but inas-
much as the Speaker is anxious to con-
clude the consideration of this bill on
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
173
account of a very crowded calendar,
we want to save time.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Will
the gentleman tell us when he expects
to have the Committee rise?
Mr. THOMASON. If 1 may quote
the Chairman and also the Speaker, I
think there is an understanding to rise
at 5:30.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. If the
gentleman will agree to rise at 5:30 I
will not object; otherwise I will have to
object.
Mr. KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, re-
serving the right to object, this is an
extremely important bill and should be
read section by section so that the Mem-
bers may understand it; therefore I
object,
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Mr.
Chairman, I object.
The Clerk read as follows:
(2) Distribution: The Commission is authoi-
ized to distiibute, with or without chaige, by-
product matei ials to applicants seeking such
materials for leseaich 01 development activity,
medical theiapy, mdustiial uses, 01 such othei
useful applications as may be developed. In
distributing such materials, the Commission
shall give preference to applicants proposing
to use such materials in the conduct of leseaich
and development activity or medical therapy.
The Commission shall not disti ibute any by-
product matei mis to any applicant, and shall
recall any dibti ibuted matei mis f i om any ap-
plicant, who is not equipped to obsei ve or who
fails to observe such safety standai ds to pio-
tect health as may be established by the Com-
mission or who uses such mateiials in violation
of law 01 regulation of the Commission or in a
manner other than as disclosed in the applica-
tion therefor.
(d) Oeneial piovisions:
(1) The Commission shall not distiibute (A)
any fissionable 01 souice matenal to any peison
for a use which is not under or within the juris-
diction of the United States 01 to any foieign
government.
(2) The Commission shall establish by legu-
lation a procedui e by which any person who
is dissatisfied with the distribution or lefusal
to distribute to him, 01 the recall from him, of
any fissionable or byproduct matei ials or with
the issuance, jefusal, or revocation of a license
to him for the tiansfer or receipt of souice
mateiials may obtain a review of such determi-
nation by a board of appeal consisting of three
members appointed by the Commission. The
Commission may in its disci ction review and
revise any decision of such board of appeal.
With the following committee amend-
ments :
Page 20, line 1C, strike out "person" and in-
sert "individual."
Page 10, line 14, strike out "person" and in-
sert "individual."
Page 20, line 15, after the word "project",
inseit "unless fust authoiized so to do by the
Commission."
Page 22, line 22, after the word "distribute"
inseit "(A)."
The committee amendments were
agreed to.
The Clerk read as follows:
Committee amendment: Page 22, line 23,
strike out the words "or source."
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman, I
offer a substitute for the committee
amendment on page 22, line 22.
The Clerk read as follows:
Substitute offered by Mr. THOMASON for the
committee amendment:
Page 22, line 22, strike out all of paragiaph
(1) and insei t in lieu thei eof the following:
"(1) The Commission shall not—
" (A) Disti ibute any fissionable material to
(i) any peison for a use which is not under
or within the jurisdiction of the United States,
(ii) any foreign govei nment, or (iii) any per-
son within the United States if, in the opinion
of the Commission, the disti ibution of such
fissionable matei ial to such person would be
inimical to the common defense and secui ity.
"(B) License any person to tiansfer or de-
livei, i eceive possession of 01 title to, or export
from the United States any source matei ial if,
in the opinion of the Commission, the issuance
of a license to such pei son for such purpose
would be inimical to the common defense and
secui ity."
Page 18, beginning in line 1, strike out "and
no person may receive possession of or title to"
and insert in lieu thereof "receive possession of
or title to, or export from the United States."
Page 23, line 11, strike out "tiansfer or re-
ceipt" and insert in lieu theieof "ti arisfer, de-
livery, receipt, 01 expoi tation."
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the committee substitute.
The committee substitute was agreed
to.
The CHAIRMAN. The question
is on the committee amendment as
amended by the substitute.
The committee amendment was
agreed to.
-------
174
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman, I
offer a clarifying amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. THOMASON: Page
20, line 4, strike out the semicolon and all that
follows down through the word "enjoy" in line
9, and insert in lieu thereof the words "subject
to valid claims existing on the date of the
enactment of this act."
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
word.
Mr. Chairman, if I understand the
amendment correctly, it proposes on
page 20 to strike out the language be-
tween line 4 and line 9 and to substitute
merely language reading "subject to
existing claims."
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman,
if the gentleman will yield, I will say to
the gentleman from South Dakota that
the language reads "subject to valid
claims existing on the date of the enact-
ment of this act." May I add that I do
not pretend to be too familiar with the
matter except the chairman of the com-
mittee, with the advice of counsel, tells
me that the Department of the Interior
sent this amendment over, with the as-
surance that it does not change the
meaning or the import of the language
in the bill but merely clarifies it to con-
form to existing law.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. The
language which is proposed to be
stricken, as nearly as I can determine
its meaning, seeks to make clear that
valid claims are not violated or rights
are not lost.
Mr. THOMASON. That is correct,
and the substitute does the same thing.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. The
gentleman from Texas says it does
the same thing?
Mr. THOMASON. That is what the
chairman of the committee as well as
counsel for the committee advise me,
and that it was the request of the De-
partment of the Interior.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. While I
am here, I would like to ask the gentle-
man from Texas also whether the com-
mittee proposes to do anything about
the matter on the same page to which
I drew attention yesterday? I pointed
out yesterday that the language in the
bill, which reads: "The Secretary of
the Interior shall cause to be inserted in
every patent, conveyance, lease, per-
mit, or other authorization hereafter
granted to use the public lands or their
mineral resources," apparently would
not apply similar requirements to lands
in the national forest administered by
the Secretary of Agriculture unless
they went to patent.
Mr. THOMASON. My information
is that it is subject to existing execu-
tive orders which cover the subject, and
therefore the committee would have no
other amendment.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I should
like to ask the gentleman then what
would happen in a situation like this:
Claims are filed in the national forests
simply by the act of the individual who
files the claim. He goes out with a
hatchet and pencil and makes his loca-
tion. Within a certain number of days
he files that location notice, if he de-
sires, in the county courthouse. But
from the time that he has put up his
notice there he may mine that particu-
lar claim if he does a certain amount of
development each year, called assess-
ment work.
Mr. THOMASON. My personal
opinion is that if the substitute amend-
ment offered by the committee is
[p. 9384]
adopted, this is just about as plain as it
could be made, because it is all subject
to valid claims existing on the date .of
the act. Therefore, there could be no
violence done to the existing claims.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I think
that is probably correct, and certainly
I am not objecting to that. I am trying
to draw attention to another matter in
the language that follows. I assume
the purpose of the legislation from line
16 on is to make a specific reservation
and have the Secretary of the Interior
put it in any form of mineral permit he
administers. I am wondering why you
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
175
do not do the same for lands under the
Secretary of Agriculture.
I know, as a matter of fact, for ex-
ample, that a permit system is in opera-
tion on certain lands in the national
forests in South Dakota which are what
we call Federal game sanctuaries.
Under that system, prospecting permits
and mining permits are issued but they
are issued by the Secretary of Agricul-
ture and not by the Secretary of the
Interior.
It is entirely immaterial to me. I am
not seeking to tighten the bill in this
respect, but in all fairness to the Com-
mittee, I thought I should point out
that there are mining permits which
are administered by the Secretary of
Agriculture and not by the Secretary
of the Interior. If the Committee does
not care to do anything about it, it is
immaterial to me.
Mr. THOMASON. Existing claims
are not affected in any way.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the committee amendment offered
by the gentleman from Texas.
The committee amendment was
agreed to.
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offeied by Mr. ELSTON: On page
23, strike out subsection (2).
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Chairman, the
purpose of offering this amendment is
to eliminate from the bill a rather
strange form of procedure. This sec-
tion you will notice touches on control
of material. The Commission under
this section has the power and author-
ity to distribute materials which may
vitally affect the private industry of
the Nation. The concluding paragraph
of this section reads as follows:
The Commission shall establish by regulation
a procedure by which any person who is dis-
satisfied with the distribution or lefusal to dis-
tribute to him, or the recall from him, of any
fissionable or byproduct materials, or with the
issuance, refusal, or revocation of a license to
him for the transfer or receipt of source ma-
teiials may obtain a review of such determina-
tion by a board of appeal consisting of three
membeis appointed by the Commission.
You will note that the Commission
appoints its own board of appeal to
pass on a question which may mean
life or death to an industry, because if
the time comes when fissionable mate-
rial is used for industrial purposes it
may make or break a company to be
able to get it or not get it. The Com-
mission makes an order on the use of
fissionable material, and if a person
is aggrieved by the order of the Com-
mission, he may appeal, but he appeals
to a board of appeal consisting of three
members appointed by the Commission.
If a person is not satisfied with the
decision of the board of appeal, he does
not appeal to the courts. The only
recourse he has under this section is to
do what is provided for in the last sen-
tence of this section, which I read:
The Commission may in its discretion review
and levise any decision of such board of appeal.
In other words, the Commission
appoints the board of appeal in the first
instance, and makes its own choice of
membership. If the person or company
aggrieved is not satisfied with the deci-
sion of the board of appeal, which the
Commission appoints, such person or
company appeals back to the Commis-
sion itself. That is about the strangest
appeal procedure of which I have ever
heard. I submit that it should be elimi-
nated from the bill, and the general pro-
visions of the administrative code of
procedure, which we adopted some time
ago in this House, should apply.
Under that code an appeal could be
had to the courts of the land. That
code was inserted in this bill by an
amendment which I offered in commit-
tee, and it was made applicable to any
decision of the Commission. But since
this separate section remains here I
believe it would be construed as a spe-
ial section and as an exception to the
general appeal provisions laid down in
the administrative code of procedure
if it is not stricken out. Therefore, I
am offering an amendment to strike
-------
176
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
this special appeal section out of the
bill.
Mrs. LUCE. Does that mean if the
Atomic Commission should manage, as
Mr. Lilienthal predicts it will, to gener-
ate heat and electrical energy for com-
mercial use, since it has the power to
license this and sell it to the public, if
an industry was not satisfied with what
it got, it could only appeal to this
board?
Mr. ELSTON. This is not the sec-
tion under which you appeal with ref-
erence to the issuance of a license. This
is the section under which you would
appeal from an order of the Commis-
sion allocating fissionable or byprod-
ucts material, which would be about the
same thing because if you have a li-
cense and cannot get the material, the
license would be meaningless.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman, I
think there is merit to the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Ohio. I
do think there ought to be some appeal
from the acts of the Commission, but
since I am led to believe that it would
be covered by the Administrative
Appeals Act it seems to me it is
more or less unnecessary. In my judg-
ment, it seems to be a rather awkward
procedure.
Mr. VORYS of Ohio. As I under-
stand will the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield.
Mr. VORYS of Ohio. As I under-
stand the gentleman from Ohio, by
striking out this very awkward attempt
at providing an appeals section we
therefore put this bill under the appeal
provisions of the, code of administra-
tive procedure over which the Congress
has labored for so many years.
Mr. THOMASON. I think the gen-
tleman is correct.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Where
would that leave the situation? I mean,
where would that leave a person under
the circumstances described by the gen-
tleman from Ohio?
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman from Texas will yield, may I
say we not only depend on the code of
administrative procedure which we
adopted some time ago in the House and
which is now law, but to make certain
that every kind of appeal that you
might take from an order of the Atomic
Energy Commission could be taken, we
wrote into this bill that the code of
administrative procedure should apply.
The amendment which I offered in com-
mittee appears on pages 45 and 46 of
the bill. So, if the section which I am
endeavoring to strike from the bill is
stricken from the bill, it is my opinion
that we are fully protected under the
code of administrative procedure plus
the committee amendment which ap-
pears on pages 45 and 46 of the bill.
Mr. THOMASON. May I say to the
gentleman from California, if I recall
correctly, the gentleman from Ohio had
offered in committee an amendment
putting this under the terms of the
Administrative Procedure Act.
Mr. ELSTON. Yes, that is correct.
Mr. THOMASON. So it does seem
to me that it is not only rather cumber-
some but superfluous.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. What
I was trying to get at was, what would
be the practical effect on a person if he
felt he had been unjustly treated?
Mr. THOMASON. My reply to that
is, from my limited knowledge of the
subject, that he could appeal to the
Commission, and if he still felt ag-
grieved he would have the right of
judicial review.
Mr. VORYS of Ohio. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield.
Mr. VORYS of Ohio. Such a person
would hire a lawyer and proceed under
the code of judicial procedure which we
have set up.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Ohio [Mr. ELSTON].
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment, which is at the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
177
Clerk's desk.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. LANHAM: On
page 15, line 24, after the woid "material", in-
sert "owned by it."
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Texas.
The question was taken; and the
Chair being in doubt, the Committee
divided; and there were—ayes 69, noes
39.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman, I
move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose; and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. JOHN J. DELANEY, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consider-
ation the bill (S. 1717) for the develop-
ment and control of atomic energy, had
agreed to no resolution thereon.
[p. 9386]
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the motion of the gentleman from Ken-
tucky.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the House resolved itself
into the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the fur-
ther consideration of the bill (S. 1717)
for the development and control of
atomic energy, with Mr. JOHN J. DE-
LANEY in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, a parlia-
mentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
will state it.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I under-
stand the reading of the bill was com-
pleted to and including all of section 5.
May I inquire whether the committee
amendments were agreed to?
The CHAIRMAN. The reading was
completed down to page 23, line 15.
The Chair may say for the information
of the gentleman that all committee
amendments were adopted.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I take the floor at this
time to propound an inquiry or two of
the committee in connection with the
prohibition on page 15, line 15. It is
stated there:
It shall be unlawful for any person after 60
days from the effective date of this act to * * *
(c) directly or indirectly engage in the produc-
tion of any fissionable material outside of the
United States.
How are you going to prevent any
one from producing such material out-
side the United States? I would like to
ask that question of the committee.
Mr. MAY. I would like to answer
the gentleman by saying that is a Sen-
ate provision that was in the bill when
we received it, and the committee
merely left it in the bill.
Mr. HINSHAW. That is not an an-
swer. How in the world can you pre-
vent anybody from manufacturing or
engaging in the production of any fis-
sionable material outside of the United
States?
Mr. MAY. I will answer the gentle-
man directly by saying this Govern-
ment has no jurisdiction outside of its
own territory except in its possessions,
and they are outside of the United
States. That provision was likely put
in there to enable this Commission to
control the production of these mate-
rials and the handling of them in our
territories. There is Alaska, for
instance.
Mr. HINSHAW. That is not outside
of the territorial definition of the
United States as set forth on page 43
of the bill.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. As a
matter of fact, the gentleman has put
his finger on the futility of the whole
bill. That is the assumption of placing
the production of fissionable material
in the United States under control and
the use of that under control. That
will have no effect on what happens
-------
178
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
outside of the United States. I think
that this shows the futility of this bill
until some international agreement is
arrived at.
Mr. HINSHAW. Now let us refer
to page 16, line 25, where it is stated:
The Commission is authorized to purchase
or otherwise acquire any fissionable material or
any interest therein outside the United States,
or any interest in facilities for the production
of fissionable material, or in real property on
which such facilities are located.
And so forth. The last sentence of
that subsection reads:
The Commission is further authoi ized to
take, requisition, or condemn, or otherwise ac-
quire any interest in such facilities or real prop-
erty, and just compensation shall be made
therefor.
I would like to know how the Com-
mission can condemn an interest in any
property outside the United States?
Mr. MAY. This merely provides
that it may purchase.
Mr. HINSHAW. It provides for
condemnation.
Mr. MAY. Where is the gentleman
reading?
' Mr. HINSHAW. The word "con-
demn" appears in line 11, page 17.
Mr. MAY. Line 11, page 17:
The Commission is authorized to take, requisi-
tion, or condemn, or otheiwise acquire any in-
terest in such facilities or real property, and
just compensation shall be made therefoi.
Mr. HINSHAW. I would like to
know how you can do that outside the
United States, and I merely asked for
this time in order to call the attention
of the membership to some of these
things. I do not care whether the Sen-
ate put them in or who put them in.
Mr. MAY. I did not say that. I said
it was the Senate that put it in, and it
probably relates to the materials that
they acquire in the United States.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
would like to reiterate that the answers
of the committee on a great many ques-
tions that have been asked here have
necessarily been probabilities rather
than facts, because I do not believe that
either the committee or this House
understands the import of this bill.
* * * * *
[p. 9464]
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Kentucky, the Chairman,
if he has an answer to the question.
Mr. MAY. Yes, I will answer it for
the gentleman. Under section 9 of the
bill, which requires the turning over of
property to the Commission, which
becomes effective on the date of enact-
ment and approval of the bill. As to
the provision in line 8 down to and
including line 11 on page 24, it becomes
effective thereafter and provides that
the Commission may authorize the
armed forces to manufacture atomic
weapons as they see fit.
Mr. HINSHAW. No. It says that
the President may direct the Commis-
sion to authorize, and on page 28 it
says that the President shall direct the
transfer of all interests owned by the
United States, in any material and any
machinery and any weapons, to the
Commission. Those two sections are
not compatible, if I can read the Eng-
lish language.
Mr. MAY. The gentleman is not op-
posed to a provision in the bill which
would authorize the Commission to give
the armed forces the right to manufac-
ture atomic weapons after the Commis-
sion takes over the property, Oak
Ridge, for instance? If they want to
manufacture them, does not the gentle-
man think the Commission ought to let
them do it?
Mr. HINSHAW. As I say, section 9
directs the President to transfer, and
then the bill states at other places that
when so transferred this property
comes under the full and complete own-
ership of the Commission. The pro-
posed committee amendment then
states that the President may direct the
Commission to authorize the armed
forces to manufacture them. How can
they do that if they cannot own any of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
179
the equipment? I should like to know
that.
Mr. ELSTON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield ?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Ohio.
Mr. ELSTON. May I tell the gen-
tleman how this particular committee
amendment happened to be adopted? In
reading this bill, some of us made the
point that everything was transferred
to the Commission. The Army and the
Navy would not even have the right to
manufacture atomic weapons of any
kind except with the consent of the
Commission. We felt that the manu-
facture of atomic weapons or any other
kind of weapons is a function of the
War and Navy Departments which
should not be interfered with by any
civilian commission. We were insist-
ing that the services be given the right
to go ahead with the manufacture of
weapons without any order or license
from the Commission. The committee
amendment, which was offered I believe
by the gentleman from Texas [Mr.
KILDAY] , was simply a compromise, and
in my judgment is just about as con-
fusing as about everything else in this
bill, which is another reason why the
bill should be recommitted for further
study.
Mr. HINSHAW. If you put in the
bill this amendment on page 24, on
page 28 in some location you will have
to put in a proviso that will exempt
that material and those facilities that
are transferred back to the War De-
partment for the manufacture of this
material from the direction that the
bill contains, which is that the Presi-
dent shall direct the transfer.
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield to the gen-
tleman from California.
Mr. DOYLE. Answering the gentle-
man's question, there is nothing incon-
sistent between this language and the
language in lines 20 and 21 in section 9,
because the language in line 5 of page
24, to which the gentleman refers,
states that the President from time to
time may direct the Commission. That
language does not compel the President
of the United States to authorize the
armed forces to manufacture, it merely
makes it optional. So this amendment,
subdivision (2), on which we are now
voting, is subject to an option expressly
given in line 5. It is optional with the
President of the United States after he
gets control under section 9 as to
whether or not he desires to authorize
the armed forces.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
ask unanimous consent to proceed for
three additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. HINSHAW. I appreciate the
gentleman's remarks, but elsewhere in
the bill it states quite clearly that when
these transfers are once made to the
Commission the Commission is vested
with all right, title, and interest to, in
full and complete ownership of, all of
this material and facilities and all of
the atomic weapons. In section 9 not
only do you direct the transfer to the
Commission of all of the material, the
facilities, and the equipment, but the
Commission will then have the full and
complete ownership of all the bombs
that have heretofore been manufac-
tured and the military will have noth-
ing to say about it.
Mr. MAY. That is the purpose of
this amendment, to make it possible for
the military department to manufac-
ture them.
Mr. HINSHAW. I again suggest
that if we are going to do that we had
better amend section 9 in such a way
as to permit the transfer of the bombs
back to that department.
Mr. MAY. We are not through that
section yet.
Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield.
-------
180
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. DONDERO. In reading the
hearings I can find no reference to the
Federal Bureau of Investigation. Can
anybody tell why?
Mr. HINSHAW. That is a little bit
off this subject.
Mr. DONDERO. It has application
to this bill.
Mr. HINSHAW. I know that, but I
would rather that the gentleman talk
on that subject on his own time.
Mr. CLASON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. CLASON. Yesterday I pointed
out in connection with an amendment
which I offered, which is on page 9381
of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, that the
Army and Navy are today spending
millions of dollars on a program which
permits them to carry on research and
discovery in the field of atomic energy.
Apparently my amendment was offered
for the same purpose as the one offered
by the committee except, I believe, the
committee amendment is much more
restricted in scope.
Mr. HINSHAW. Section 8, dealing
with international arrangements,
makes it mandatory upon the Commis-
sion as soon as an international ar-
rangement is entered into to transfer
to the international authority all of this
material and facilities and bombs and
everything else that the international
authority may want. I would like to
know how after that happens you are
going to be able to authorize the armed
forces to manufacture anything. You
are not going to be able to do it. There
is no sense having that amendment in
the bill at all because the international
authority will control the entire pro-
gram from stem to stern and you will
have located in the United States and
elsewrhere in the world international
extraterritorial localities, if you want
to call them that, where this manufac-
turing and so forth is to be carried on.
That is a very serious question. I
think it deserves the serious considera-
tion of the Committee.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
pro forma amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I would agree with
those Members who have indicated that
the bill would be confusing if the com-
mittee amendment were added to it. I
think I understand quite clearly what
the bill would mean if the committee
amendment were not adopted. I would
like to read this language as the Senate
wrote it:
The President may from time to time direct
the Commission to deliver such quantities of
weapons to the armed forces for such use as he
deems necessary in the interests of national
defense.
The principle of the bill as it came to
us from the Senate was briefly that
atomic-energy development was to be
concentrated in the hands of the Com-
mission. It was assumed that this
Commission would be composed of the
very best and most patriotic people in
the whole Nation. It was assumed that
they would handle this most dangerous
and important problem and material
that has ever faced this country with
the degree of care and concern for the
interests of this Nation that it de-
mands. Anticipating, perhaps, what
[p. 9465]
the gentleman from Michigan may have
had in mind when he arose and men-
tioned the Federal Bureau of Investi-
gation, may I say to him that so far as
I am concerned I should be perfectly
glad to support provisions in this bill
providing for FBI investigation of per-
sons who shall have any part in this
work. It seems to me, however, what
this proposed committee amendment
which we are now considering will
actually do, briefly, is this: The bill as
originally brought to us provides un-
questionably for the power of the Presi-
dent to decide how many atomic bombs
shall be manufactured, at what time
they shall be manufactured, whether or
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
181
not they shall be manufactured, and to
tell this Commission through its Divi-
sion of Military Application to make
that number of bombs and deliver them
to the armed forces.
Obviously, the bombs are going to
have to be made by scientists if they are
made at all. They will be made in the
Division of Military Application, under
the terms of the original bill. The com-
mittee amendment will only mean, if I
understand its meaning at all, that we
will set up two places for making of
atomic bombs. On the one hand, they
will be manufactured by the Division
of Military Application of the Commis-
sion, and, on the other hand, if the
President happens to decide to do it, the
armed forces, the Army or the Navy,
or both, may themselves set up new
Oak Ridges or new something else and
make them there.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Let
me yield to my colleague from Cali-
fornia because he has asked me three
times.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. I
think subdivision 2 on page 24 means
that the Army and Navy shall have
the right to requisition the property of
the Commission and make various
kinds of atomic weapons. That is all
it means. The property to make weap-
ons and the machinery belongs to the
commission, and the armed forces can
requisition those and make them in an
arsenal or any other place. In other
words, there are two places you can
make them under this provision, as the
gentleman said.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. That
is what it seems to me, but it does not
seem to me that that is the wise and
orderly way to go about the matter.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I yield.
Mr. MAY. I think the gentleman has
overlooked one important feature of the
discussion here. Beginning in line 5 on
page 24, it says:
The President from time to time may direct
the Commission (1) to deliver such quantities
of materials or weapons to the armed forces for
such use as he deems necessary in the interest
of national defense, or (2) to authorize the
armed forces to manufacture, produce, or ac-
quire any equipment or device utilizing fission-
able material.
What is wrong with the Commis-
sion's determining whether they will
do it or the armed forces do it?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Of
course, this would provide, as the gen-
tleman suggests, that it might be done
by the Division of Military Application
of the Commission or it might be done
elsewhere. It seems to me this work
ought to be concentrated in one
organization.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California [Mr. VOOR-
HIS] has expired.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Mr. Chair-
man, I ask unanimous consent that the
gentleman may proceed for five addi-
tional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Connecticut?
There was no objection.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I yield.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. I am troubled
by this committee amendment, because
in placing in the hands of the War De-
partment the power to manufacture
bombs, it must, of course, be given over
to private industry, and it cannot be
given to small industry; it must be
given to large industry. I fear the
control of those, due to the fact that it
might be that those large industries
would make deals and cartels with
other countries that would be detrimen-
tal to the safety of our own country. I
would like to have the gentleman's
opinion on that.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. My
opinion of that is that so long as this
process of manufacture is handled
under the terms of the bill as written,
I do not have the fear that what the
gentleman postulates will happen. I
-------
182
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
believe it might well be that the Com-
mission or the armed forces might want
to contract for some of this production.
I think that might well happen. I
would not object to that being done.
The thing I am fearful of—and I do
not want to speak about it now because
I have no doubt there will be full dis-
cussion of it later—but I am fearful
that if we permit the private patenting
of atomic energy, the thing the gentle-
man mentioned will happen. But I do
not think it is involved in this particu-
lar question.
Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I yield
to the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. BROOKS. Further in reference
to the subject discussed by the gentle-
man from California [Mr. JOHNSON]
who preceded you, regarding the appar-
ent conflict in two sections of the act, I
want to say this:
The section to which he referred on
page 24 deals entirely with the material
application of atomic energy whereas
the subsequent section which he felt
conflicted with the military application
section deals entirely with the owner-
ship of the property of the Commission.
To hold that that particular phrase to
which the gentleman refers conflicts
with the section on the property of the
Commission would in effect hold that
the entire section dealing with military
application conflicts with the section on
ownership of the property by the Com-
mission. That is not an argument that
is tenable, because they do not conflict.
They are separate and stand on their
own feet.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I am
much obliged to the gentleman.
In conclusion may I say that the
Chief of Staff of the Army and the
Secretaries of War and the Navy have
expressed their satisfaction with this
bill from the point of view of its guard-
ing the military interests of this
Nation.
The most important thing that the
bill will do will be to assure the con-
tinued development of the military
applications. That is the thing that
really counts much more than the man-
ufacture of bombs; that is the vital
thing. I am for continuing that mili-
tary development under present cir-
cumstances; and until an international
agreement and control that we have
talked about so much is finally effected.
I believe all decisions with regard to
what is going to be done under this bill
should be made at the very highest level
in our Government, that is, the Presi-
dent of the United States. I think that
is where they should all be made. This
legislation is written from the point of
view of trying to make this thing a uni-
fied proposition so that the American
program with regard to it will be so
well coordinated as to make possible
effective hope at least of getting the
international control upon which the
future hope of peace really rests.
These are the reasons it would seem to
me reasonable to leave the bill as it was
before and why the committee amend-
ment should be defeated.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has again
expired.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I ask for
a vote on the committee amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the committee amendment.
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. THOMASON)
there were—ayes 63, noes 38.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Chairman, I
demand tellers.
Tellers were ordered, and the Chair
appointed as tellers Mr. MAY and Mr.
SHORT.
The committee divided; and the tell-
ers were unable to agree on the count.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objec-
tion, the Chair will direct that the vote
by tellers be taken over.
There was no objection.
The Chair appointed as tellers Mr.
THOMASON and Mr. SHORT.
The Committe again divided, and the
tellers reported that there were—ayes
102, noes 72.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
183
So the amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
report the next committee amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Committee amendment. On page 24, line 13,
after the comma inseit "except as provided in
section 6 (a)."
The committee amendment was
agreed to.
The Clerk read as follows:
UTILIZATION OF ATOMIC ENERGY
SEC. 7. (a) License required: It shall be
unlawful, except as piovided in sections 5 (a)
(4) (A) or (B) or G (a), for any person to
manufactuie, pioduce, or export any equipment
or device utilizing fissionable material or atomic
energy or to utilize fissionable material or
atomic energy with 01 without such equipment
or device, except undei and in accordance with
[p. 9466]
a license issued by the Commission authorizing
such manufacture, production, export, or utili-
zation. No license may permit any such activity
if fissionable material is produced incident to
such activity, except as provided in sections 3
and 4. Nothing in this section shall be deemed
to require a license for the conduct of reseaich
or development activities relating to the manu-
facture of such equipment or devices 01 the
utilization of fissionable mateiial or atomic
eneigy, or for the manufacture or use of equip-
ment or devices foi medical therapy.
(b) Report to Congress: Whenever in its
opinion any industi ml, commercial, or other
nonmilitaiy use of fissionable material or atomic
energy has been sufficiently developed to be of
practical value, the Commission shall piepare a
report to the President stating all the facts
with respect to such use, the Commission's
estimate of the social, political, economic, and
international effects of such use, and the Com-
mission's recommendations for necessary 01 de-
sirable supplemental legislation. The President
shall then transmit this report to the Congiess
together with his recommendations. No license
for any manufacture, production, expoit, or
use shall be issued by the Commission under this
section until after (1) a report with respect to
such manufacture, production, export, or use
has been filed with the Congress; and (2) a pe-
riod of 90 days in which the Congress was in
session has elapsed after the report has been so
filed. In computing such period of 90 days,
there shall be excluded the days on which either
House is not in session because of an acljouin-
ment of more than 3 days.
(c) Issuance of licenses: After such 90-day
period, unless hereafter prohibited by law, the
Commission may license such manufacture, pro-
duction, export, or use in accordance with such
procedures and subject to such conditions as it
may by regulation establish to effectuate th,e
provisions of this act. The Commission is au-
thorized and directed to issue licenses on a non-
exclusive basis and to supply to the extent
available appropriate quantities of fissionable
material to licensees (1) whose proposed activi-
ties will serve some useful puipose pioportionate
to the quantities of fissionable materials to be
consumed, (2) who are equipped to observe such
safety standards to piotect health and to mini-
mize danger from explosion or othei hazaid to
life or property as the Commission may estab-
lish, and (3) who agree to make available to
the Commission such technical infoimation and
data concerning their activities pursuant to such
licenses as the Commission may determine neces-
sary to encourage similar activities by as many
licensees as possible. Each such license shall be
issued for a specified period, not to exceed 1
year, shall be revocable at any time by the
Commission in accoidance with such proce-
dures as the Commission may establish, and may
be renewed upon the expiration of such period.
Where activities under any license might serve
to maintain or to foster the growth of monop-
oly, restraint of trade, unlawful competition,
or other trade position inimical to the entry
of new, freely competitive enterprises in the
field, the Commission is authorized and directed
to refuse to issue such license or to establish
such conditions to prevent these results as the
Commission, in consultation with the Attorney
General, may determine. The Commission shall
report promptly to the Attorney General any
information it may have with respect to any
utilization of fissionable material or atomic en-
eigy which appears to have these results. No
license may be given to any person for activities
which aie not under or within the jurisdiction
of the United States to any foreign government.
(d) Byproduct power: If energy which may
be utilized is produced in the production of fis-
sionable material, such energy may be used by
the Commission, transferred to other Govern-
ment agencies, oi* sold to public or private utili-
ties under contracts providing for reasonable
icsale prices.
With the following committee
amendments:
Page 27, line 3, strike out "to exceed" and
insert "less than,"
Page 27, line 19, strike out "States or" and
insert "States."
The committee amendments were
agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
report the next committee amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Committee amendment: Page 27, line 20,
after the comma insert "or to persons within
the jurisdiction of the United States where
the issuance thereof would be inimical to the
common defense and security."
-------
184
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I offer a
substitute for the committee amend-
ment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. MAY as a sub-
stitute for the committee amendment: On page
27, line 20, before the period insert the follow-
ing: "or to any person within the United States
if in the opinion of the Commission the issuance
of a license to such person would be inimical to
the common defense and security."
The substitute for the committee
amendment was agreed to.
The committee amendment as
amended was agreed to.
Mr. CLASON. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I merely wish to point
out that the last amendment over which
we had a dispute and which was
approved by our votes put into the bill
an amendment which in effect I offered
yesterday and which was rejected. I
believe it is important because it will
give to the armed forces through an
order of the President an opportunity
to carry on the very important research
and development work they are now
carrying on prior to the passage of this
bill.
Another proposition which indicates
to me how confused we are in connec-
tion with legislation today is the situ-
ation with reference to our postal
employees. They are without their pay
because we cannot figure out what the
price of silver should be. This bill
here gets all balled up because of a lot
of little mix-ups between the Depart-
ment of the Interior, the military
departments, and all the other depart-
ments of the Government. I sincerely
hope that during the course of the day
not only will this committee straighten
out this bill but the Committee on Ap-
propriations will be able to bring in
here a bill which will permit our postal
employees to get their pay. The postal
employees should not be penalized by
the dispute over the price of silver now
raging in the Treasury Department.
They need their pay for their families,
for their food, and for their vacations.
In this case the Treasury Department
is balling up the orderly processes of
the Post Office Department.
Mr. KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, I rise
in opposition to the pro forma amend-
ment.
Mr. Chairman, I note in this section
subparagraph (d), entitled "Byprod-
uct Power," it reads:
If energy which may be utilized is produced
in the production of fissionable material, such
energy may be used by the Commission, trans-
ferred to other Government agencies, or sold to
public or private utilities under contracts pro-
viding for reasonable resale prices.
Now, I have been trying to find out
what that means. Is there anybody on
this committee who can tell us what
that means?
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. If the
gentleman would yield, I would like to
answer the question.
Mr. KEEFE. I will yield to the gen-
tleman in just a moment.
I get a little inkling as to what it
means by reading the preface contained
in the Report on the International Con-
trol of Atomic Energy prepared for the
committee of the Secretary of State
which I have before me. To show you
how simple and easy this situation is,
let me read it to you:
It is impossible to maintain a chain reaction
in a mass of ordinary uranium. The neutrons
which result from the fission of uranium 235
are captured by the much more abundant
uranium 238 before they can get to another
uranium 235 nucleus and the chain is therefore
broken. However, by an adroit airangement of
ordinary uranium in the form of a lattice,
imbedded in an inert material with respect to
neutron capture like carbon, the neutrons can
be slowed down and preferentially captured by
uranium 235 to maintain the chain reaction.
Now, here is what happens:
In this way ordinary uranium can be used
to maintain a chain reaction. A device of
this sort is called a pile or a nuclear reactor.
Since a large fraction of the neutrons in the
reactor are captured by uranium 238, plutonium
is a byproduct of the operation of the reactor.
Another byproduct is the enormous amount of
heat energy released by the fission process. A
third byproduct is a large variety of highly
radioactive materials which are the fission frag-
ments or the result of neutron capture by ma-
terials inserted in the reactor.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
185
Now we have indicated here in this
section that the so-called byproduct
powers that I have just described may
be used by the Commission and trans-
ferred to other Government agencies or
sold to public or private utilities under
contracts providing for a reasonable
retail price. Just so that the public
and the Congress will know and under-
stand when this bill passes and becomes
operative and your constituents should
certainly understand that they will
perhaps have an opportunity to buy as
byproducts from this Commission
highly radioactive materials which are
fission fragments as the result of neu-
trons captured by materials inserted
in the reactor, it demonstrates to me so
far as I am concerned, and I think most
of the Members of this House are con-
cerned, that we are going over this
legislation without any very clear com-
prehension as to just exactly what may
be involved. I conceive that possibly
in this process there may be the devel-
opment of heat as another byproduct.
There may be developed electricity as
another byproduct. I call it to the
[p. 9467]
attention of Congress in order that we
may know and may have in the RECORD
a very clear and definite understanding
as to what we are legislating on today.
I now yield to the gentleman from
Indiana [Mr. HARNESS].
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. A few
moments ago I wanted to make an
observation that that was only one of
the many reasons why this legislation
should go back to the committee.
Mr. KEEFE. Well, that may be a
compelling- reason.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Wisconsin has expired.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I move
that all debate on this section and all
amendments thereto close in 5 minutes.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, the gentleman from Wis-
consin [Mr. KEEFE] has raised an im-
portant question on which I think I can
at least say one thing that will be of
interest.
At the atomic-energy plant in the
State of Washington there is at the
present time a considerable amount of
this byproduct energy, that the gentle-
man described when he read the report,
that is being produced and wasted into
the Columbia River. The fact of the
matter is that the temperature of that
great stream is being considerably
raised. There exists the possibility
that that byproduct energy might in-
deed be sold to some public body or
some private agency for some useful
purpose, on condition that since it is
generated with public funds it should
be resold at a fair price. That happens
to be a problem right now and for want
of legislation like this a great waste is
going on. I take it that is why it is in
the bill.
Mr. KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I yield.
Mr. KEEFE. Does the gentleman
understand that in this process there
might be electricity developed as a by-
product of the process?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I un-
derstand, as fully as one man's com-
pletely inadequate mind can understand
it, that there are those possibilities with
regard to this matter. My main con-
cern, as far as the domestic application
of peacetime uses is concerned, is that
they shall be under such circumstances
as to spread the benefits as broadly as
possible throughout the Nation, and to
give all elements in the population and
all elements in business, as nearly as
possible, an equal chance.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California [Mr. VOOR-
HIS] has expired.
Mr. MURDOCK. Mr. Chairman, I
regard paragraph (d) of the bill, as
found on pages 27-28, a wise provision.
Whoever wrote this bill, S. 1717, must
have become very well acquainted with
the processes thus far used in placing
in human hands atomic power. I un-
derstand that there are several ex-
-------
186
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
ceedingly valuable byproducts in the
manufacture of atomic bombs. We
have heard suggested that we probably
have only slight conception of the great
value for medicine of radioactive mate-
rial.
Probably in the field of power, or in
heat, there is likewise a tremendous by-
product of the process. If electric pow-
er can be produced as a byproduct in
the manufacture of fissionable mate-
rial, which in itself also has great
peacetime utility and value, it is easily
conceivable that great quantities of
heat or electricity can be produced very
cheaply. If such is the case, whoever
has control of the processes should see
to it that society gets the benefit,
through lowered rates. Society has al-
ready paid a great financial price and
ought to enjoy financial benefits.
The Clerk read as follows:
INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
SEC. 8. (a) Definition: As used in this act,
the term "international arrangement" shall
mean any treaty approved by the Senate or
international agreement approved by the Con-
gress, during the time such treaty or agreement
is in full force and effect.
(b) Effect of international arrangements:
Any provision of this act or any action of the
Commission to the extent that it conflicts with
the provisions of any intei national anangement
made after the date of enactment of this act
shall be deemed to be of no further foice 01
effect.
(c) Policies contained in international ar-
rangements: In the performance of its func-
tions under this act, the Commission shall give
maximum effect to the policies contained in
any such international arrangement.
With the following committee amend-
ment:
On page 28, line 7, after the word "agree-
ment", insert the word "hereafter."
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
ask for recognition on the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to inquire
of the chairman of the committee why
it was that they limited the interna-
tional agreements to those which might
"hereafter" be approved by Congress.
Are there some agreements that have
already been approved that require the
insertion of this word "hereafter"?
Mr. MAY. The intention was to be
all-inclusive, so that it would include
not only those that have already been
approved but any that may hereafter
be approved.
Mr. HINSHAW. No. I believe the
gentleman is mistaken. By the inser-
tion of this word "hereafter," you are
approving all of those treaties that
have been heretofore as well as those
hereafter approved by the Senate, but
you are limiting the international
agreements approved by Congress to
only those which are hereafter ap-
proved. I wonder if there has been
some agreement that has been hereto-
fore approved in this connection that I
do not know about.
Mr. MAY. There is none that I
know of. It is simply to take care of
any that might be made.
Mr. HINSHAW. I would like to call
attention to the fact that this section 8
remaining in the bill is an authoriza-
tion, in advance of any treaty that
might be made, to carry out the provi-
sions of any such treaty and give maxi-
mum effect to any policies contained in
such arrangement. In other words,
that would almost constitute a blank
check to the Commission in connection
with any arrangement of international
character that might hereafter be
made. You should understand in giv-
ing this your approval that it can be a
treaty approved by two-thirds of the
Senate, without regard to the House of
Representatives, in which case, of
course, the House would not have any-
thing further to say on this subject.
Or it can be an international agree-
ment approved by both bodies and I
assume a majority vote in both bodies.
This section 8 is the kernel of the nut
in this bill. It is the section which pro-
vides that all properties, materials, real
estate, and everything else in the
United States under the jurisdiction of
the United States Atomic Energy Com-
mission may be transferred to the
international authority upon the con-
clusion of the international agreement.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
187
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. Is not
that the rule that pertains now, that a
treaty is the supreme law of the land
and it modifies all laws that may con-
flict with it?
Mr. HINSHAW. There is no treaty
that I know of that would authorize the
turning over to an international au-
thority of real property of the United
States within the United States bound-
aries.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. How
does the gentleman know they are going
to have one like that? The gentleman
is just assuming that.
Mr. HINSHAW. I am assuming
that after this bill becomes law with
that language in it and you should
want to strike that out of section 8, it
would be subject to a veto and it would
take a two-thirds vote in both Houses
to override the veto.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. What
the gentleman is talking about is the
rule now in the case of international
agreements. This does not change any
rules.
Mr. HINSHAW. This authorizes in
advance something that is not already
done.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.
The question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed:
The Clerk read as follows:
Page 28, line 19:
PROPERTY OF THE COMMISSION
SEC. 9. (a) The President shall direct the
transfer to the Commission of all interests
owned by the United States or any Government
agency in the following property:
(1) All fissionable material; all atomic
weapons and parts theieof: all facilities,
equipment, and materials for the processing,
production, or utilization of fissionable ma-
terial or atomic energy; all processes and tech-
nical information of any kind, and the source
thereof (including data, drawings, specifica-
tions, patents, patent applications, and other
sources) relating to the processing, production,
or utilization of fissionable material 01 atomic
energy; and all contiacts, agreements, leases,
patents, applications for patents, inventions
and discoveries (whether patented or un-
patented), and other lights of any kind con-
cerning any such items.
(2) All facilities, equipment, and materials,
devoted primarily to atomic energy lesearch and
development, and
(3) Such other property owned by or in the
custody or control of the Manhattan Engineer
District or other Government agencies as the
Piesident may determine.
[p. 9468]
(b) In order to lender financial assistance to
those States and localities in which the activities
of the Commission are canied on and in which
the Commission has acquired property pre-
viously subject to State and local taxation, the
Commission is authorized to make payments to
State and local goveinments in lieu of propeity
taxes. Such payments may be in the amounts,
at the times, and upon the terms the Com-
mission deems appropriate, but the Commission
shall be guided by the policy of not making pay-
ments in excess of the taxes which would have
been payable for such pioperty in the condition
in which it was acquired, except in cases where
special burdens have been cast upon the State
or local government by activities of the Com-
mission, the Manhattan engineer distiict or
their agents. In any such case, any benefit
accruing to the State 01 local government by
reason of such activities shall be considered in
determining the amount of the payment. The
Commission, and the piopeity, activities, and
income of the Commission, are hereby expressly
exempted from taxation in any manner or form
by any State, county, municipality, or any sub-
division theveof.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, there is hardly an
hour, certainly not a day, that I do not
learn some new and frightening fact
concerning atomic energy.
The gentleman from Wisconsin
pointed out to you that the Lilienthal
or State Department report indicated
that it would only be a question of time
before atomic energy installations
could be used to generate heat and
electrical power. As a matter of fact
the report goes on to say that these
installations may be put into operation
in the very near future, and, I quote,
"only the gradual incorporation and
adaptation of such units to the specific
demands of contemporary economy will
involve a protracted development."
This translated into plain English
means that the only thing the Commis-
sion formed under the bill will need to
-------
188
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
determine is how long it will take Gov-
ernment monopoly heat and electricity
to put private heat and electricity out
of business, without unduly upsetting
the folks.
But now here is an amusing idea
which occurred to me as a result of a
conversation that I had in the lohby
with my great good friend, Dr. JUDD,
the gentleman from Minnesota, who is
certainly a scientific expert in the field
of radioactive materials. He told me—
and I do not know whether he is on the
floor, but if he is I hope he will cor-
rect the remark if I got it wrong—that
he said in his speech on the floor of
the House yesterday, which I have not
yet had the time to study, that radio-
active energy, used on human germ
cells, may be used to mutate the species,
and that it was radioactive energy
which was probably responsible, at his-
tory's dawn, for such sports and bio-
logical monsters as dinosaurs, and, was
itself the mysterious instrument God
used to create the creature man. In
those days only God knew how to mu-
tate animal species. The secret may
now be man's.
Now, evidently the gentleman from
Minnesota, Dr. JUDD, suggests radio-
active energy may eventually be used
to breed a new species: a superman
godlike creature, or perhaps a monster;
at any rate, operating on the germ cells
it could be used to bring forth out of
man as we know him now an inde-
terminate quantity of legs, arms, ears
and eyes, if a careless user of this
should feel so disposed, or if a lot of the
stuff got loose on the premises.
I suddenly imagined myself many
years from now confronted by a com-
mission that had gotten rather bored,
as well it might, with the follies and fu-
tilities of man, or even with the stub-
born unwillingness of the common
Congressman to vote away his liberties;
and the commission decided that the
time had come to mutate the species,
the male species of course—because
when they got around to mutating the
female of the species they would surely
make them all Lana Turners; but as
far as the stubborn male species are
concerned they might decide the time
had come to treat human beings with
these radioactive particles in order to
get a new type with a very large head,
one eye, one ear bent permanently to
hold a telephone, one armed, with only
a forefinger and thumb for signing
documents and checks, no legs and an
anatomy constructed to fit most com-
fortably into a swivel chair. In other
words, they might decide to make a
new species—the Bureaucrats.
I consider this a very dangerous idea,
but in order not to leave the matter on
this humorous plane, I ask my col-
league, Mr. JUDD if he will explain to
the House the truly scientific aspects of
the mutation of the species with atomic
energy as he explained them to me
earlier. And, although I speak entirely
in fun, I think this question of the ter-
rible dangers inherent in radioactive
energy is, in all seriousness, a further
great argument for the need of civilian
control for the next years, and another
reason for voting for this bill.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentlewoman from Connecticut has ex-
pired.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last two words.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from North Carolina is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am
definitely delighted with my member-
ship on the Committee on Agriculture.
On that committee we have not dis-
cussed such technical subjects as atom-
ic energy. Certainly, we have not
discussed subjects as technical as the
subject which has been discussed by the
lady from Connecticut and the doctor
from Minnesota.' Frankly, I think we
ought to forget that discussion and
leave it right where it is.
Mr. Chairman, I have never seen this
House in such an atmosphere of uncer-
tainty and indecision. I agree with the
lady from Connecticut that we seem to
learn something new every hour about
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
189
radioactivity and atomic energy, but,
apparently, the more we talk about
these things the more we are confused.
The very distinguished and learned
gentleman from Missouri admitted
frankly that he was confused and after
his very fine speech he said that he was
going to take his seat and listen to the
debate, in the hope that it would aid
him in making up his mind. I know
that the distinguished lady and dis-
tinguished doctor are confused, and I
believe that most of us are confused.
It seems to me that when we consider
the whole subject we are in a rather
ridiculous position. According to the
gentleman from Wisconsin, we are now
providing for the sale of this new and
mysterious power to our constituents.
If this new discovery possesses the
potentialities and possibilities indicated
by the lady from Connecticut, I cer-
tainly do not want any of it sold down
in the Fourth Congressional District of
North Carolina.
As I said yesterday, I am anxious,
yes, most anxious, for the secrets of
atomic energy to be controlled and care-
fully guarded. I do not think that it is
necessary for us to take anyone else
into our confidence in our efforts to
keep better and guard the secret which
has been pretty well guarded up to
this moment. I am at a loss to under-
stand why there seems to be such
controversy over, and such lack of
confidence in, our military men. We
certainly know that the members of our
armed forces are true, patriotic Amer-
icans, and they would do nothing to
jeopardize or to imperil the safety of
our country. When members of the
committee have been asked why they
object to military men being placed on
this committee, they say that they ob-
ject to it because it is a violation of the
traditions of America for military men
to participate in the deliberations of
any committee within the civil branch
of our Government. It seems to me
that is a very, very, weak argument.
We are dealing with something about
which there are no traditions. We
know nothing about atomic power. We
know that it has not yet been perfected
for military purposes. We are now in
the experimental stage. We are still
experimenting with the atomic bomb in
Bikini. We know what the effect of the
atomic bomb is because we have seen
its results at Hiroshimo and Nagasaki.
Why can we not rest easy and let the
development of atomic energy for
peaceful pursuits remain unknown for
a few months, until at least the peace
documents are prepared and signed?
Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Iowa.
Mr. JENSEN. Does not the gentle-
man agree with me that there are as
many potential dangers to the peace
and security of the world in this legis-
lation that we are now considering as
there are in the atomic bomb itself?
Mr. COOLEY. I do not know
whether in degree I agree with the gen-
tleman exactly, but I do say that there
is great danger in this situation. We
talk about being fair and we talk about
dealing fairly with all the people of
the world. Here is a secret that cost
$2,000,000,000 and, incidentally, has
cost thousands and thousands of human
lives, as witnessed by the destruction
of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and yet we
are talking about sharing the secret
with other peoples of the world before
we even have full knowledge ourselves.
[p. 9469]
Mr. ABENDS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Illinois.
Mr. ARENDS. In view of what the
gentleman is saying, and the impres-
sion that was given a while ago, does he
not think the smart thing to do would
be to recommit this bill at the present
time?
Mr. COOLEY. I agree with the gen-
tleman.
Mr. VOOEHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
-------
190
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. COOLEY. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. I am
sure that the gentleman from North
Carolina does not think that by recom-
mitting this bill we somehow or other
make atomic energy stand still in other
countries.
Mr. COOLEY. I think we can at
least control the secrets that we have
here and leave it in the hands of the
military people.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gentle-
man from Kentucky.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that all debate on
this section and all amendments thereto
close in 5 minutes.
Mr. BIEMILLER. I object, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I move
that all debate on this section and all
amendments thereto close in 5 minutes.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I do
not stand in the well of the House to
lecture on biology, or to lecture to any
Member. I do not think I am any
scientist, but I just wonder to what
level this debate will fall, if we will
stop and just think about ourselves,
what the scientists in the world have
given us. We should think about the
great Scotchman, Watt, who invented
the steam engine. We should think
about the other great inventors, of the
barometer and thermometer, compass
and many other inventions that have
aided our welfare. Yet here in this
House today we are poking fun at the
people who have given to this world
today a problem that we have got to
solve ourselves.
Mr. MURDOCK. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Arizona.
Mr. MURDOCK. I imagine the gen-
tleman has some such thought and feel-
ing as I have. Pun has been poked at
inventors and inventions before this,
even in this body. Does the gentleman
recall that about 100 years ago when
Morse proposed his electric telegraph
and needed money to help with it, there
were plenty of people, even Members
of Congress, who facetiously wanted to
spend money instead on investigating
several other things instead of the tele-
graph ? People poked fun at that effort
in that day, but the people who made
fun had a laugh on the other side of
their faces in after years. Any way
we look at it, atomic energy is a serious
matter.
Mr. DURHAM. I thank the gentle-
man.
*****
[p. 9470]
Mr. MAY. If the bill goes to confer-
ence, the House will still have another
opportunity to pass on it if a confer-
ence report comes back?
Mr. McCORMACK. Absolutely.
I urge the membership not to recom-
mit the bill. It would be an unwise step
to take. It would be construed as the
defeat of the bill. Technically, of
course, we know that that is not so, but
actually you and I know when a bill is
recommitted, so far as any bill is con-
cerned and so far as this bill is con-
cerned, it is defeated. The passage of
the bill is defeated. This bill has taken
the ordinary course through legislative
processes. It has passed the Senate.
It is about to be acted upon in the House
with a number of amendments. We all
agree that something should be done.
We are all in agreement on that basic
proposition. Certainly, we must have
confidence in the members of the con-
ference committee on this bill the same
as we have in the members of confer-
ence committees on other bills. All
they can do is their best. They are
representing both branches of the Con-
gress. Whether I agree with a confer-
ence report or not, I have confidence in
the men who represent the legislative
body of which I am a Member and of
the other body. They are doing the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
191
best they can. They are following the
dictates of their judgment and their
conscience. We ought to follow the
regular ordinary course with reference
to this bill.
Every one of us is in agreement that
something should be passed. I hope
the bill will not be recommitted.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. McCORMACK. I yield.
Mr. COOLEY. I would like the gen-
tleman to tell us some sound reason
why it should not be recommitted.
Mr. McCORMACK. That is not the
question.
Mr. COOLEY. That is exactly the
question.
Mr. McCORMACK. That is not the
question. Can the gentleman give me
any sound reasons why it should be
recommitted?
Mr. COOLEY. Yes.
Mr. McCORMACK. What are they?
Mr. COOLEY. If I had the time I
could give you a hundred reasons.
Mr. McCORMACK. You could give
me a hundred emotional reasons, but
the fact is the country needs this legis-
lation.
Mr. COOLEY. Why?
Mr. McCORMACK. Why? It is of
vital importance.
Mr. COOLEY. Why?
Mr. McCORMACK. Oh why. There
are a hundred reasons why it is of vital
importance. Oh, it is easy to sit there
and ask the question "Why?" I am
surprised at the gentleman from North
Carolina who ordinarily has better
judgment than that. The important
fact is that this bill has been considered
by this committee for several days. It
has been considered by the Military Af-
fairs Committee for weeks. It is a
matter of vital importance to send it
along to the conference committee.
Is the gentleman opposed to some
legislation to control atomic energy?
Mr. COOLEY. At this time; yes.
Mr. McCORMACK. Are you op-
posed to it at any time?
Mr. COOLEY. No; not at any time.
Mr. McCORMACK. The gentleman
admits that legislation is necessary.
The gentleman can take his own re-
sponsibility.
Mr. COOLEY. That is exactly what
I am doing.
Mr. McCORMACK. The gentleman
can take his own responsibility. The
fact remains that if this bill is recom-
mitted, as far as the country is con-
cerned they will consider it a defeat of
the bill, and the people of the country
are justified in considering that if the
bill is recommitted, the bill has been
defeated.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Massachusetts has ex-
pired.
The question is on the committee
amendment.
The committee amendment was
agreed to.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, it seems perfectly
plain to everyone in this House and in
the Nation that there is confusion here
about how to vote on this legislation.
In passing, I have been reading the
newspapers in the past 3 or 4 days,
with close attention to their opinions
and reporting of this subject, and I
have yet to find anything in the papers
which clarified the Congress' mind
about this legislation, and much cal-
culated further to confuse them.
Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LUCE. I yield.
Mr. RIVERS. Will you please give
the House the benefit of some of the
reasons whereby you think it is so nec-
essary at this time to pass this legisla-
tion?
Mrs. LUCE. I shall come to them
later, although I have given them re-
peatedly during the course of this
debate. Now the majority of the news-
papers and their columnists, just like
the Members, are often for or against
this legislation, it seems to me in many
instances, for altogether wrong rea-
sons.
-------
192
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
For example, there is one school that
seems largely to advocate this bill as a
peacetime measure for the cure of can-
cer and leukemia. Now, there happens
to be a bill, H. R. 4502, on cancer re-
search which has just been reported
out of the Committee on Foreign Af-
fairs of this House and I hope will be
on the floor of this House today for
our consideration, appropriating
$100,000,000 for experiments and re-
search in cancer.
The bill concerns an effort wholly de-
voted to the search to defeat the dread
disease. I intend to vote for it, and I
hope with all my heart that everyone
else will vote for it. But the bill before
us is not a medical therapy bill. If its
passage does eventually result in fur-
ther beneficial research in cancer, it
will only do so incidentally. The main
reason for this bill is the defense of our
Nation, and for no other reason should
it be considered as urgent.
I intend at the proper place in the
bill to offer an amendment providing
that this act shall expire at the end of
7 years. Seven years, I believe, is a
most generous length of time in which
to find out whether this bill will work
of whether it will not; whether we need
it or whether we do not; whether it will
fulfill all the promises for welfare that
are made in its name for science; or,
most important of all, whether it will
operate in a free country in peacetime
without constricting both scientific re-
search and our political and economic
liberties.
Mr. EATON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LUCE. I yield with great
pleasure to our most distinguished col-
league.
Mr. EATON. Will the lady please
give us her judgment of what will be-
come of the atomic bomb during the 7
years? Who will be in control of it?
Mrs. LUCE. I have first been asked
by the gentleman from South Carolina
to try to give some reasons for the
urgency for the passage of this bill. I
would feel in a weak position indeed if
all I could say when asked that question
was, Why that should be perfectly ap-
parent; anybody ought to see why
plainly. I believe that many Members
of this House sincerely do not see why
it is necessary. I will tell you why I
think it is of great importance that we
[p. 9552]
should pass a civilian-control bill now,
although some provisions of the Senate
bill have been stricken out that I would
have left in and some put in that I
would have left out, but the reason I
think it is important to pass this bill is
that, first, we must maintain and ac-
quire complete control of the raw
materials for making atomic bombs.
Secondly, that control must be neces-
sarily civilian, because civilian scien-
tists and others who will be needed in
a long-range atomic research and ex-
periment plan just will not work in a
brass-hat atmosphere. You can like it
or not, but they will not work under
such conditions.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LUCE. I yield.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Will the
gentlewoman tell me why we cannot
now obtain the materials for the man-
ufacture of the atomic bomb just as
well as if we had this legislation?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentlewoman from Connecticut has ex-
pired.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for three
additional minutes and to revise and
extend my remarks.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentlewoman
from Connecticut?
There was no objection.
Mrs. LUCE. The gentleman's ques-
tion was why can we not have Govern-
ment control of raw materials?
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. No;
that was not what I asked. Under the
present emergency legislation, war
emergency legislation, we are in a
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
193
position now to get all the materials
necessary to manufacture the bomb.
Mrs. LUCE. There are a great many
corporations, companies, and busi-
nesses which have materials to sell, or
mine, in the atomic field. For example,
thorium happens to be fissionable ma-
terial. Today the people producing
thorium do not know whether to con-
tinue their operations or to stop them;
they do not know whether to make con-
tracts with the Army, or to wait and
make contracts with some civilian au-
thority, or whether they should make
them under the old free-enterprise sys-
tem ; in fact, everybody who has fission-
able material, plants, structures, or
anything whatsoever to do with atomic
energy is exactly in the same position
the country is in about OPA now.
There is confusion in the entire field
owing to uncertainty about this legis-
lation.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. That is
because of the policy of the adminis-
tration trying to force this bill through
Congress at this time. If they adopted
a definite policy I do not know why they
could not get it. It must be mined in
order to provide the material necessary
for the manufacture of atomic bombs.
We did it in war. We are still at war.
Mrs. LUCE. Yes; but the war acts
must one day expire.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LUCE. I yield.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. I wish
to make two short observations. One
is that we can buy the materials under
the law we have on the statute books at
the present time, the Strategic Material
Stock Pile Act; the other is that if the
main purpose of this bill is defense—
Mrs. LUCE. That is what I conceive
is its proper purpose—defense; and I
want an expiration date to it when
there is genuine peace in the world.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. If the
main purpose is defense, then 7 years
is too long.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. LUCE. I yield.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. There
is a great deal of difference between the
Government being able to buy enough
fissionable material to make bombs with
on the one hand, and having a commis-
sion able to prevent somebody from pos-
sessing fissionable material that may
prove very dangerous, on the other
hand. Is it not the second reason, even
more than the first one, with which we
should be concerned?
Mrs. LUCE. That is quite correct.
There must be a consistent, intelligent,
coherent control over the export, own-
ership, and acquisition of fissionable
material, and there also must be free-
dom to the scientists. I think there are
provisions in this bill which are defi-
nitely socialistic in character. I con-
sider that my position on this bill, that
it is necessary to vote for it, while at
the same time, I am concerned to point
out its dangers in order to guard
against them, is consistent.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentlewoman from Connecticut has
again expired.
Mr. BULWINKLE. Mr. Chairman,
I rise in opposition to the pro forma
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I have heard during
the debate here much talk about con-
fusion and I have also heard much talk
about recommitting the bill. The ques-
tion was asked just a short time ago,
Why the necessity for this bill?
May I not refer those who wish to
know of the necessity for this bill to
the hearings, and particularly Secre-
tary of War Patterson whose evidence
is on page 17:
In May 1945, in anticipation of the prob-
able success of the atomic bomb and of the
prospect of an early end to the war, the Secre-
tary, with approval of the President, took steps
to initiate a long-iange policy on atomic energy.
He appointed the following special committee to
survey the subject and to submit it a program:
Secretary Stimson, chairman; James F. Byrnes
(then a piivate citizen); Will Clayton, Assistant
Secretary of State; Ralph Bard, Under Secretary
of Navy; George Harrison, Special Assistant to
Secretary of War; Di. Vannevar Bush, Chair-
man of the Office of Scientific Research and
-------
194
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Development; Dr. Karl Compton, president,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Dr.
James Conant, president, Harvard University.
The special committee was assisted by a
scientific panel drawn from the most eminent
scientists working on the atomic energy project:
Dr. J. R. Oppenheimer, Dr. E. O. Lawrence,
Dr. Arthur H. Compton, Dr. Enrico Fermi.
This special committee made findings
that are worthy of the attention of any
man, the last one, No. 6, I should like
to call your attention to, quoting:
The activities of the commission to be con-
sistent with foreign policy and national defense
as communicated to the commission by the
President.
Are we, merely by a cursory view or
reading of this bill and the hearings,
going to stand before the country today
and say that we will put up our puny
minds on this subject against the great
scientists of this country? Are we, who
have not studied this problem, for polit-
ical or other purposes going to stand
here today and say that with a matter
involving as much as this we will dis-
regard everything that has been said
by those who know and cast it all away,
and then say we do not need this legis-
lation?
Ah, my colleagues, before you come
to your conclusion, let me pray in be-
half of this country of ours that we all
love that you give serious consideration
to the work of the Senate committee,
the House committee, and the scientists
of this country.
Mrs. DOUGLAS of Illinois. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield.
Mr. BULWINKLE. I yield to the
gentlewoman from Illinois.
Mrs. DOUGLAS of Illinois. Is not
one reason why we need at once a long-
term program the retention of top-
flight scientists and research workers?
I had the privilege of visiting Oak
Ridge in January, and the officers in
charge insisted that the imperative
need was to get at once a long-range
program, because they were daily los-
ing competent men on their staff, and
without a plan they could not keep
them.
Mr. BULWINKLE. Certainly, the
lady is correct in her statement.
Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. LANHAM: Page
50, line 16, insert a new subsection, as follows:
"The term 'nuclear fission' shall be construed
to mean that process which takes place in
nuclei wherein the nucleus is split into frag-
ments, at least two of which contain a substan-
tial fraction of the mass of the original
nucleus."
Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Chairman, nu-
clear fission is referred to all through
the bill, and I think there should be a
definition of it. This definition is prob-
ably correct; if not, it could be
changed; but it certainly has the ap-
proval of a very distinguished gentle-
man who from the very beginning has
been connected with all of the opera-
tions with reference to atomic energy.
Does not the chairman think that
there should be some definition of it,
since you are giving definitions of the
various other terms mentioned in the
bill?
Mr. MAY. I have no objection what-
soever to defining the term; and if it is
not properly defined in the gentleman's
amendment, that is another reason why
it ought to go to conference, where we
can sit down deliberately and see what
the exact, proper definition is or
whether this is proper or not.
Mr. LANHAM. But the conference
would have no authority unless there
[p. 9553]
was something in the bill by way of
definition.
Mr. MAY. I think that is possibly
true, and this will certainly give them
an opportunity to do it.
Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to
the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Texas [Mr. LANHAM].
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
word.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
195
Mr. Chairman, mankind has always
been afraid of the unknown. Mankind
was afraid of influenza when it struck
this country during the last war. It
has been afraid of all diseases until a
remedy has been found. Mankind is to-
day afraid of cancer. Why? Because
its cause is unknown. Its cure is not
certain.
I think a great deal of the confusion
in this House over atomic energy can be
placed directly at the door of the un-
known quantity. Research is nothing
more than reaching out into the un-
known, taking something that we have
not known about and bringing it down
to practical application. The scientists
in this age have reached out and tapped
the field of atomic energy and the many
problems involving it. It seems to me
that this House ought to do the thing
that will take atomic energy and then
use it for the benefit of mankind. How
that is going to be done, I do not know,
and I do not think this House knows.
There are many unknown roads to
travel before we reach the ultimate end
of what will happen with atomic en-
ergy. That is one cause of the confu-
sion today. We cannot pull back the
curtain of tomorrow and see just what
is to happen with this new-found force.
It is a great destructive power. It
should be harnessed for the benefit of
mankind.
I wish the bill could have more study,
but I will not stand in the way of prog-
ress represented by this great new dis-
covery.
As Members of Congress we ought
to approach this problem with open
minds, with the hope of going down a
road that will eventually take this
great secret that scientists have
reached out and brought down to us
and use it for the benefit of the world.
Perhaps we could outlaw atomic bombs
in future wars. That wTould be ideal.
Whether it can be done or not I do not
know.
I heard the gentlewoman from Con-
necticut say that scientists would not
work with the brass hats, or something
like that, but I do not agree. Of course,
scientific knowledge goes on regardless
of this bill. I am not worried about
whether cancer research will continue
if we do not pass this bill. Scientists
work, and have been working for years,
on what causes cancer. Some day we
may find out what causes cancer, we
may find a cure for it. Neither do I
think the knowledge of the atomic
bomb will stay here in America. Sci-
ence marches on and this knowledge of
atomic energy will be universal. Sci-
entists the world over are thinking
along the lines of what atomic energy
can do today. Other nations will have
it, although they may have some diffi-
culty in getting that intricate machin-
ery that goes into the production of
atomic bombs. But it does seem to me
that with the peace conference to be
held next week there perhaps is no
hurry about passing this particular
atomic-energy bill. What harm is there
in waiting until the thing has had time
to boil down and simmer a bit. Per-
haps in 6 months we will be wiser and
confusion will subside. The more you
think about the unknown the less fear-
ful you become about the unknown. If
the bill is not recommitted for further
study, I shall join with the majority
and trust that, under the bill, science
may march on and the powers and
benefits of atomic energy will bring
great benefits to the world.
Mr. EATON. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I have been sitting
here through every hour of this debate.
I do not claim to have as much intellec-
tual equipment or scientific knowledge
as many of my colleagues, but I have
managed through the past 22 years
once in a while to vote intelligently.
That privilege is going to be denied me
today.
I have three convictions as a result
of these weary days: First, we have
created the atomic bomb. It was done
with our money and our scientists un-
der military control at the time. That
is our responsibility as a people and a
-------
196
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
government, the gravest responsibility
that has ever rested upon a nation in
the history of the world.
Second, I am convinced that it is a
serious mistake to have kept this legis-
lation until the dying hours of this ses-
sion of Congress, when we are harassed
to death with a thousand claims and
calls and are looking to get away from
here, and are unable to give the atten-
tion and time to it that we ought to.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. EATON. I yield to the gentle-
man from Kentucky.
Mr. MAY. I call the attention of my
friend, when he says it was a mistake
to keep the legislation back to this late
hour, to the fact that the House Com-
mittee on Military Affairs reported a
bill on the subject the 7th day of last
November and urged its early consid-
eration. I do not think we ought to be
blamed for what has happened, in view
of the fact that the Senate bill came to
us, and we commenced hearings on it
immediately.
Mr. EATON. I am not blaming any-
one, I am just stating a fact.
Lastly, I join with the very brilliant
and beautiful lady from Connecticut, if
she will allow me to join with her, in
being completely confused. When a
mind such as she possesses is confused,
what can you expect of a mere man?
So I say today that no matter how I
vote I have not the slightest idea
whether I am voting wisely or unwisely.
I am inclined to cut the Gordian knot by
voting to recommit this bill to the com-
mittee.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. EATON. I yield.
Mr. HINSHAW. The gentleman has
been a very distinguished representa-
tive of this body at the San Francisco
Conference and at other conferences of
an international character. Can the
gentleman give us the benefit of his
wisdom as to the immediate need for
passing this legislation?
Mr. EATON. I am not profoundly
acquainted with the reasons to be pre-
sented in answer to that question, but I
can conceive of no immediate urgency
from the point of view of the interna-
tional organization at this time.
Mr. WADSWORTH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. EATON. I yield.
Mr. WADSWORTH. Speaking of
the alleged immediate urgency, the gen-
tleman will recall that the War Depart-
ment is now entering into contracts
with universities for further research
in this field so that research will not
cease.
Mr. EATON. So you understand,
then, that the urgency is not imme-
diate?
Mr. WADSWORTH. It is not imme-
diate; that is correct.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. EATON. I yield.
Mr. CHURCH. The gentlewoman
from Connecticut has said that there
was much of the socialistic in this bill.
Does the gentleman not believe that in
the next year there will be less of that
trend in the then membership and in
the country and that it is better to de-
lay legislation on this question?
Mr. EATON. I do not see any imme-
diate urgency for the passage of the
bill.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that all debate on
this section and all amendments thereto
do now close.
Mr. WILSON. Mr. Chairman, I
object.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I move
that the debate on this section and all
amendments thereto do now close.
The motion was agreed to.
[p. 9554]
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
word.
Mr. Chairman, as most Members
know, I have opposed the amendments,
with one or two exceptions, which have
been adopted to this bill.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
197
I rise at this time, none the less, to
beg the House not to recommit it. The
confusion that has been referred to is
largely confusion that has been created
—I shall not say deliberately—in the
course of debate. The conception of
the bill as it came to us from the Senate
is absolutely clear to anyone who really
wants to understand it.
It was almost a year ago that the
first atomic bomb was dropped. A
Member of this body, responsible for
the welfare of the Nation, who, 1 year
after that greatest event since the birth
of Christ himself upon this earth, is
willing to tell his constituents that he
does not understand the over-all prob-
lems of it well enough to legislate upon
them, strikes a blow at democratic
Government itself. We must be able to
deal with this our greatest problem if
we are to prove that democratic par-
liamentary legislative Government can
justify its continuance in the new and
admittedly dynamic and in some re-
spect fearsome age in which we live.
The question is, Do we have the cour-
age to face the world as it is; not as we
would like it, but as it is? A vote to
recommit this bill means that domestic
control over fissionable material and
atomic energy will not be adopted at
least until the Congress meets next
year. Such a vote will be tantamount
of cause to defeating the bill and will
mean that sporadic possession and spo-
radic use of this most dangerous ele-
ment ever to face mankind can go on.
Such a vote will mean a repudiation,
in effect, of the official position of this
Government as laid before the other
nations of the world in the Baruch
proposal for the international control
of atomic energy, because, unless we
here establish domestic control first,
we cannot expect other nations to agree
with us for international control. And
unless that international control be
established during the period of Amer-
ica's unquestioned pre-eminence in this
field, our chance to get that interna-
tional control will be minimized im-
measurably, and a continuing atomic
race becomes inevitable.
Furthermore, the choice and alterna-
tive that we face is briefly this, if this
legislation is recommitted, this House
puts its stamp of approval on a con-
tinued armament race in atomic wea-
pons. We would be resting the fate of
this Nation in some miraculous stop-
ping of the minds of scientists in every
other nation in the world. For we
would fail to make provision, as every
bit of competent evidence tells us we
must, for the continuance of atomic
energy development at home. In other
words, if we recommit this bill, we fail
to say that we will do everything with-
in the power of this House to stop an
armament race in atomic weapons, and
we will be saying instead that this
House will have no part in what other
agency of this Government has at-
tempted and is striving to do, namely
to get control in the hands of men over
this engine of destruction, which other-
wise will destroy him.
For my part, I am not willing to sell
the future safety of my children and
yours for any cheap political effort to
save myself in the next few years.
This is a matter for the ages. This
House cannot turn this legislation
down, Mr. Chairman, and be true to
our duty.
For if we raise our sights even for a
moment above the level of secrets that
elementary reason teaches will be se-
cret for only a moment of time, above
the level of political slogans, above the
level of the desires of some forces in
this country for private profit—if we
will raise our sights to the great stark
facts we face we shall see beyond them
but two visions, one is a vision of the
four horsemen more terrible in mien
than ever a World War I author could
possibly paint them. The other is a
vision of the stars themselves and the
universe whence atomic energy has
come, which of these visions will con-
stitute the actual fact of our children
and children's children, depends be-
lieve me, on what we do in this solemn
hour.
-------
198
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
I cannot blame Members in the slight-
est for feeling this is most difficult;
indeed, I cannot even blame them per-
sonally for wishing, as by their votes
and speeches many of them have indi-
cated they wished that atomic energy
had never been released. But I can,
and do most earnestly, beg them not to
continue to commit their country's
course on such a wish which they know
is contrary to the basic facts of our life.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield.
Mr. HINSHAW. Will the gentle-
man tell me if any other nation of the
world has transferred its atomic-en-
ergy program to the domestic field?
Mr. COOLEY. Not that I know of.
Mr. FOLGER. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. Very briefly.
Mr. FOLGER. What other nation
has the atomic bomb besides this
Nation?
Mr. COOLEY. I do not know of any.
Mrs. DOUGLAS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield.
Mrs. DOUGLAS of California. The
question was asked if any countries had
transferred their atomic-energy pro-
gram underneath civilian control. The
English have their entire program un-
derneath civilian control, and the Army
or the Navy does not appear anywhere
in their program.
Mr. COOLEY. I hope the lady's an-
swer is satisfactory to the gentleman
who propounded the question.
I asked the majority leader to give
the House one sound reason why this
bill should not be recommitted. I did
not do that with the idea of bringing
about any embarrassing situation to
him because he had the floor. In the
hours and hours of debate I have lis-
tened for some sound reasons to be
given by someone as to why it was not
wise to recommit this bill.
Mr. WILSON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I do not know
whether the gentleman can give us any
sound reason or not, but if he can, I am
very glad to yield to him.
Mr. WILSON. The chairman of the
committee just a few moments ago
made the statement that this bill was
reported out of the Committee en Mili-
tary Affairs 8 months ago and had not
been acted upon. Can anyone tell me
why there should be such haste to act
upon it, when 5 months from now we
will be back in session again?
Mr. COOLEY. I agree with the gen-
tleman.
Mr. BLOOM. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield.
Mr. BLOOM. I merely want to say
that the very interesting speech made
by the gentleman from California, I
[p. 9555]
think, gives more than one reason why
this bill should not be recommitted.
Mr. COOLEY. No, it does not. The
gentleman from California did not give
any reason except
Mr. VOORHIS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield.
Mr. VOORHIS of California. The
first reason is to make sure that Amer-
ica continues to get fissionable material
in the future.
The second reason is to prevent that
fissionable material from getting scat-
tered all over the Nation with people
using it for all sorts of purposes.
The third reason is to establish a
continuous centralized control in the
hands of this Commission to prevent
that thing from happening.
The fourth reason is that if you are
going to talk at all about getting that
international control then the first
thing you have got first to do is to have
domestic control.
The fifth reason is that the most dis-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
199
tinguished people who studied this
question, the scientists, the economists,
the chiefs of staff, the President of the
United States, the State Department,
and everybody else who knows any-
thing about it has told you that it was
necessary to act now.
Mr. COOLEY. Now, to sum up the
reasons that have just been given by
the gentleman from California, he ap-
parently is very much afraid at the
present time that the secrets of the
atomic bomb are being given away or
that research in the field is being re-
tarded or will soon be abandoned and
that all of the scientists will cease to
work on this newly discovered, mysteri-
ous, and most terrific of all powers. He
recites the fact that others have been
giving thought and consideration to the
matter, that great scientists have
worked on it, that the Military Affairs
Committee members have considered it.
I believe, and I hope he will agree, that
the secret is now being safely guarded;
research is continuing and will not be
impeded and will not be abandoned.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield to the gentle-
man from Michigan.
Mr. DINGELL. The gentleman has
asked why we should pass this? Will
the gentleman state precisely why he
is opposed to favorable action at this
time?
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for five
additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from North Carolina.
There was no objection.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I will
be very glad to tell the gentleman why
I am opposed to it. The secret now is
adequately safeguarded, it should be
safeguarded, and should remain as a
military secret until peace documents
have been written and signed. We
should hold this weapon of war.
I do not believe it has been recognized
or established as a cure for cancer.
The gentleman from Minnesota, Dr.
JUDD, has not yet established his theory
of mutating the species by radio-
activity, on which the charming lady
from Connecticut commented yester-
day.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I yield to the gentle-
woman from Connecticut.
Mrs. LUCE. I had not at that time
read Dr. JUDD'S exceedingly brilliant
explanation of the processes of muta-
tion as they appear in yesterday's
RECORD. You will find there a complete
description as to radioactivity in this
field and how it may have brought
about the creation of dinosaurs and
other monsters in prehistoric times.
I want to say also that I welcome this
opportunity to say that my own re-
marks on the subject were a humorous
attempt to focus attention on the in-
credible potentialities of radioactive
energy. If we do not control the bomb,
it might be a good thing for someone to
mutate the species, so we could all es-
cape from it, and change us into
groundhogs or moles or, better still,
provide us with wings, because I am
sure it would be nice to have them here.
If we do not stop devising weapons of
slaughter, we are not likely to have
wings in the hereafter, that is certain.
What is much to be preferred to the
mutation of the species is that we
should all begin to use the gray matter
and the brains with which the Lord so
abundantly provided us many millions
of years ago. If we will use our brains
on this matter, we need not worry about
mutation of the species, because we will
not take any risks with human life, and
we will send this bill to conference.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COOLEY. I want to answer the
gentleman's question.
Mr. DINGELL. The gentleman
stated that he feared the possible dis-
closure of secrets if this is placed in the
hands of a commission. Is there any-
thing in the bill that threatens any
-------
200
LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATIQN-
such possibility?
Mr. COOLEY. I do not think \ve
need to take any others in with us to
help share the secrets of the atomic
bomb. I regard the atomic bomb as one
of the greatest instrumentalities of
death ever devised by the genius of
man. You do not have to guess about
it. All you have to do is to go to Naga-
saki and Hiroshima and see the results
of it there. If we are going to remain
strong, if this is an instrumentality of
defense, then pray tell me why should
we give it up?
Mr. DINGELL. We are not giving
it up.
Mr. COOLEY. Why should we be so
anxious to let Russia or any other na-
tion on earth know the secrets of this
deadly weapon that we have in our
hands? I would like to ask a question
of the gentleman from California.
Does the gentleman believe that if the
situation were reversed and Russia had
possession of this secret that she would
give us full information about it?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. No;
and I do not believe that there is a line
or a dot in this bill that proposes to
give it to anybody, and if there were, I
would be against the bill. What there
is in this bill is the establishment of the
kind of control in the hands of a com-
mission that will make it clear and to
prevent that happening until such time
as we have international control over
it.
Mr. COOLEY. What is the gen-
tleman's objection to the present
method of control? What is the gen-
tleman's objection to guarding it with
soldiers and controlling it as it is now
being controlled?
Mr. VOORHIS of California. The
present method of control does not ex-
tend at all to development throughout
the country. The present method of
control, as I explained over and again
in the debate, does not reach fissionable
material in the hands of any Tom, Dick,
and Harry in this Nation. It does not
prevent the development of production
of any weapon that anybody may want
to produce.
Mr. COOLEY. My friend seems to
be alarmed over the possibility that fis-
sionable material may fall into the
hands of individuals or private corpo-
rations and that such individuals or
corporations might make greater
strides in development and production
than will be made under our present
set-up, and he seems to be under the
impression that this newly created
Commission will guard more carefully
both the material and its development.
This is about the frankest expression
that I have heard in support of the bill.
Technically, we are still at war, and
certainly, no individual or corporation
would dare attempt to seize upon fis-
sionable material or undertake experi-
ments which would clash with the plans
and programs of the armed forces.
This is a deadly instrumentality, and
it should be dealt with in deadly fash-
ion. The atomic bomb was the weapon
that ended, suddenly, the world's great-
est conflict. While it destroyed human
life, it likewise saved human life, be-
cause it ended the war. It was a climax
to cruelty. Certainly it is not unrea-
sonable to argue that atomic energy as
a weapon of war or defense should be
perfected before diverting our atten-
tion and the attention of scientists to a
discovery of other peacetime uses in
which it may be developed.
Is this bill an act of appeasement?
Are we being forced by diplomatic
pressure to surrender "the big stick,"
the atomic bomb, before even our allies
will discuss the terms of peace? This
country is tired of appeasement. This
country is tired of pussyfooting. We
should be more determined and insist
upon free, frank, and open discussions.
What do we know about Russia's post-
war programs, demobilization plans, or
experiments in the field of atomic
energy? Will the passage of this bill
cause Russia and other nations to
abandon all experiments and discharge
all scientists and abandon their explor-
atory efforts or even to submit to inter-
national control the information which
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
201
they have obtained thus far? Why,
Russia will not even permit American
military men or civilians into Korea or
into certain sections of Manchuria. It
is not even safe for Members of this
Congress to fly over territory which is
now occupied by the Russians. They
have not accorded us even the privileges
of cooperation and understanding.
There is constantly a tense feeling in
[p. 9556]
China, and especially in the northern
portion of that poverty-stricken nation.
In China we seem to be playing both
ends against the middle. We are told
that we are equipping and supplying
both armies—the army of the Central
Government and the army of the Com-
munists. Our men are still wondering
why they are in China. They know
that the war is over and they want to
know why they are not permitted to re-
turn home. General Marshall has been
given the world's greatest and most
difficult diplomatic assignment, but I
venture the assertion that there are
areas with which he is dealing into
which he would not even be permitted
to travel in search of pertinent infor-
mation. What kind of partnership is
this? With what kind of ally are we
dealing? Not even the members of our
great Military Affairs Committee know
anything at all about Russia's postwar
programs, and yet we are about to run
the risk of surrendering the greatest
military secret of all times and even
before the terms of peace have been
agreed upon. Yes; I am for control of
all the secrets of the atomic bomb and
will continue to be for the control of
such secrets until the terms of peace
have been agreed upon and adequate
international machinery has been pro-
vided for the future control of all
phases of the development in the field
of atomic energy.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from North Carolina has
expired.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I move
that all debate on this section and all
amendments thereto do now close.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. CASE of South
Dakota:
Page 52, line 13, strike out "four years" and
insert "one year."
Page 52, line 13, strike out "four-year" and
insert "one-year."
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from South Dakota.
The amendment was rejected.
* * * * *
[p. 9557]
Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Chairman,
I move to strike out the last five words.
Mr. Chairman, I have refrained from
speaking on the bill during the time
that we have debated it because there
is evidently a great deal of confusion in
the minds of many here as to the advis-
ability of this legislation at all. On the
other hand, there is no question about
the fact that science is going to stop its
experiments and research whether this
legislation is passed or not. I am in-
clined to believe the Senate certainly
must have had in mind the protection
of the Nation and its natural resources
and the dangers of this atomic energy
if it were released promiscuously, when
they passed this bill. On the contrary,
we have amended the bill to such an
extent that it is now in such a state that
it is doubtful whether we all believe the
things that we have added to the bill.
One of the amendments which I am
particularly concerned about which was
adopted here a few moments ago on a
voice vote, was the definition of nuclear
fission. The gentleman who offered the
amendment may have been sincere in
his intentions, but the definition of nu-
clear fission in a bill passed by the
Congress will carry a great deal of au-
thority. If it is not properly defined, it
is going to be a matter of ridiculous-
ness in the minds of the public, or it is
going to be looked upon as the correct
-------
202
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
definition of nuclear fission, whether it
is correct or not. I recommend that
this bill go to conference and that the
conferees consider the definition of nu-
clear fission as defined in the Smythe
report which is much more scientifi-
cally correct, if there is going to be any
definition of nuclear fission in the bill
at all.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McDONOUGH. I yield.
Mr. HINSHAW. I think the House
should understand that my distin-
guished colleague from California is a
chemical engineer. His words are of
value at this time.
Mr. McDONOUGH. I thank the
gentleman. I have spent years in chem-
istry, in metallurgy, in the manufac-
ture of steel and aluminum, and in
explosives in the manufacture of
nitroglycerin, nitro-starch, and tetra-
nitroanilin before entering public serv-
ice when atomic energy was revealed
as an explosive. I became vitally in-
terested in and have done considerable
study on the subject. It is a highly
scientific subject. It is difficult to
legislate on. Scientific research and
development should not be curtailed by
legislation. It is an inherent charac-
teristic of men and women of science
to use their talent for the good of man-
kind, not for destructive purposes.
Most of the progress we have made in
extending life and making living more
comfortable has come from scientific
research and development.
I do not want to appear as an expert
on atomic energy, although I appre-
ciate the reference of my colleague
because, although the revolution of
atomic energy is new, in science it is
as old as the hills. We have only dis-
covered the uses of it. The defense
that we are trying to protect against
here is a defense for and from destruc-
tive purposes. We certainly should do
nothing by legislation that would inter-
fere with the development research and
uses of atomic energy for the indus-
tries, the arts, and sciences.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. McDONOUGH. I yield.
Mr. COOLEY. The gentleman from
Texas [Mr. LANHAM], in offering the
amendment, confessed that he was not
convinced that the definition was accu-
rate, but he merely put it in the bill
so that the conferees could discuss it
later.
Mr. McDONOUGH. I appreciate
that. I am only adding my contribu-
tion to it so that the conferees may have
it before them. I believe the definition
in the Smythe report is as accurate as
you can define it. I think we have the
framework of a good bill here and I do
not think it should be thrown out alto-
gether. It should go to conference. I
doubt very much if the secret about
which we are all talking—as a matter
of fact there is no secret in the creation
and formation of atomic energy. There
is a secret with reference to the specific
destructive force that it produces. No
private corporation will get hold of
that. They will not spend the amount
of money necessary to develop it for
that purpose. We are protecting that
secret with as much security as we have
in the Army and Navy and the FBI.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. McDONOUGH. I yield.
Mr. DINGELL. The gentleman's
idea of the Smythe suggestion is an
excellent one, but let me ask the gen-
tleman this question: Is there anything
in this bill that will disclose the secret
to anyone outside of these United
States?
Mr. McDONOUGH. I may say to
the gentleman, I am concerned about
the broad powers that are given to the
Commission, and the added personnel
that would be developed under the Com-
mission, and the fact that if you allow
these things to go through too many
minds, they are likely to leak out and
get into the wrong channels. As it is
now, I have every confidence the Army
is protecting the secret.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
203
gentleman from California has expired.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that all debate on
this section and all amendments thereto
close in 10 minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Kentucky?
There was no objection.
Mr. TIBBOTT. Mr. Chairman, I
ask unanimous consent to extend my
remarks.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from Pennsylvania.
There was no objection.
Mr. TIBBOTT. Mr. Chairman, from
the standpoint of my duty as a Member
of this body and to justify my position
on this bill, it is my conscientious belief
that this measure should be returned to
the committee for further study and
consideration. While I realize that
there are many who believe that the
committee's bill on atomic energy
should be adopted now, nevertheless, it
seems to me that we are acting in too
much haste. I have arrived at this con-
clusion after listening carefully to the
arguments both for and against the bill.
As the situation stands I cannot give
the bill my support as there are so
many confusing provisions in it that, to
my way of believing, do not give our
country the protection to which we are
entitled. For the time being and until
peace is restored throughout the world,
I am of the firm belief that the secrets
of the atomic bomb should be kept
entirely within the confines of our own
Nation. Until such time as the com-
mittee brings in additional evidence
in support of their position, I am com-
pelled to vote against the passage of
the bill before us.
[p. 9558]
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Kentucky [Mr. ROBSION] is recog-
nized.
Mr. ROBSION of Kentucky. Mr.
Chairman, we have all watched with
interest the efforts of our country to
build a just and lasting peace and to set
up an organization that would prevent
aggression and the horrors and burden
of wars in the future. But in that
effort backed by our administration and
the heart, soul, and mind of the Ameri-
can people we have seen our efforts
frustrated from time to time so that we
were unable to write a workable charter
and we have been unable to bring the
countries together to write or agree
upon a treaty of peace. The country
that has obstructed all the way, all the
time, has been Russia. It has created
a spirit of alarm in this country and we
are continuing to draft teen-agers and
keep and maintain 1,600,000 of our
boys in foreign lands and in camps here
and on the seven seas of the world, at
great expense to our Nation. This year
with a deficit facing the country the
Congress has already voted the enor-
mous sum of $12,000,000,000 for the
Army and the Navy. This is one-half
of the cost of World War I. The ad-
ministration says all this is necessary.
Why? They claim that there is dan-
ger. Russia is the threat. Now, if it is
so necessary to draft our teen-agers
and keep large armed forces through-
out the world and spend $12,000,000,000
this year to strengthen our military and
naval power, we must guard zealously
our atomic secret today. We must not,
while the world is in turmoil, make it
possible for any potential enemy to
obtain this war secret, the most power-
ful aggressive and defensive weapon
the American people have? I have
heard throughout this debate expres-
sions of doubt as to how far we should
go. The bill has been greatly amended
and I think improved. But it is still not
clear what type of men will be ap-
pointed on that Commission or the per-
sons who will make up the large number
of personnel. There could be a leak.
Now, without a peace treaty, with a
world still technically at war, shall we
give away this mighty secret weapon?
I am in favor of recommitting this bill
and giving more time for study.
Russia is not surrendering any of her
-------
204
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
military secrets; she has rejected all
plans submitted by us and other peace-
loving nations. This secret—know-how
—of the atomic bomb is in the safekeep-
ing of our military with other secrets.
This is the most priceless of all. We
know and the world knows we are a
peace-loving Nation and will not use it
except in our own defense and to pre-
serve the peace of the world, but what
will happen if some other nations get
possession of this secret before a treaty
of peace is signed and there is still dis-
cord throughout the world.
This bill as amended sets up a Com-
mission of civilians and one military
man. They do not have the right to
give away our atomic bomb secret. The
Congress and the American people
should be vigilant. Some delay until
Congress meets next January would
give time to determine if the world's
problems can be solved in a peaceful
way, and we can know more about Rus-
sia's attitude.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Kentucky has expired.
The gentleman from North Carolina
[Mr. FOLGER] is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. FOLGER. Mr. Chairman, I can
hardly understand what is going on in
the House. It is the strangest situation
from any point of view that the mind
can conceive, if one has a mind, as to
why a concerted, apparently well-de-
veloped campaign should be put on in
this body to destroy this legislation. Is
it politics? I would not make that
accusation. I do not wish even to think
that even in the inmost private recesses
of my soul.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. FOLGER. I yield.
Mrs. LUCE. I do not think anybody
in this House would dream of accusing
anybody in this House of jeopardizing
millions of lives and perhaps civiliza-
tion itself for political reasons. There
is not a man that low in this House. If
there were he should be shot.
Mr. FOLGER. The gentlewoman has
stated about what I have stated, that
not in the inmost recesses of my soul
would I think such a thing. Then, is it
due to the fact that many of us have
failed to inform ourselves on this sub-
ject, when the President of the United
States, the Secretary of War, the Sec-
retary of the Navy, the State Depart-
ment, the scientists who discovered
atomic energy have asked for this legis-
lation? It was not an invention, it was
a discovery, for nuclear energy has
been here all the time. We just have
discovered it and made ourselves able
to apply it.
I want to read you a fine statement,
and, as my opinion, the following:
The carefully considered measure for
control of atomic energy passed by the
Senate has now been warped beyond all
recognition. The chance we may have
if we subscribe to that view is that in
the conference we may unwarp some of
these things that have been, in my opin-
ion, thoughtlessly injected into this
legislation.
On the pretext of preserving secrecy,
the House has voted to void the prin-
ciple of civilian rule, as though Ameri-
cans are not to be trusted simply
because they do not wear a uniform.
And then, by way of making ludicrous
even its own pretenses, the House
voted to make secrecy impossible by
eliminating the Senate provision for
a Government monopoly in the atomic
field and providing, instead, for pri-
vate patents to develop the most potent
force the world has ever known. This
vital legislation must not now be killed.
The House has a positive obligation to
act, however inadequately. If it does
so, perhaps something that makes
sense can be worked out in conference
with the Senate. If it fails to act the
Army will be left in the stultifying
control which has already driven the
men of science from the field. What is
at stake is far too urgent, far too vital
to the Nation and to the world, to be
settled by craven default.
It is admitted that in this bill it is not
expected we can pass a perfect piece of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
205
legislation and we may under necessity,
from time to time, to offer and adopt
amendments to it; but I suggest to the
Members of the House that this bill, as
it comes to us from the Senate, is as
nearly a perfect answer to the obliga-
tion of the United States, to its own
citizens and the rest of the world, as
the mind of man can conceive under the
circumstances. A postponement of
this would be a likely disaster to the
Nation and probably to the world.
Men and women, I plead that you may
not scuttle this important bill.
*****
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, it seems
to me that there is little confusion about
the character of the Senate bill before
amendment. But many are confused
about whether or not we should vote for
it. We are torn between a distaste for
the vast dictatorial domestic powers it
confers on the five-man commission,
and our fears that without it we shall
endanger our national security in a
troubled world.
When scientists read the debate on
this floor they will no doubt be appalled
by our ignorance of the subject of
nuclear energy, and the silly unscien-
tific things we have said about it. But
when we read some of the things scien-
tists say about the purpose and effect of
domestic legislation, they also sound a
[p. 9559]
little silly to us. We are ignoramuses
in their field, but they are not exactly
Daniel Websters in ours. If the world
were at peace we could each stick to
our own last. But it is not, unhappily.
The threat of war has combined in this
bill the scientists' field and ours. I
apologize to the scientists for any of
my scientific errors or malapropisms
in this debate, which natural igno-
rance of the subject occasioned. But
none of us owe any apology to the
scientists for telling them that this
bill is pure socialism. Indeed they
should thank us for it, for of all
men American scientists passionately
love liberty. It is the liberty they have
enjoyed in the past which has enabled
us to grow great as a scientific nation.
It is the business of a legislator to point
out to them, and all the people, just
what effect this law may have on their
liberties, when peace comes. Moreover,
I do not see why any Member should be
criticized for stating a fact which the
able Senator from Connecticut, a man
of intellectual integrity, stated himself
several times—that this bill is unprece-
dented, unique, and that it should never
set a precedent for any other legisla-
tion. So, in saying that its unique and
unprecedented aspect is precisely its
totalitarian aspect, I am only repeating
what Senator McMAHON and his com-
mittee developed in their hearings, and
in the few hours of debate the Senate
had on the matter.
Is it wrong for a legislator to be hon-
est with the people? I have been
honest, in any case, about what I
thought this bill signified for the Na-
tion's future, if it stays on the books
when the long international crisis that
brought it into being is past. I have
been equally honest in saying that I
agree with the Senators, and I agree
with our Members who think that
although this is very bad medi-
cine—socialistic medicine—indeed, the
strongest dose of it that this Congress
has ever been asked to take, for the
world's ills and our own sins, we must
nevertheless take it.
But I am now offering an amendment
to this bill which will let it expire at the
end of 7 years, in the event that we do
not find ourselves in a war at that time
with any foreign power.
Mr. Chairman, we need this bill, not
to advance scientific research in time of
peace, for we could continue to advance
science as we have done during our
whole history without it, under a free
system. Remember, our scientists pro-
duced nuclear fission without any such
bill as this. The reason we need the bill
now, if we will be honest with ourselves,
is that we are afraid of dangers from
abroad, and need to safeguard and
-------
206
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
develop our supremacy in atomic weap-
ons until that fear is passed.
Seven years is a very long time. In
7 years all of the questions that concern
me, and have concerned the gentleman
from California [Mr. VOORHIS], whose
reasons for accepting this legislation
are the same as I have repeatedly given
—will be answered. We will know the
answer to whether or not we will have
a world authority to control atomic
weapons, for example. We will know
whether our hopes for peace are well
founded, or whether war is inevitable.
Yes; I agree with all those who have
said during this debate that they favor
a large measure of civilian control
while there is the threat of war, and
even a certain measure of civilian con-
trol even in times of peace to guard
against serious accidents in the indus-
trial use of fissionable materials. We
must have civilian control, so long as
there is any possible threat of war, of
raw materials, over-all production of
facilities, and the means to induce sci-
entists to continue research; and in
peace we must prevent disastrous acci-
dents to our people. But if the dangers
of such wide legislation as this in peace-
time are now clearly seen by this House,
as the result of this debate, then let us
give ourselves a chance to get the
atomic commissariat we have created,
because of our fears about a third
world war, off our necks, if those fears
should mercifully cease to materialize
and peace should come.
Let us not, because of our temporary
fears of foreign totalitarianism, plunk
for permanent domestic totalitarianism
ourselves, when those fears are passed.
We shall regret it if we wed ourselves
permanently to this vast and mysteri-
ous socialistic enterprise.
Again, please remember why we are
passing this bill—it is as a defense
measure in a troubled world. When
the world subsides into a creative peace
we will not need it.
To keep it permanently on our books
is to despair of peace in the next dec-
ade.
Have we no hope for the future? Do
we really believe that war between our-
selves and Russia is inevitable? Are
we certain, beyond any hope, that the
peoples of the world will all be hurling
atomic bombs at one another in 5 or 10
years ? Are we despairful of the efforts
of our statesmen ever to make the UN
a going concern, to achieve world con-
trol of armaments, or better still, a
world in which no nation will desire
armaments because they are free, con-
tented, and prosperous?
Are we really committed in our
hearts and minds to an unending bomb
race? Do we really believe that there is
no way out of the dreadful stalemate
and impasse we find ourselves in but
annihilation between the nations?
If we do believe all these things, if we
can see nothing but certainty of war as
a solution for the international prob-
lems that confront us, then there is a
real excuse for making this legislation
permanent. But if that is our belief,
what you and I do here will not be long
remembered, it will be soon forgotten.
The very archives in which we place
this bill, and this building itself will be
destroyed in an atomic war. No, it will
not much matter then what we say or
do here today. Then those who have
shined on this floor will shine in the
Milky Way. And none of us will be
able to say to the other, "I told you so."
For we will all be atomized.
But, if there is a hope for peace—and
I dare to believe there is a hope—then
let us support this amendment, which
would cross this measure off our books
in peacetime and allow our people to
return to the free development of all
our energies, including our atomic
energy.
The CHAIRMAN The time of the
gentlewoman from Connecticut has
expired.
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for three
additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentlewoman
from Connecticut?
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
207
There was no objection.
Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentlewoman yield ?
Mrs. LUCE. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. McDONOUGH. Does the gen-
tlewoman believe that if atomic energy
had been revealed to the world not as a
destructive force there would be any
necessity for this legislation?
Mrs. LUCE. I doubt if this legisla-
tion would ever have been proposed if
this form of energy, which can be so
very beneficial to humanity had been
released in a nondestructive or indus-
trial form. This legislation is the re-
sult of atomic energy having first been
released before the public in the form
of a decisive weapon and because, until
our relations with Soviet Russia are
free of mutual suspicions, we must take
every precaution to safeguard that
weapon, and, if need be, develop it.
Mr. McDONOUGH. And we wish to
protect ourselves against the use of it
on us for destructive purposes.
Mrs. LUCE. That is correct. We
are scared of being destroyed by it if
other nations get ahead of us in the
development of it. The urgent need to
prevent that is why I am for this bill.
Mr. McDONOUGH. The gentle-
woman believes that is the principal
need for this legislation?
Mrs. LUCE. That is the principal
need for the bill. And when we are no
longer faced with the threat of war, we
will not need this bill. War with Rus-
sia is not inevitable. If we use half the
brains that God gave us we will not
have a war with Russia. We do not
want a war with Russia. What the
nations need is not so much atomic con-
trol as self-control. We would not need
to worry over the destructive potential-
ities of nuclear fission if we all worried
a little more over the destructive and
evil ideas released by the minds and
hearts of men. In the final analysis, if
the peoples of the Nation will not seek
the answers to atomic energy by con-
sulting the authority of God, no world
authority will ever be able to prevent
its use for the mutual annihilation of
nations. But I refuse to despair of the
wisdom or piety of our statesmen. I
refuse to despair of what may yet be
done in the field of atomic and other
disarmament in the United Nations
organization, based on the achievement
of a peace with justice. So, because I
do not believe in the inevitability of
war, and I do believe in the possibility
of peace, I want to see an expiration
date in this act.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I do not exactly un-
derstand the gentlewoman's position in
[p. 9560]
offering this amendment. She states
that it is bad legislation, very bad.
Still, she is offering an amendment here
to make this legislation effective for
seven long years. If this is bad legis-
lation, it should not last for 7 years.
In this bill is a provision for a Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy, with 11
members from this body and 11 mem-
bers from the body at the other end of
the Capitol. All matters pertaining to
fissionable material, nuclear fission,
and everything else that has to do with
the manufacture of atomic energy,
have to be referred to this committee
for consideration. This committee can
initiate legislation at any time it wants
to. Congress is in session or will be in
session every 2 years, for how long, we
do not know. I feel it is unwise to enact
this legislation for seven long years.
The first part of the amendment I think
is already the law. This spells it out,
and there is no objection to it. But the
latter part of it setting up the act for
seven long years is what I object to.
Miss SUMNER of Illinois. How
long does it last under the bill?
Mr. DURHAM. There is no limit to
it. The Congress always has the au-
thority to repeal any act it sets up here
at any time if they care to repeal it.
The gentlewoman says that anyone who
is opposed to this amendment either be-
lieves in war or believes in some kind of
-------
208
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
socialistic state. I think my record here
will show that I voted for the security
of my country on every measure affect-
ing our security. I do not believe in a
socialistic state. I hope we do not have
a war. That is the reason I am here at
the present time and why all during
the consideration of this bill I have
fought for it as the gentleman from
California clearly stated a few minutes
ago. I think he has presented one of
the best reasons for adopting this meas-
ure and sending it to conference than
any man who has taken the floor.
There is not just one reason, gentle-
men, for this measure. I do not like all
features of this bill. You never get
everything you like in these matters,
but it is absolutely necessary, in my
opinion. It is one of the ingredients of
the prescription that we must hand out
to the world in order to come to an
agreement and peace. You are not
going to get anywhere in the negotia-
tions, in the United Nations organi-
zation or the Security Council, until we
adopt some domestic program in re-
gard to atomic energy. I hope the
House will send this bill to conference.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman has expired.
Mr. MAY. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that all debate on
this section, and all amendments there-
to close in 5 minutes, the last minute
to be reserved for myself.
Mr. JUDD and Mr. LAFOLLETTE ob-
jected.
Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman
from Connecticut needs no defense at
my hands, but when it was pleasantly
stated a while ago that she is confused
it seems to me that statement does not
conform to the nature of the debate in
the last 2 or 3 days. I think the gentle-
woman from Connecticut has made it
very clear that she entertains a strong
conviction on this question of our de-
fense being involved in an assertion of
policy at this critical hour. I follow
her logical arguments. I am sorry she
has emphasized the word "socialism" in
referring to the bill, but that is inci-
dental. I doubt it can be supported.
But the gentlewoman from Connecticut
is absolutely right when she implies and
states in fact that it is an attitude of
defeatism if we refuse to do anything
at all about this tremendous new power
that has been turned loose in the world.
I, for one, am not going to have less
faith in the scientists who uncovered
this new force than they had in us when
they said it was a good thing—weigh
these words—that the thousands of
people lost their lives at Hiroshima if
as a result of that dramatic happening
the people of America in their position
of leadership would realize that action
is necessary to keep this tremendous
new power under control and thus save
millions of lives. The scientists said
they had faith in the people acting
through their representatives to de-
clare a policy on this question. Now,
we do not declare a policy and we ac-
complish nothing if we leave it uncon-
trolled with no declaration at all on
this question. If we believe that the
military with no mandate from us are
going to exercise some control over the
holding of fissionable material, we are
in my judgment deluding ourselves.
The first announcement of the dis-
covery was made in an institution in
this city, George Washington Univer-
sity. Except for the fact that a war
followed in a short time after that, we
would not be discussing this problem,
and it would be a matter of concern
only to those of high technical training.
I wonder if in all history a thing like
that has happened; if contemporane-
ously with the discovery of a dangerous
force the people were advised of the
terror that its use involved.
So the point is, beginning here in
George Washington University and
then terminating by the destruction of
60,000 people, the question is, Will the
Congress assert a policy and say that
that power must be put to use for peace
and industrial needs, and that they
have faith in the scientists who will be
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
209
appointed under this bill to properly
use that power?
*****
[p. 9561]
The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re-
port the motion to recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. SHORT moves to recommit the bill (S.
1717) to the Committee on Military Affairs for
further study.
The SPEAKER. Without objection,
the previous question is ordered.
There was no objection.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the motion to recommit.
Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, on that
I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken; and there
were—yeas 146, nays 195, not voting
88.
*****
So the motion to recommit was re-
jected.
*****
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the passage of the bill.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, on
that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken; and there
were—yeas 265, nays 79, not voting 86.
So the bill was passed.
[p. 9562]
l.la(4)(d) July 22: Senate disagrees with House bill, asks for con-
ference, p. 9611
Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, I
move that the Senate disagree to the
amendments of the House; ask a con-
ference with the House on the disagree-
ing votes of the two Houses thereon,
and that the Chair appoint the con-
ferees on the part of the Senate.
The motion was agreed to; and the
President pro tempore appointed Mr.
McMAHON, Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado,
Mr. RUSSELL, Mr. VANDENBERG, and
Mr. AUSTIN conferees on the part of
the Senate at the conference.
* >;: * * *
[p. 9611]
l.la(4) (e) July 26: House agrees to conference report, pp. 10192-10199
the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr.
THOMAS].
The conference was in session for the
greater part of 3 days and every section
of both the Senate and the House bills
was given very careful and I may say
judicious consideration. I think it is
the almost unanimous opinion of the
conferees that the subject is so big and
so important that legislation, provided
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946
The SPEAKER. The gentleman
from Texas [Mr. THOMASON] is rec-
ognized.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, in
my judgment your conferees have
brought back to you a very splendid
report. It bears the signature of all of
the Senators and of all the House con-
ferees except my distinguished friend
-------
210
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
it is reasonable in its terms, is abso-
lutely necessary, in view of our national
and international situation.
It should not be forgotten that the
President urged some legislation on this
subject just as soon as possible. It
should not be forgotten that the Secre-
tary of State urged action in view of
our proposed international agreements.
It is my opinion that there must be
some solution to the domestic control
of atomic energy before we can move
into the international field.
What I shall say will be very brief,
and then I will yield to members of the
committee who desire time. To get
right down to the report, I may say
that with the exception of two big ques-
tions, the Senate receded on practically
every amendment. If you will look at
the report you will find amendment
after amendment, which was adopted
by the House, readily accepted by the
Senate conferees.
I may say that the conferees on the
part of the Senate, composed of the
Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Mc-
MAHON], the Senator from Michigan
[Mr. VANDENBERG], the very able and,
in my judgment after hearing him, the
great lawyer, the Senator from Colo-
rado [Mr. MILLIKIN], the Senator from
Colorado [Mr. JOHNSON], and the Sen-
ator from Georgia [Mr. RUSSELL], had
the same objective as all of us, and
that is to do something to get this fis-
sionable material that we hear so much
about, and the things that go into mak-
ing not only atomic bombs but the
things we hope will go into peacetime
articles under control in this country
just as soon as possible. Congress in
all its history never had to deal with
a more important problem. About it
hinges the question of war or peace,
and also the matter of destruction or
survival. If put to proper and peace-
time use, atomic energy, I predict, will
become the greatest boon to humanity
in all history.
Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield.
Mr. ARENDS. Is it not true that on
two major provisions in this bill the
House receded to the Senate? One was
having a military man on the Commis-
sion, the other was the patents pro-
vision.
Mr. THOMASON. I will explain
that as fully as I can. The first one, of
course, is this very controversial ques-
tion as to whether or not anybody from
the armed forces should be on the Com-
mission proper. It will be recalled that
the amendment that was adopted in the
House provided that there must be at
least one, and that two were permis-
sible. If you will recall, a little later
in the same military section of the bill
there is a provision that the Director
of Military Application should be a
member of the armed forces. That
amendment was offered in the House
and adopted by the Senate.
The compromise—and that is why we
have conference committees—was that
the Senate was willing to accept the
amendment that the Director of Mili-
tary Application, the man who is going
to make the bombs if any are to be
made, or to put atomic energy to mili-
tary purposes if that is to be done,
should be a member of the armed forces.
That, as I tried to say the other day, I
think is in keeping with our tradition,
because the Director of Military Ap-
plication is not going to be a policy
maker. The Senate stood firm, how-
ever, and opposed, as did three of the
House conferees, that there should be
an Army or Navy man on this policy-
making committee, the Commission it-
self. There would be just as good
argument to have a general Secretary
of War or an admiral as Secretary of
the Navy, or that the man in the White
House is not to be a civilian, because
that has been the policy of our Govern-
ment from the beginning.
And I might say in this connection
that after we met last evening on the
report and after it was drafted and
put into final form, in order to make
assurance doubly sure and to bring
some kind of definite information back
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
211
to this House, I had this report sub-
mitted early this morning to none other
than the Chief of Staff, General Eisen-
hower, and asked him to read it over
and give me his frank opinion so I
would have it for my own satisfaction
and to transmit to you if you were in-
terested. About 2 hours after I had
submitted the report General Eisen-
hower called me in person over the
phone and told me what he had already
told Senator VANDENBERG, and that
was that the Army did not want a
member of the armed forces on the
Commission; and that in view of the
Vandenberg amendment he and the
War Department were entirely satis-
fied with the conclusions reached by the
conferees and he hoped for the adop-
tion of the conference report. So now
the Director of Military Application
remains an Army officer and the Van-
denberg amendment provides that any
representative of the War or Navy De-
partments, even the Chief of Staff, the
Secretary of War, or the Secretary of
the Navy or any military persons whom
they delegate, shall attend the sessions
of the Commission and keep in close
touch and be fully informed of every-
thing that goes on in the sessions of the
Commission and if they are not satisfied
they file their protests with the Secre-
tary of War and the Secretary of the
Navy. If they are still dissatisfied
they appeal to the Commander in Chief
of the United States Army, who is none
other than the President. You have got
to trust somebody, and all of us have
confidence in the honesty and patrio-
tism of these high officials.
I only wish I had the ability and
facility of expression so that I could
repeat to you the argument Senator
VANDENBERG made in support of this
report. He said in view of the military
liaison amendment that he had insisted
on he felt this arrangement was the
best that could possibly be worked out,
not only to protect the secrecy of the
bomb but also to give us the best na-
tional security. I might also add that
it was his statement that in the begin-
ning of the consideration of this legis-
lation he stood firm that the armed
forces must be represented. I would
like for you to look at the personnel of
that committee again. I just do not
believe you could have a greater com-
mittee appointed to consider a matter
of this great importance than the Mem-
bers that constituted the special
Atomic Energy Committee, because
there were men on it like Senator
MCMAHON, Senator MILLIKIN, and
Senator VANDENBERG. There was also
Senator HART, formerly an admiral in
the Navy for many years and with a
distinguished record. After 5 months
of hearings, comprising four printed
volumes and the examination of 110 of
the outstanding scientists, military
men and industrialists of this Nation
that committee unanimously reached
the conclusion that it did on this im-
portant legislation.
Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield to the
gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. DONDERO. What was done by
the conferees in regard to the amend-
ment which provided for screening by
the Federal Bureau of Investigation of
the personnel?
Mr. THOMASON. T will come to
that.
Before we get down to the last and
perhaps the biggest controversial issue
left in the bill, may I say that after we
compromised this issue on whether it
was necessary to have a member of the
armed forces on the Commission, which
is purely a civilian affair, we did pro-
vide that there must be a member of
the armed forces as director of mili-
tary application. We then got down to
such problems as mentioned by the
gentleman from Michigan regarding
investigation of all these men by the
FBI.
A careful analysis of the report will
disclose that the House amendment is
still in the bill substantially in the same
form it left the House except for one
[p. 10193]
-------
212
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
thing. The FBI screens all of theise em-
ployees, especially those having to do
with what might be termed the secrets
and those having anything to do with
critical material, but the FBI does not
do the certifying. The unanimous con-
clusion of the conferees, I think, was
that while the FBI does a very splendid
and valuable work in matters of inves-
tigation and things of that sort, yet we
do not want to set the Bureau up as a
kind of employment agency where they
have to certify employees. However,
you will find in the report where there
must be a full and complete investiga-
tion by the FBI and they, in turn, sub-
mit the facts to the Commission. The
conferees thought, therefore, that if
the FBI furnishes the facts to the Com-
mission that would be sufficient and, of
course, we must assume that the Pres-
ident is going to appoint some out-
standing men on this Commission. He
must accompany their nominations
with their qualifications to the Senate
before confirmation. We direct that
FBI must investigate, but we do not
give them the authority to certify the
names of the people who should be em-
ployed.
Another thing in that same connec-
tion, is this matter of the death penalty.
That, like the FBI amendment, is sub-
stantially retained in the report, except
the committee thought just as a matter
of justice and also in trying to be prac-
tical that where you impose the death
penalty it should only apply to men who
have disclosed secrets to foreign en-
emies or foreign governments, or be-
trayed their country, and that the death
penalty should only be imposed by a
jury. Otherwise the death-penalty
provision is retained in there in sub-
stantially the same form as it left the
House.
In conclusion, let me make brief ref-
erence to the last and perhaps most
controversial issue in the report, the
matter of patents. That is a big sub-
ject in itself. Frankly, I share the
views of a great many men in this
House, especially my distinguished col-
league from Texas [Mr. LANHAM] in
saying that I do not want the Govern-
ment in private business. I have great
respect for our present patent laws. I
want to encourage individual enter-
prise and inventive genius. Neverthe-
less, we are dealing here with a very
unusual situation, we are dealing with
a very grave and dangerous instru-
mentality that might mean the life or
death of the human race. There was
never anything like it in history. The
Government has spent $3,000,000,000
to develop atomic energy. It belongs
to Uncle Sam. It is in its very nature
a monopoly. It has to be kept that
way, at least for a time, if we are to
keep the secret. There is no use for
the Government to take over all fission-
able material if we do not also have all
the patents to process this dangerous
element.
I want to be frank with you as relates
to this whole report. Every member
had one big objective and that was to
tie up the secret of the atomic bomb.
You cannot do it without also control-
ling all patents. Perhaps those restric-
tions can be lifted later, but this is
certainly no time to take a chance. Be-
cause these patents have to do with all
fissionable material wherever it is. I
think, perhaps, with one exception, it
was the opinion of the conferees that
for the time being, at least until we
know what we are going to do with this
terrible weapon and this tremendous
secret discovery, that there is nothing
in the world to do except to give the
Government the monopoly that it must
have. But in that connection let me
say that whenever it takes over an ex-
isting patent or does anything else in
connection with existing patents or in-
ventions that are later discovered, they
must make adequate compensation for
the taking of it and also pay a royalty.
So, nobody, whose principal interest is
in connection with this bomb, can find
any fault about that until we settle
down and determine what is the best
thing for our country and for the peace
of the world.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
213
Mr. KUNKEL. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. KUNKEL. Then you have
adopted practically in identical form
the Senate amendment on patents?
Mr. THOMASON. That is correct.
Mr. KUNKEL. There are no mate-
rial changes in it at all?
Mr. THOMASON. That is correct.
Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield to the
gentleman from Texas.
Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Do I
understand the gentleman to say that
when we come to deal with patents and
the necessity to protect the secrecy in
regard to the bomb, that you let the
patents suffer, if I may put it that way,
rather than take a chance on revealing
the secrets of the bomb?
Mr. THOMASON. The gentleman
is exactly right. This is something
that we cannot gamble with or take the
slightest chance. The secret at present
is the important thing. When a man
thinks he has an invention, he has to
file his application down here in the
Patent Office, and that becomes not only
known to every Tom, Dick, and Harry
who wants to look at it, but any citizen
who wants to go down to the Patent
Office can look at the application.
As the Senator from Colorado [Mr.
MILLIKIN] so ably pointed out, you just
cannot take a chance with a thing like
this. We are dealing with the most ter-
rible device that has ever been dis-
covered in the history of mankind.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield to the
gentleman from California.
Mr. HINSHAW. If the Lanham
amendment had not been agreed to in
the House, I had a provision to add to
section 3 of the patent provision which
related to inventions and discoveries
that had not been patented, but must
be turned over to the Commission with-
in 60 days and provide that just com-
pensation should be made for turning
over the information, but we did not
reach that point.
I would like to know, if a man makes
an invention or discovery for which no
patent application is made, how you
can pay compensation under that sec-
tion by turning it over to the Commis-
sion?
Mr. THOMASON. The Commission
itself is authorized to make fair and
just compensation.
Mr. HINSHAW. You will find un-
der section 3 that no such language was
contained, and it was covered in the
first two sections relating to patents.
Mr. THOMASON. I cannot answer
that technical question.
Mr. CHELF. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield to the
gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. CHELF. I might say to the gen-
tleman that the bulk of the patent laws
that we are now operating under were
enacted back in 1870.
If we were dealing with just an or-
dinary thing and this were just a nor-
mal situation there would be much
force, I think, to the argument that
has been made that we should not in-
vade the present patent law field, but I
need not tell the Members of this
House, in view of what happened at
Bikini the other day and what hap-
pened at Hiroshima, what this means
to the peace of the world. It was the
opinion, I think, of the conferees, I
know it was of most of us, that it is
something you cannot trifle with at
present. This bill does set up a monop-
oly. It has to be. If you are going to
take over all the fissionable material
in the United States, which you do in
the bill, certainly you are going to have
to take over for the time being every-
thing connected with it including
patents.
Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I am
afraid the gentleman misunderstood
me. My point was that in dealing with
the patents and in protecting the secret
you go to the side of protecting the
-------
214
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
secret. You do not take a chance on
letting the secret get loose in order to
give some fellow a patent.
Mr. THOMASON. My friend from
Texas is absolutely right. Patents and
everything else must be subordinated to
keeping our great secret. In view of
what is going on in some parts of the
world today, I am not willing to take
the slightest chance. We have tried to
tie this thing up with the strongest
language that can be written.
Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Of course.
Mr. THOMASON. Congress is go-
ing to be in session after this law goes
into effect and after we have, perhaps,
an international atomic commission of
some sort that will put this thing to
peaceful purposes rather than to de-
structive purposes, so then there will
be time to make changes if necessary.
But it is the opinion, I think, of every-
body on the committee, or nearly so,
that for the present we cannot do any
gambling.
Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield to the
gentleman from Mississippi.
Mr. COLMER. As I understand,
under the House bill the appointment
of a military representative was com-
pulsory, but under the conference re-
port that would be optional.
Mr. THOMASON. No. I do not
want to mislead the gentleman as
[p. 10194]
to the Commission. They will all be
civilians, with a military liaison com-
mittee sitting in session with them.
However, the only member of the
armed forces proper who will be in the
organization will be the Director of
Military Application.
Mr. COLMER. Under the House
version of the bill, was not provision
made for a military representative?
Mr. THOMASON. Yes.
Mr. COLMER. But that has been
changed?
Mr. THOMASON. It was made
compulsory that there should be one
member of the armed forces, and it was
permissive to have two.
Mr, COLMER. Would not the gen-
tleman think the armed forces should
be represented on this Commission?
Mr. THOMASON. No; I do not
think so, and General Eisenhower does
not think so, and Secretary Patterson
does not think so, and Secretary For-
restal does not think so. In view of the
existence of the military liaison com-
mittee, Secretary Patterson and the
Under Secretary of the Navy testified
before our committee that they felt
there was ample and full protection un-
der the Vandenberg amendment, which
was the basis on which the Senator
from Michigan changed from the posi-
tion the gentleman from Mississippi
now has and offered the liaison com-
mittee amendment, which is now part
of the conference report.
Mr. COLMER. Of course, I differ
with that.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMASON. I yield to the
gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. COOLEY. When the gentleman
addressed the House recently on this
proposition, he seemed to emphasize the
necessity and desirability of developing
atomic energy for industrial or peace-
ful purposes. I compliment the gentle-
man on emphasizing today the necessity
for secrecy. Does the gentleman now
think that under the bill that has been
agreed upon by the conferees the se-
cret is being just as carefully guarded
as it possibly can be?
Mr. THOMASON. I will be frank
with my friend from North Carolina.
I think the bill is stronger than it was
when it left the House insofar as the
guarding of the secret of the atomic
bomb is concerned, because, under the
section relating to giving information
to other countries, that can only be
done after the Congress by a joint res-
olution has said that all safeguards
have been invoked that are necessary
for the guarding of the atomic bomb
as a military weapon.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
215
Another reason why I am now fully
convinced that for the present the Gov-
ernment must control the patents on
all matters affecting atomic energy is
this. Let me call my friend's attention
to this statement, and I hope he will
read all of it, that as to this monopoly
on patents the law uses the word
"solely." No other patents of any kind
are touched or in any way affected. It
cannot invade any other field. It has
to do solely with the atomic energy
problem itself and the atomic bomb.
Mr. COOLEY. I have no objection
to the monopoly features of the bill. I
have no objection to the Government
having a monopoly on all the patents.
The thing that I am most interested
in is that we should agree to keep this
secret at the present time.
Mr. THOMASON. I think the bill
as reported back to the House is just
as strong as it can be. I think it is a
splendid report. I hope for its adop-
tion.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr.
CLASON].
Mr. CLASON. Mr. Speaker, as one of
the conferees on the McMahon atomic
energy bill I can say that the matters
which were in dispute were thoroughly
discussed by the conferees. We had
some very strong arguments on the dif-
ferent amendments which were under
discussion. The two main amend-
ments, of course, were those which
had to do with whether or not a mili-
tary man should be placed upon the
Commission, and the one dealing with
patent law, although there were dis-
putes on other amendments adopted
by the House. Further than that, I
think I should say that the position of
the conferees was not unanimous on
any of the important amendments
which were in dispute. Nevertheless,
I think we have brought back a very
fine conference report. I say that be-
cause General Eisenhower, Secretary
Forrestal, and Secretary Patterson
all indicated that they felt even if the
bill had not had as much protection in
it and had not had the provisions in it
which the conferees have finally
brought back to you, they still would
have felt and believed that the bill
ought to be adopted and that they
were satisfied with it. The question
of whether or not there should be a
military man upon the Commission
was covered under amendments 1, 2,
and 3. The first one, as you probably
will recall, had directly to do with
whether or not a military man should
bs appointed to the Commission; the
second one had to do with the question
of the director of military application,
and the third had to do with the law
which would permit at least one and
not more than two military men to
qualify to serve on the Commission at
the same time. In connection with
that, we had considerable argument.
I have been delighted today to hear the
distinguished gentleman from Texas
quote so often from the two distin-
guished Republican Senators on the
conference committee. I almost gain
the impression that if either one of
them were nominated for President he
would be assured a large Democratic
following. They certainly got it in the
conference. I have no doubt they de-
served it. It is my opinion we are fully
protected so far as the military is con-
cerned even though there may not be
military men on the Commission itself.
We have the military liaison commit-
tee which General Eisenhower stated
was all he felt was necessary in order
for the armed services to be fully pro-
tected in connection with atomic re-
search in the future. However, the
House added the amendment which
did put the Director of Military Ap-
plication directly into the armed serv-
ices—he must be a member of the
armed services. That being so, we
have a much closer and much more im-
portant connection with atomic re-
search in the future. Therefore, I
feel even though the House did not get
all they would like to have had under
the amendments 1, 2, and 3, they did
obtain a big advantage over the orig-
-------
216
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
inal Senate bill. I feel that the Army
and Navy are fully protected, while
we have established civilian control of
our national policy on atomic energy.
So far as the patent laws are con-
cerned, the conferees called in the dis-
tinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr.
LANHAM], who explained fully to them
the difference between the patent sec-
tions of the Senate bill and the House
bill. Many of the members of the con-
ference committee are lawyers and
each of them had his own idea of what
was meant in the Senate and House
versions. On a divided vote the ma-
jority of the conferees of each House
voted for the provisions of the Senate
bill. If they prove inadequate for our
national protection, I am sure the Com-
mission will request such changes as
are necessary.
This conference report will be of
great value in two important avenues:
First, it will aid our representatives
in the United Nations and in any peace
conference to secure international co-
operation and lasting peace; second,
it will establish a much needed organ-
ization to facilitate research and de-
velopment of atomic energy, not only
for military purposes, but for medi-
cal, domestic, municipal, and industrial
purposes. I urge that the conference
report be adopted.
The question came right down to the
proposition. Did the McMahon bill
provide as much protection as was nec-
essary and was actually needed in
order to prevent dissemination of
knowledge in regard to atomic energy,
which we ought to have to protect our
people? We have the know-how, we
have the inventions and the patents.
Should they be protected to the extent
of the provisions of the McMahon bill?
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr.
CLASON] has expired.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield the gentleman two additional
minutes.
Mr. CLASON. As I see it, it came
down to the question of whether or not
we receive more protection for the
United States under the McMahon ver-
sion or under the Lanham version. I
do not think it is proper for a conferee
to state how he stood on any one thing,
but there was not a unanimous vote
on the particular amendment. How-
ever, a majority did decide that they
preferred the McMahon provision to
the Lanham provision. When the con-
ference report was finally drawn, even
though I personally did not agree with
some of the provisions, I felt strongly
it was necessary to have legislation on
this subject at this time, and I there-
fore signed the report. I feel that the
conference report added to the legis-
lation which was before you and has
resulted in satisfactory legislation and
very valuable legislation. I will vote
for the conference report, and I hope
the rest of you will see it as I see it.
I know you will be in disagreement on
certain amendments, but on the whole
we have good legislation. Otherwise
we will not get the benefits for domes-
tic purposes and for industry from
atomic energy which we are entitled
to obtain.
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman from Massachusetts has
again expired.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina [Mr. DURHAM].
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Speaker, it has
been well explained to you what the
conferees did. I think we brought out
a good conference report.
My position on this matter is pretty
well known with regard to the military
men on the Commission. I supported
the Lanham amendment when it was
on the floor of the House. After hear-
ing the discussion on this matter when
the conferees got together on it, I feel
that the Senate amendment is more
workable and is a far better amend-
ment than the amendment that was
adopted in the House.
There has been a little confusion
spread around the House in regard to
fissionable material. The rumor has
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
217
been spread that it exists in practically
everything. Steel is said to be fission-
able material. I am not an authority
on fissionable material, but I have had
some chemistry, and I have some
knowledge of it. We feel that we are
at the present primarily dealing with
only uranium and thorium to produce
this fissionable material and nuclear
fission for this atomic weapon.
Looking at this patent provision,
which is section 11 and applies solely
to fissionable material, that is what we
are trying to apply this patent provi-
sion to. If we are going to control all
of that material, as this bill does, we
are going to have something like a man
who has a book of blank checks in his
pocket and no money in the bank, if he
goes down here and secures patents,
because he has no material unless he
secures it from the Government.
Therefore, his patent becomes useless.
Furthermore, these men who have
been serving at Oak Ridge and other
plants of the Manhattan project will be
free when they are discharged or re-
leased from that plant. Those people
are ambitious, they will apply for pat-
ents on what they have already done.
I therefore feel that we cannot open
this thing up to everybody.
What are the principal differences
between Senate section 11 and the so-
called Lanham amendment?
The Senate patent provisions differ
from the House provisions in five ma-
jor respects:
First. The Senate makes patents on
the production of fissionable material
and on atomic weapons nonpatentable;
the House permits private patents.
Private patent rights in these two
fields are inconsistent with the national
security because patent litigation and
procedures may well result in disclo-
sure of secrets. It would be a risk that
one or two companies would control all
patents affecting these vital national
defense activities.
Second. The Senate bill requires that
all new inventions relating to the pro-
duction of fissionable material be re-
ported to the Commission. The House
bill contains no such provisions.
Third. The Senate bill automat-
ically authorizes the use of any patent
in atomic-energy research. The
House, in omitting this provision, may
hamper atomic research by refusal of
patentees to license their patents for
research.
Fourth. The Senate requires that
the patentee license at a reasonable
royalty the use of any nonmilitary de-
vice of importance to the economy.
The House, in omitting this provision,
permits, for example, one patent holder
to take over the entire power industry
through control of any atomic-power
patents.
Fifth. The Senate bill gives the
Commission full authority to condemn
all atomic-energy patents, including'
production of fissionable material, uti-
lization devices, research, and atomic
weapons. The House bill confines the
condemnation power to patents affect-
ing the national defense.
We must go all the way if we are
going to have control of this dreadful
weapon.
If this provision, section 11, in any
way hinders or affects the further de-
velopment of our great industrial and
private enterprise system, I will be one
of the first to advocate doing away with
it, but I do feel for the present we can-
not take a chance and hope the House
will accept the conference report.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield 8 minutes to the gentleman from
New Jersey [Mr. THOMAS].
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Mr.
speaker, as one of the conferees, I did
not sign the report on S. 1717, and I did
not because I felt that the House was
giving up too much, that this confer-
ence report was nothing more than a
skim-milk version of the bill that
passed in the House; further, the
House conferees won all the skirmishes
and the Senate conferees won all the
big battles, and the two largest battles
were: One, whether or not the military
would have representation on the Com-
-------
218
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
mission; and two, whether or not we
were going to take the House version
of the patent provision.
Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. I
yield.
Mr. ARENDS. Would the gentle-
man say then that the conferees on the
part of the House capitulated com-
pletely to the Senate in those two
major items?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. I do
not like to criticize my good colleagues
on either the Democratic side or the
Republican side, but I will say that the
House conferees did not carry out
the version of the House on those two
questions.
A great deal has been said about
security, that this bill will give us more
security than we had in the bill that we
passed in the House. I just want to
paint this picture. Just as soon as this
bill is enacted into law and as soon as
the Army engineers have had a reason-
able time to get out of Oak Ridge they
will get out of there to a man. There
will be no more Army Intelligence or
Army engineers in Oak Ridge. Then
we are going to turn the plant and its
secrets over to whom? We are going
to turn them over to a lot of persons,
and I will admit that in time they will
be investigated by the FBI, but we are
going to turn Oak Ridge over to a lot
of persons who may have had no ex-
perience in security. Some of them
will be political patronage. Those are
the people who are going to guard the
atom bomb secrets down there in Oak
Ridge.
That is the reason why I say that
under the provisions of S. 1717 where
we turn everything over to civilian
control we may be taking steps that
will do the very thing that a potential
aggressor or a potential enemy of this
country would want us to do, and that
is to open the door to the secrets that
are so necessary to guard at this time
particularly.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. I
yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. When
the conferees accepted the Senate ver-
sion of the patent feature they accepted
what the Socialists have been trying to
do for the last half century?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. No
doubt about that.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Com-
pletely socializing our patent system
in this Nation.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. There
is no question about that.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. When
they refused to permit the War De-
partment, the Army, or the military
to have one single representative out
of five they assured the possibility of
giving away the secrets if any may be
left in connection with this bomb?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Yes.
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. I
yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. CURTIS. I favor the position
of the gentleman in regard to both the
patent feature and the military con-
trol. This conference report should be
turned down. There is no more reason
to take the Army out of the atomic
bomb business than to take it out of
aviation, artillery, or any other branch
of our defense.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. Mr.
Chairman, it was said in conference
that the reason we should not have an
Army man as one of the commissioners
is because it might be considered as a
military veto and, in addition, that we
were overemphasizing the military.
These remarks were made by one of
the distinguished gentlemen whom our
colleague from Texas referred to and I
am sure he is going to vote for him
when he runs for President of the
United States. I would like to know
how anybody could consider that by
placing one Army man on a commis-
sion of five it would be a military veto.
I would like to know how it could be
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
219
construed by any nation in the world
that we were overemphasizing the
military.
The reason that we want a military
man on there is so that he will be in
[p. 10196]
every conference, so that he will know
absolutely what is going on, so that he
will be just as close to the picture as
possible. When we exclude the mili-
tary we make them outcasts, something
that we are a little ashamed of. I
think it is just plain ridiculousness.
Mr. REED of New York. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. I
yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. REED of New York. I ran
across something that startled me
early in the war. An Army officer
came to my office and he said, "I am
somewhat distressed. I do not care to
go to the higher-ups, but I know you,
and I am going to talk to you." He
said, "Every single day my men are
getting communistic literature under
the frank of the Patent Office." I have
watched this thing very closely and
when I saw this patent provision in
here I could quickly understand why
it was in there.
Mr. THOMAS of New Jersey. I
want to say just a word about the
patent feature. We House conferees
did not have a chance. The cards were
stacked against us from the beginning.
There was never any time when we
thought we were going to gain our
objectives.
I think that the thing that amazed
me more about the conference we had
in regard to patents was this, that it
was admitted, by not one conferee but
by more than one, that the Senate sec-
tions on patents would do this thing
above everything else, and that is,
bring about a compulsory monopoly,
and for the first time in the history of
the United States we are now called
upon to have a compulsory industrial
monopoly. Yet, all of the authorities
in the United States on patents tell us
that the Lanham features, the sections
put in by the House bill, would not only
protect the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion and protect the United States
when it came to the question of atomic
energy and the making of the atomic
bomb, but would protect the industry
of the United States as well.
I disagree with my colleague from
Connecticut that the Senate version on
patents would benefit private business.
I think under the Senate version of
patents, private business, whether it
had anything to do with atomic energy
or not, would be absolutely stifled; it
would never get started, and if these
features had been in existence some 50
or 75 years ago we would not have the
industrial life in America that we en-
joy today.
Mr. Speaker, after hearing all the
debate in Committee and on the floor
of the House and in conference, I am
still resolved to oppose this legislation.
I think it the most dangerous we have
ever considered—likewise the most im-
portant. For the safety of 135,000,000
of Americans we should delay further
consideration until we have had more
time for study. The stakes are too
high in the gamble we are taking
today.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas [Mr. LANHAM].
Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, in my
judgment this conference report in-
volves most unfortunate legislation,
and I certainly shall oppose it.
We have all seen the gradual growth
of centralization of power in Washing-
ton, depriving the people of their rights
and leading them to neglect their re-
sponsibilities, and now we see a blow at
the fundamental basis of our progress
in our patent system.
Here we have the recommendations
of the Committee on Military Affairs
with reference to patents. Those rec-
ommendations, from the standpoint of
knowledge or familiarity, might as
well have come from the Committee on
Claims or the Committee on the Dis-
-------
220
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
trict of Columbia.
The small businessmen of this coun-
try, the American Bar Association, and
the gentleman from the Navy Depart-
ment who has been from the beginning
the adviser with reference to atomic
energy on patent matters have all ap-
proved this House provision. We voted
for it overwhelmingly in this body,
and the conferees have not even shown
us the courtesy of bringing it back in
disagreement in order that we might
express our views again.
I wonder if we are beginning to sac-
rifice and surrender our American way
of life to appease those in this country
and abroad who have no fondness for
our governmental philosophy and prin-
ciples. What will happen if you sup-
port these patent provisions in the
conference report? There will be no
incentive, outside of those connected
with this Commission itself, to stimu-
late the inventive genius of America to
undertake to give us discoveries that
will be helpful with reference to atomic
energy. Let me bring to your attention
the fact that patents, wonderful inven-
tions for our progress, come in the
main not from the Government, but
from the rank and file who make their
research far from Washington, and
unless we protect them, unless we get
rid of this compulsory licensing which
is going to turn our patent system over
to an unknown commission, we may
undermine and destroy this fundamen-
tal basis of our progress and also the
initiative and the incentive of the
American inventor.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LANHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Indiana.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Under
this conference report, and under the
Senate bill the way it passed the
House, the Commission will be the
arbitrary and sole judge of what pat-
ents are connected with the develop-
ment of atomic energy.
Mr. LANHAM. Absolutely.
Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. And
any invention that might remotely
have any connection with atomic en-
ergy will be under the control of this
Commission.
Mr. LANHAM. And consequently
the inventors are not going to try to
invent things that will be helpful in
reference to atomic energy. There
will be no incentive to do it.
Let me call your attention to the fact
that the House provision gives the
Commission authority to get any in-
vention, any patent, or any application
for a patent, that it can use in carrying
out its purposes. Why go beyond that
to take away property rights from the
citizens of this country, to revoke their
property rights, and to assure them
that they can have no further rights in
their property, because you are confis-
cating and taking the property of the
individuals when you undermine and
abolish the patent system of this Na-
tion of ours?
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. LANHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Illinois.
Mr. CHURCH. If the Lanham
amendment were left in the bill, does
the gentleman feel the secrecy or the
know-how would be endangered in any
way?
Mr. LANHAM. Not in the least.
As a matter of fact, it would be pro-
tected. I think this whole legislation
is a bit premature, and we are likely to
take steps that will menace our secu-
rity if we enact legislation of this
kind in advance of the agreement with
reference to peace treaties and the
establishment of peace in the world.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman
from Connecticut [Mrs. LUCE].
Mrs. LUCE. Mr. Speaker, the con-
ference report seems to be about the
best legislation we are likely to get for
this vital problem. It was often noted
during the debate in this House that,
while this bill may open the front door
to merciful peace and international and
national security, it does leave the back
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
221
door open to socialism. And that still
remains true of the conference report,
particularly in reference to the patent
sections, as the gentleman from Texas
[Mr. LANHAM] has pointed out to you.
Nevertheless, its socialistic features
constitute a long-range danger. What
we are confronted with today is the
short-term danger of not protecting
our atomic supremacy now, and the
short-term necessity of working for in-
ternational atomic control. I think we
must trust in the patriotism of the
President, and we must hope and be-
lieve that he will place on the Commis-
sion five men of integrity and brains
and truly American convictions, who
will see that this legislation is not
abused in the patent field or any other,
to destroy our American free-enter-
prise system.
There is a good deal of talk about
this legislation being premature in
view of the facts that international
arrangements in atomic control, and
peace treaties are not signed. One of
the reasons which makes this precise
legislation necessary is that we cannot
get international arrangements in
atomic control unless we do have this
bill.
You have all read the newspapers.
You saw that the Russians have cur-
rently turned down the Baruch plan.
There will be no incentive for them fur-
ther to discuss the international con-
trol of atomic energy unless we can
fortify the position of the Atomic Com-
mission in the UNO with this legisla-
tion, which provides domestic controls
of the same nature as those proposed
internationally. What we will not, or
dare not, do ourselves, we cannot
expect other nations to do.
We must not forget that within from
5 to 15 years the Russians are going to
have all the atomic bombs they want.
[p. 10197]
It will be 15 years if they have to do it
alone, because of their scientific, indus-
trial, and technological backwardness,
but probably not more than 5 years if
they can communize Germany, or if
Germany itself becomes communized,
and alines itself as a satellite state of
the Soviet Union. Then German tech-
nicians, German scientists, German
know-how, German skill, all which
we certainly should have learned after
two world wars are not to be sneezed
at, combined with Russian aggressive-
ness and Russian manpower, would
thus shorten the time it would take
Soviet Russia to get the bomb. Our
choice is between truly international
control and an atom bomb race after
that, which would certainly end in
atomic war.
In the meanwhile, this bill safe-
guards our own national security,
while allowing us to advance down the
road to peace, trying as best we can to
persuade our Russian friends that the
cause of peace and world prosperity
would best be served if they came in
with us on an international control
plan which would protect all the na-
tions, great and small. I know of noth-
ing that will so strengthen the hands
of our statesmen in Paris, and of our
United Nations Atomic Commission in
New York, as the adoption of this leg-
islation, which will help us to control
fissionable materials and also give us
some control and direction over scien-
tific research in this field.
If you read the newspapers yester-
day you saw the story about the sudden
inexplicable disappearance of uranium,
which is a fissionable material, in Bra-
zil. Nobody knows where it went, after
it was acquired by the Brazilians,
apparently we do not know where that
material has gone, or to what use it is
currently being put. This is a bill
which will enable America to keep an
eye on the ownership and movement of
fissionable material in all countries, in-
cluding our own.
The conferees were, it seems very
plain, men who understood very well
what it meant to split the atom. They
also being good Americans understand
what it is to split their differences.
And apart from the highly controver-
-------
222
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
sial patent section the Senate receded
in a good many matters important to
the House, matters which do improve
the legislation. I, like others, am
deeply alarmed by the implications of
the patent section. But in the end, we
dare not take any chances on our
atomic security in the next crucial 12
months. And let us remember, and
take comfort of the fact, that the joint
committee, provided by the bill, of Sen-
ators and Representatives, can at all
times watch the Commission, review its
reports, and see that it is not abusing
its authority. They will be, and must
be, the custodians of our liberties,
wherever they may be threatened by
this bill.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield 1% minutes to the gentleman
from California [Mr. JOHNSON].
Mr. JOHNSON of California. The
purpose of taking this minute is to ask
a question along this line: If we adopt
the conference report, will that mean
that in the field of patents every single
unique device that is developed, such
as a device to improve a cyclotron, for
instance, will go into the hands of the
Government? I would like to have the
gentleman from North Carolina an-
swer that question.
Mr. DURHAM. It is solely for the
purpose of covering patents on fission-
able material and nuclear material. It
says in the bill that it is only for that
purpose.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. I
know, but some of us do not know just
how broad that is. Does it mean that
it only covers those materials from
which bombs can be made?
Mr. DURHAM. That is correct, as
I understand it.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. For
instance, out in California we have a
cyclotron at the University of Cali-
fornia that cracks atoms, but that ma-
chine cannot make bombs. Now, would
any device to perfect that machine,
which is patentable, be outside the
scope of the provision of this bill as
reported back by the conferees?
Mr. DURHAM. I would say if that
machine were capable of making fis-
sionable material it would come under
this provision.
Mr. JOHNSON of California. This
machine only cracks atoms and does
not make bombs.
Mr. DURHAM. Then how are they
going to get the fissionable material?
Mr. JOHNSON of California. I do
not know.
Mr. DURHAM. They must get it
through the use of the equipment.
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman from California has ex-
pired.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield 1% minutes to the gentleman
from Iowa [Mr. MARTIN].
Mr. MARTIN of Iowa. Mr. Speaker,
I am keenly disappointed in the results
of the conference on this legislation. I
cannot give up, lying down, the impor-
tance of the taking of an active part by
a representative of the armed forces
in a field that involves one of the great-
est potential weapons of all time. I
cannot surrender completely the whole
field of atomic energy policy making to
the scientists or to the manufacturers,
and bar absolutely only one class of
people, namely, those who know some-
thing about military application of any
super weapon such as the atomic bomb.
In spite of all you say about it, the time
has come when our Nation must not
appease potential future enemies in
that fashion. This is no time to set the
stage for the first Munich of World
War III. That is exactly what you are
doing—exactly that and nothing else.
When the time comes when I can prove
to you that I am right, it will be too
late. You will then be led around by
the nose by foreign enemies who are
laughing up their sleeves at you now
for appeasing them and sticking your
ostrich head deeper below the sands
than any isolationist that has ever been
condemned by the left-wing interna-
tionalists of this Nation.
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman from Iowa has expired.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
223
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
yield the balance of the time to the gen-
tleman from Minnesota [Mr. JUDD].
Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, I do not
believe anybody can accuse me of being
an appeaser of any of these countries
which have been mentioned as possible
dangers to our security. I support this
conference report precisely because I
want us to do our utmost to assure the
Nation's security.
The Bikini test was called Opera-
tions Crossroads, because it was held at
the crossroads of the Pacific. It might
well have been called that because the
unleashing of atomic energy is the
crossroads of history. That is where
we are this afternoon. We are decid-
ing which way our Nation and the
world are to take at the great cross-
roads.
There are about four possibilities.
One, we can ignore atomic energy,
rest on our first achievements, fail to
keep in the forefront of progress until
somebody blows us off the face of the
earth or covers our land with radio-
active energy, making life impossible.
Second, we can say that since we
have the secret now, we can beat other
countries by building more and bigger
and better bombs than they; therefore
we have nothing to fear.
The trouble with that argument is
that a nation does not need to have any
bigger or better bombs than exist now.
If, and when other nations are able to
build them as they will be in a rela-
tively short time, all they need is a few
hundred of the present type delivered
by plane or rocket to cripple us hope-
lessly.
Third, we could wipe out every pos-
sible potential enemy right now while
we alone have the bomb. The trouble
with that course is twofold: First, we
could not do it, because the President
and the Army do not have any such
power, and I think you will agree there
would be quite a little discussion before
the Congress would do that. The nation
to be destroyed would certainly be noti-
fied well in advance. Second, we would
not do it, because we just are not the
sort of people who carry out sneak
attacks like Pearl Harbor. We simply
would not start such a war. It is un-
realistic to imagine we would.
Fourth, we can try to develop inter-
national control with rigid and com-
plete supervision of all fissionable
materials, factories, and armaments in
every country by a real international
organization with no vetoes.
Bombs are now made in Tennessee,
in Washington, and New Mexico. I
live in Minnesota, but I am not scared.
Why? Because the use of the bombs
made in those three States is controlled
by the United States Government on
behalf of all the 48 States. They are
for the security, not of three States,
but of everybody.
I see no hope except in this fourth
course. I believe we should take the
lead in trying to unite in such a real
organization all nations that will join.
We cannot make headway in that direc-
tion unless we have unified control
within our own country of all atomic
energy, whether for military or for
civilian purposes. That is why I sup-
port the conference report. We must
have unified civilian control so that we
can keep our present processes secret
while doing everything possible to im-
[p. 10198]
prove those processes, to expand our
knowledge of atomic energy and skill
in handling it.
Let us not make a wrong decision
today at operations crossroads.
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman from Minnesota has ex-
pired.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
move the previous question.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
agreeing to the conference report.
The conference report was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
Mr. THOMASON. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous consent that all Mem-
-------
224
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
bers may have five legislative days in
which to revise and extend their re-
marks at this point in the RECORD on
the conference report just agreed to.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
There was no objection.
THE CONFEREES HAVE BROUGHT US A
SOUND BILL FOR ADOPTION
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, a few
days ago when debate upon this vital
subject of the atomic-energy bill was in
progress and it was known that the dis-
tinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr.
LANHAM] was to offer an amendment
to strike out all the patent section of
the committee bill and to offer a substi-
tute which would make unnecessary
the obtaining of a license from the
United States to obtain, or use, or
develop atomic energy, even for mili-
tary weapons, I naturally hesitated to
speak in opposition to his proposals,
for I know how deservedly his propo-
sals receive the cordial regard by the
Members of this House. However, as a
new member of your Patents Commit-
tee, I soon discovered that his industry
and knowledge and natural "drive"
were all big factors in the functioning
of that important committee.
Yet, having studied the committee
bill at length and also having studied
his proposals also at length, I felt I had
a duty to speak out emphatically for
the patent section of the committee bill
and for its retention, as distinguished
from the proposals of the gentleman
from Texas.
The conferees have now put back the
patent section of the House bill for
which I spoke. I compliment the
House conferees for agreeing to same.
During the debate here a few days ago
I felt many Members had not had op-
portunity to carefully study the bill
and so must have voted under a mis-
taken idea of what it did do and did not
do.
True it is that this conferees' report
as to patents will place exclusive con-
trol of atomic energy for military pur-
poses in the hands of Uncle Sam. But,
my colleagues, why should it not be
there? I have previously argued that
such control would help take the profit
out of war. I do it again. What a man
makes for sale at a money profit, he is
going to try to sell at the most profit
possible. And, he is not always too
choosy about his customers, as long as
the customer pays him his price. So, it
would be with the private manufacture
of atomic energy for military weapons.
The Government retaining exclusive
control of the source of material and
its manufacture for war-weapon uses
and purposes should make it far more
difficult for the development of interna-
tional cartels in the field of munitions
manufacture. And that is exactly
what I said before and now repeat
as highly desirable. The less material
profit there is in war, the fewer wars
we will have.
Because these are unusually hazard-
ous times in the world's history, we
must be willing to step forth in unusual
pathways to peace. We must dare to
pioneer in the field of essential legisla-
tion in this field of atomic energy, as
much as in any field for world peace.
We must protect our field of free
enterprise in patents in due fashion.
But, gentlemen, there is no soundness
in immediately releasing this most dan-
gerous material to free enterprise to
make money profit out of it, at the
expense of, our national safety and se-
curity. This bill guarantees every in-
ventor an adequate compensation for
his invention in this field. It assures
an applicant for patent the same. We
do not yet know the rudiments of need
for our national security, and until we
know what we need for it, it is un-
sound and unsafe to let atomic energy
loose for promiscuous acquisition and
development.
Why the hurry? The war is not even
officially ended as yet.
Besides, our executive leaders must
know what they can and cannot do in
the field of atomic energy. This is a
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
225
world neighborhood problem now. It
is not merely whether or not American
inventors shall have full freedom to do
as they please immediately.
The problem before us filters into
the very fabric of international policy
and world peace from atomic warfare.
We must keep our President and dele-
gates to Paris and other conferences
where world peace is involved, in a
position of knowledge to what extent
America can control atomic energy for
war and peace purposes.
Therefore, any private control, with-
out regard to our national security, of
and for the purpose of war or military
weapons, is fundamentally incompat-
ible with our national welfare and
security.
So I am pleased the conferees have
confirmed my humble words of several
days ago as also being their firm con-
viction and decision.
[p. 10199]
l.l(a)(4)(f) July 26: Senate agrees to conference report, p. 10168
* * * * * conference report.
Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, I There beinŁ no obJection, the report
ask unanimous consent for the imme- was considered and agreed to.
diate consideration and adoption of the [p. 10168]
Lib ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954
August 30,1954, P.L. 83-703, §§1,2,3,31, 53, 62, 63, 69,81,102.
103, 104, 109, 123, 161, 68 Stat. 921, 927, 930, 948
AN ACT
To amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as amended, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Atomic
Energy Act of 1946, as amended, is amended to read as follows:
"ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954
"CHAPTER 1. DECLARATION, FINDINGS, AND PURPOSE
"Sec. 1. Declaration.
"Sec. 2. Findings.
"Sec. 3. Purpose.
"CHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS
"Sec. 11. Definitions.
"CHAPTER 3. ORGANIZATION
"Sec. 21. Atomic Energy Commission.
"Sec. 22. Members.
"Sec. 23. Office.
"Sec. 24. General Manager.
-------
226 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
"Sec. 25. Divisions and Offices.
"Sec. 26. General Advisory Committee.
"Sec. 27. Military Liaison Committee.
"Sec. 28. Appointment of Army, Navy, or Air Force Officers.
"CHAPTER 4. RESEARCH
"Sec. 31. Research Assistance.
"Sec. 32. Research by the Commission.
"Sec. 33. Research by Others.
"CHAPTER 5. PRODUCTION OF SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL
"Sec. 41. Ownership and Operation of Production Facilities.
"Sec. 42. Irradiation of Materials.
"Sec. 43. Acquisition of Production Facilities.
"Sec. 44. Disposition of Energy.
"CHAPTER 6. SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL
"Sec. 51. Special Nuclear Material.
"Sec. 52. Government Ownership of All Special Nuclear Material.
"Sec. 53. Domestic Distribution of Special Nuclear Material.
"Sec. 54. Foreign Distribution of Special Nuclear Material.
"Sec. 55. Acquisition.
"Sec. 56. Fair Price.
"Sec. 57. Prohibition.
"CHAPTER 7. SOURCE MATERIAL
"Sec. 61. Source Material.
"Sec. 62. License for Transfers Required.
"Sec. 63. Domestic Distribution of Source Material.
"Sec. 64. Foreign Distribution of Source Material.
"Sec. 65. Reporting.
"Sec. 66. Acquisition.
"Sec. 67. Operations on Lands Belonging to the United States.
"Sec. 68. Public Lands.
"Sec. 69. Prohibition.
"CHAPTER 8. BYPRODUCT MATERIAL
"Sec. 81. Domestic Distribution.
"Sec. 82. Foreign Distribution of Byproduct Material.
"CHAPTER 9. MILITARY APPLICATION OF ATOMIC ENERGY
"Sec. 91. Authority.
"Sec. 92. Prohibition.
[p. 919]
"CHAPTER 10. ATOMIC ENERGY LICENSES
"Sec. 101. License Required.
"Sec. 102. Finding of Practical Value.
"Sec. 103. Commercial Licenses.
"Sec. 104. Medical Therapy and Research and Development.
"Sec. 105. Antitrust Provisions.
"Sec. 106. Classes of Facilities.
"Sec. 107. Operators' Licenses.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 227
"Sec. 108. War or National Emergency.
"Sec. 109. Component Parts of Facilities.
"Sec. 110. Exclusions.
"CHAPTER 11. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
"Sec. 121. Effect of International Arrangements.
"Sec. 122. Policies Contained in International Arrangements.
"Sec. 123. Cooperation with other Nations.
"Sec. 124. International Atomic Pool.
"CHAPTER 12. CONTROL OF INFORMATION
"Sec. 141. Policy.
"Sec. 142. Classification and Declassification of Restricted Data.
"Sec. 143. Department of Defense Participation.
"Sec. 144. International Cooperation.
"Sec. 145. Restrictions.
"Sec. 146. General Provisions.
"CHAPTER 13. PATENTS AND INVENTIONS
"Sec. 151. Military Utilization.
"Sec. 152. Inventions Conceived During Commission Contracts.
"Sec. 153. Nonmilitary Utilization.
"Sec. 154. Injunctions.
"Sec. 155. Prior Art.
"Sec. 156. Commission Patent Licenses.
"Sec. 157. Compensation, Awards, and Royalties.
"Sec. 158. Monopolistic Use of Patents.
"Sec. 159. Federally Financed Research.
"Sec. 160. Saving Clause.
"CHAPTER 14. GENERAL AUTHORITY
"Sec. 161. General Provisions.
"Sec. 162. Contracts.
"Sec. 163. Advisory Committees
"Sec. 164. Electric Utility Contracts.
"Sec. 165. Contract Practices.
"Sec. 166. Comptroller General Audit.
"Sec. 167. Claim Settlements.
"Sec. 168. Payments in lieu of Taxes.
"Sec. 169. No Subsidy.
"CHAPTER 15. COMPENSATION FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY ACQUIRED
"Sec. 171. Just Compensation.
"Sec. 172. Condemnation of Real Property.
"Sec. 173. Patent Application Disclosures.
"Sec. 174. Attorney General Approval of Title.
"CHAPTER 16. JUDICIAL REVIEW AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
"Sec. 181. General.
"Sec. 182. License Applications.
"Sec. 183. Terms of Licenses.
"Sec. 184. Inalienability of Licenses.
"Sec. 185. Construction Permits.
-------
228 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
"Sec. 186. Revocation.
"Sec. 187. Modification of License.
"Sec. 188. Continued Operation of Facilities.
"Sec. 189. Hearings and Judicial Review.
[p. 920]
"CHAPTER 17. JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
"Sec. 201. Membership.
"Sec. 202. Authority and Duty.
"Sec. 203. Chairman.
"Sec. 204. Powers.
"Sec. 205. Staff and Assistance.
"Sec. 206. Classification of Information.
"Sec. 207. Records.
"CHAPTER 18. ENFORCEMENT
"Sec. 221. General Provisions.
"Sec. 222. Violation of Specific Sections.
"Sec. 223. Violation of Sections Generally.
"Sec. 224. Communication of Restricted Data.
"Sec. 225. Receipt of Restricted Data.
"Sec. 226. Tampering with Restricted Data.
"Sec. 227. Disclosure of Restricted Data.
"Sec. 228. Statute of Limitations.
"Sec. 229. Other Laws.
"Sec. 230. Injunction Proceedings.
"Sec. 231. Contempt Proceedings.
"CHAPTER 19. MISCELLANEOUS
"Sec. 241. Transfer of Property.
"Sec. 251. Report to Congress.
"Sec. 261. Appropriations.
"Sec. 271. Agency Jurisdiction.
"Sec. 272. Applicability of Federal Power Act.
"Sec. 273. Licensing of Government Agencies.
"Sec. 281. Separability.
"Sec. 291. Short Title.
"CHAPTER 1. DECLARATION, FINDINGS, AND PURPOSE
"SECTION 1. DECLARATION.—Atomic energy is capable of appli-
cation for peaceful as well as military purposes. It is therefore
declared to be the policy of the United States that—
"a. the development, use, and control of atomic energy shall
be directed so as to make the maximum contribution to the
general welfare, subject at all times to the paramount objec-
tive of making the maximum contribution to the common
defense and security; and
"b. the development, use, and control of atomic energy shall
be directed so as to promote world peace, improve the general
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 229
welfare, increase the standard of living, and strengthen free
competition in private enterprise.
"SEC. 2. FINDINGS.—The Congress of the United States hereby
makes the following findings concerning the development, use, and
control of atomic energy:
"a. The development, utilization, and control of atomic energy
for military and for all other purposes are vital to the common
defense and security.
"b. In permitting the property of the United States to be used
by others, such use must be regulated in the national interest and
in order to provide for the common defense and security and to
protect the health and safety of the public.
"c. The processing and utilization of source, byproduct, and
special nuclear material affect interstate and foreign commerce
and must be regulated in the national interest.
"d. The processing and utilization of source, byproduct, and
special nuclear material must be regulated in the national interest
and in order to provide for the common defense and security and
to protect the health and safety of the public.
[p. 921]
"e. Source and special nuclear material, production facilities,
and utilization facilities are affected with the public interest, and
regulation by the United States of the production and utilization of
atomic energy and of the facilities used in connection therewith is
necessary in the national interest to assure the common defense
and security and to protect the health and safety of the public.
"f. The necessity for protection against possible interstate dam-
age occurring from the operation of facilities for the production
or utilization of source or special nuclear material places the op-
eration of those facilities in interstate commerce for the purposes
of this Act.
"g. Funds of the United States may be provided for the develop-
ment and use of atomic energy under conditions which will provide
for the common defense and security and promote the general
welfare.
"h. It is essential to the common defense and security that title
to all special nuclear material be in the United States while such
special nuclear material is within the United States.
"SEC. 3. PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this Act to effectuate the
policies set forth above by providing for—
"a. a program of conducting, assisting, and fostering re-
search and development in order to encourage maximum sci-
entific and industrial progress;
"b. a program for the dissemination of unclassified scien-
-------
230 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
tific and technical information and for the control, dissemina-
tion, and declassification of Restricted Data, subject to
appropriate safeguards, so as to encourage scientific and in-
dustrial progress;
"c. a program for Government control of the possession,
use, and production of atomic energy and special nuclear ma-
terial so directed as to make the maximum contribution to the
common defense and security and the national welfare;
"d. a program to encourage widespread participation in the
development and utilization of atomic energy for peaceful
purposes to the maximum extent consistent with the common
defense and security and with the health and safety of the
public;
"e. a program of international cooperation to promote the
common defense and security and to make available to co-
operating nations the benefits of peaceful applications of
atomic energy as widely as expanding technology and con-
siderations of the common defense and security will permit;
and
"f. a program of administration which will be consistent
with the foregoing policies and programs, with international
arrangements, and with agreements for cooperation, which
will enable the Congress to be currently informed so as to take
further legislative action as may be appropriate.
*******
[p. 922]
the Army, Navy, or Air Force may serve as Director of the Di-
vision of Military Application without prejudice to his commis-
sioned status as such officer. Any such officer serving as Director
of the Division of Military Application shall receive in addition to
his pay and allowances, including special and incentive pays, an
amount equal to the difference between such pay and allowances,
including special and incentive pays, and the compensation pre-
scribed in section 25. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other
law, any active or retired officer of the Army, Navy, or Air Force
may serve as Chairman of the Military Liaison Committee without
prejudice to his active or retired status as such officer. Any such
officer serving as Chairman of the Military Liaison Committee
shall receive, in addition to his pay and allowances, including spe-
cial and incentive pays, or in addition to his retired pay, an amount
equal to the difference between such pay and allowances, includ-
ing special and incentive pays, or between his retired pay, and the
compensation prescribed for the Chairman of the Military Liaison
Committee.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 231
"CHAPTER 4. RESEARCH
"SEC. 31. RESEARCH ASSISTANCE.—
"a. The Commission is directed to exercise its powers in such
manner as to insure the continued conduct of research and de-
velopment activities in the fields specified below, by private or pub-
lic institutions or persons, ^nd to assist in the acquisition of an
ever-expanding fund of theoretical and practical knowledge in such
fields. To this end the Commission is authorized and directed to
make arrangements (including contracts, agreements, and loans)
for the conduct of research and development activities relating
to—
"(1) nuclear processes;
" (2) the theory and production of atomic energy, including
processes, materials, and devices related to such production;
"(3) utilization of special nuclear material and radioactive
material for medical, biological, agricultural, health, or mil-
itary purposes;
"(4) utilization of special nuclear material, atomic energy,
and radioactive material and processes entailed in the utiliza-
tion or production of atomic energy or such material for all
other purposes, including industrial uses, the generation of
usable energy, and the demonstration of the practical value of
utilization or production facilities for industrial or commercial
purposes; and
"(5) the protection of health and the promotion of safety
during research and production activities.
"b. The Commission may (1) make arrangements pursuant to
this section, without regard to the provisions of section 3709 of the
Revised Statutes, as amended, upon certification by the Commis-
sion that such action is necessary in the interest of the common
defense and security, or upon a showing by the Commission that
advertising is not reasonably practicable; (2) make partial and
advance payments under such arrangements; and (3) make avail-
able for use in connection therewith such of its equipment and
facilities as it may deem desirable.
"c. The arrangements made pursuant to this section shall con-
tain such provisions (1) to protect health, (2) to minimize danger
to life or property, and (3) to require the reporting and to permit
the inspection of work performed thereunder, as the Commission
may determine. No such arrangement shall contain any provisions
or conditions which prevent the dissemination of scientific or tech-
nical information, except to the extent such dissemination is pro-
hibited by law. [p. 927]
-------
232 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
"SEC. 53. DOMESTIC DISTRIBUTION OF SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATE-
RIAL.—
"a. The Commission is authorized to issue licenses for the pos-
session of, to make available for the period of the license, and to
distribute special nuclear material within the United States to
qualified applicants requesting such material—
" (1) for the conduct of research and development activities
of the types specified in section 31;
"(2) for use in the conduct of research and development
activities or in medical therapy under a license issued pur-
suant to section 104; or
" (3) for use under a license issued pursuant to section 103.
"b. The Commission shall establish, by rule, minimum criteria
for the issuance of specific or general licenses for the distribution
of special nuclear material depending upon the degree of impor-
tance to the common defense and security or to the health and
safety of the public of—
" (1) the physical characteristics of the special nuclear ma-
terial to be distributed;
"(2) the quantities of special nuclear material to be dis-
tributed; and
"(3) the intended use of the special nuclear material to be
distributed.
"c. The Commission may make a reasonable charge, determined
pursuant to this section, for the use of special nuclear material
licensed and distributed under subsection 53 a. (1) or subsection
53 a. (2) and shall make a reasonable charge determined pursuant
to this section for the use of special nuclear material licensed and
distributed under subsection 53 a. (3). The Commission shall
establish criteria in writing for the determination of whether a
charge will be made for the use of special nuclear material licensed
and distributed under subsection 53 a. (1) or subsection 53 a. (2),
considering, among other things, whether the licensee is a non-
profit or eleemosynary institution and the purposes for which the
special nuclear material will be used.
"d. In determining the reasonable charge to be made by the
Commission for the use of special nuclear material distributed to
licensees of utilization or production facilities licensed pursuant to
section 103 or 104, in addition to consideration of the cost thereof,
the Commission shall take into consideration—
"(1) the use to be made of the special nuclear material;
" (2) the extent to which the use of the special nuclear ma-
terial will advance the development of the peaceful uses of
atomic energy;
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 233
" (3) the energy value of the special nuclear material in the
particular use for which the license is issued;
"(4) whether the special nuclear material is to be used in
facilities licensed pursuant to section 103 or 104. In this re-
spect, the Commission shall, insofar as practicable, make
uniform, nondiscriminatory charges for the use of special
nuclear material distributed to facilities licensed pursuant to
section 103; and
[p. 930]
"(5) with respect to special nuclear material consumed in
a facility licensed pursuant to section 103, the Commission
shall make a further charge based on the cost to the Commis-
sion, as estimated by the Commission, or the average fair
price paid for the production of such special nuclear material
as determined by section 56, whichever is lower.
"e. Each license issued pursuant to this section shall contain and
be subject to the following conditions—
"(1) title to all special nuclear material shall at all times
be in the United States;
"(2) no right to the special nuclear material shall be con-
ferred by the license except as defined by the license;
"(3) neither the license nor any right under the license
shall be assigned or otherwise transferred in violation of the
provisions of this Act;
"(4) all special nuclear material shall be subject to the
right of recapture or control reserved by section 108 and to
all other provisions of this Act;
" (5) no special nuclear material may be used in any utiliza-
tion or production facility except in accordance with the pro-
visions of this Act;
"(6) special nuclear material shall be distributed only on
terms, as may be established by rule of the Commission, such
that no user will be permitted to construct an atomic weapon;
"(7) special nuclear material shall be distributed only pur-
suant to such safety standards as may be established by rule
of the Commission to protect health and to minimize danger
to life or property; and
"(8) the licensee will hold the United States and the Com-
mission harmless from any damages resulting from the use or
possession of special nuclear material by the licensee.
"f. The Commission is directed to distribute within the United
States sufficient special nuclear material to permit the conduct of
widespread independent research and development activities to
the maximum extent practicable and within the limitations set by
-------
234 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the President pursuant to section 41. In the event that applica-
tions for special nuclear material exceed the amount available for
distribution, preference shall be given to those activities which are
most likely, in the opinion of the Commission, to contribute to
basic research, to the development of peacetime uses of atomic
energy, or to the economic and military strength of the Nation.
*******
[p. 931]
"CHAPTER 7. SOURCE MATERIAL
"SEC. 62. LICENSE FOR TRANSFERS REQUIRED.—Unless authorized
by a general or specific license issued by the Commission, which
the Commission is hereby authorized to issue, no person may trans-
fer or receive an interstate commerce, transfer, deliver, receive
possession of or title to, or import into or export from the United
States any source material after removal from its place of deposit
in nature, except that licenses shall not be required for quantities
of source material which, in the opinion of the Commission, are
unimportant.
[p. 932]
"Ssc. 63. DOMESTIC DISTRIBUTION OF SOURCE MATERIAL.—
"a. The Commission is authorized to issue licenses for and to
distribute source material within the United States to qualified
applicants requesting such material—
"(1) for the conduct of research and development activ-
ities of the types specified in section 31;
"(2) for use in the conduct of research and development
activities or in medical therapy under a license issued pur-
suant to section 104;
" (3) for use under a license issued pursuant to section 103;
or
"(4) for any other use approved by the Commission as an
aid to science or industry.
"b. The Commission shall establish, by rule, minimum criteria
for the issuance of specific or general licenses for the distribution
of source material depending upon the degree of importance to the
common defense and security or to the health and safety of the
public of—
"(1) the physical characteristics of the source material to
be distributed;
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 235
"(2) the quantities of source material to be distributed;
and
"(3) the intended use of the source material to be
distributed.
"c. The Commission may make a reasonable charge determined
pursuant to subsection 161 m. for the source material licensed and
distributed under subsection 63 a. (1), subsection 63 a. (2), or
subsection 63 a. (4), and shall make a reasonable charge deter-
mined pursuant to subsection 161 m., for the source material
licensed and distributed under subsection 63 a. (3). The Commis-
sion shall establish criteria in writing for the determination of
whether a charge will be made for the source material licensed and
distributed under subsection 63 a. (1), subsection 63 a. (2), or
subsection 63 a. (4), considering, among other things, whether the
licensee is a nonprofit or eleemosynary institution and the purposes
for which the source material will be used.
*******
[p. 933]
"SEC. 69. PROHIBITION.—The Commission shall not license any
person to transfer or deliver, receive possession of or title to, or
import into or export from the United States any source material
if, in the opinion of the Commission, the issuance of a license to
such person for such purpose would be inimical to the common
[p. 934]
defense and security or the health and safety of the public.
"CHAPTER 8. BYPRODUCT MATERIAL
"SEC. 81. DOMESTIC DISTRIBUTION.—No person may transfer or
receive in interstate commerce, manufacture, produce, transfer,
acquire, own, possess, import, or export any byproduct material,
except to the extent authorized by this section or by section 82.
The Commission is authorized to issue general or specific licenses
to applicants seeking to use byproduct material for research or
development purposes, for medical therapy, industrial uses, agri-
cultural uses, or such other useful applications as may be de-
veloped. The Commission may distribute, sell, loan, or lease, such
byproduct material as it owns to licensees with or without charge:
Provided, hoivever, That, for byproduct material to be distributed
by the Commission for a charge, the Commission shall establish
prices on such equitable basis as, in the opinion of the Commission,
(a) will provide reasonable compensation to the Government for
-------
236 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
such material, (b) will not discourage the use of such material or
the development of sources of supply of such material independent
of the Commission, and (c) will encourage research and develop-
ment. In distributing such material, the Commission shall give
preference to applicants proposing to use such material either in
the conduct of research and development or in medical therapy.
Licensees of the Commission may distribute byproduct material
only to applicants therefor who are licensed by the Commission to
receive such byproduct material. The Commission shall not per-
mit the distribution of any byproduct material to any licensee,
and shall recall or order the recall of any distributed material from
any licensee, who is not equipped to observe or who fails to observe
such safety standards to protect health as may be established
by the Commission or who uses such material in violation of
law or regulation of the Commission or in a manner other than
as disclosed in the application therefor or approved by the Com-
mission. The Commission is authorized to establish classes of
byproduct material and to exempt certain classes or quantities
of material or kinds of uses or users from the requirements
for a license set forth in this section when it makes a finding
that the exemption of such classes or quantities of such material or
such kinds of uses or users will not constitute an unreasonable risk
to the common defense and security and to the health and safety
of the public.
"SEC. 82. FOREIGN DISTRIBUTION OF BYPRODUCT MATERIAL.—
"a. The Commission is authorized to cooperate with any nation
by distributing byproduct material, and to distribute byproduct
material, pursuant to the terms of an agreement for cooperation to
which such nation is party and which is made in accordance with
section 123.
"b. The Commission is also authorized to distribute byproduct
material to any person outside the United States upon application
therefor by such person and demand such charge for such material
as would be charged for the material if it were distributed within
the United States: Provided, however, That the Commission shall
not distribute any such material to any person under this section
if, in its opinion, such distribution would be inimical to the com-
mon defense and security: And provided further, That the Com-
mission may require such reports regarding the use of material
distributed pursuant to the provisions of this section as it deems
necessary.
"c. The Commission is authorized to license others to distribute
byproduct material to any person outside the United States under
the same conditions, except as to charges, as would be applicable
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 237
if the material were distributed by the Commission.
[p. 935]
"CHAPTER 10. ATOMIC ENERGY LICENSES
"SEC. 101. LICENSE REQUIRED. — It shall be unlawful, except as
provided in section 91, for any person within the United States to
transfer or receive in interstate commerce, manufacture, produce,
transfer, acquire, possess, import, or export any utilization or pro-
duction facility except under and in accordance with a license
issued by the Commission pursuant to section 103 or 104.
"SEC. 102. FINDING OF PRACTICAL VALUE. — Whenever the Com-
mission has made a finding in writing that any type of utilization
or production facility has been sufficiently developed to be of prac-
tical value for industrial or commercial purposes, the Commission
may thereafter issue licenses for such type of facility pursuant to
section 103.
"SEC. 103. COMMERCIAL LICENSES. —
"a. Subsequent to a finding by the Commission as required in
section 102, the Commission may issue licenses to transfer or re-
ceive in interstate commerce, manufacture, produce, transfer, ac-
quire, possess, import, or export under the terms of an agreement
for cooperation arranged pursuant to section 123, such type of
utilization or production facility. Such licenses shall be issued in
accordance with the provisions of chapter 16 and subject to such
conditions as the Commission may by rule or regulation establish
to effectuate the purposes and provisions of this Act.
"b. The Commission shall issue such licenses on a nonexclusive
basis to persons applying therefor (1) whose proposed activities
will serve a useful purpose proportionate to the quantities of spe-
cial nuclear material or source material to be utilized; (2) who are
equipped to observe and who agree to observe such safety stand-
ards to protect health and to minimize danger to life or property
[p. 936]
as the Commission may by rule establish; and (3) who agree to
make available to the Commission such technical information and
data concerning activities under such licenses as the Commission
may determine necessary to promote the common defense and se-
curity and to protect the health and safety of the public. All such
information may be used by the Commission only for the purposes
of the common defense and security and to protect the health and
safety of the public.
-------
238 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
"c. Each such license shall be issued for a specified period, as
determined by the Commission, depending on the type of activity
to be licensed, but not exceeding forty years, and may be renewed
upon the expiration of such period.
"d. No license under this section may be given to any person
for activities which are not under or within the jurisdiction of the
United States, except for the export of production or utilization
facilities under terms of an agreement for cooperation arranged
pursuant to section 123, or except under the provisions of section
109. No license may be issued to any corporation or other entity
if the Commission knows or has reason to believe it is owned,
controlled, or dominated by an alien, a foreign corporation, or a
foreign government. In any event, no license may be issued to any
person within the United States if, in the opinion of the Commis-
sion, the issuance of a license to such person would be inimical to
the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the
public.
"SEC. 104. MEDICAL THERAPY AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOP-
MENT.—
"a. The Commission is authorized to issue licenses to persons
applying therefor for utilization facilities for use in medical ther-
apy. In issuing such licenses the Commission is directed to permit
the widest amount of effective medical therapy possible with the
amount of special nuclear material available for such purposes and
to impose the minimum amount of regulation consistent with its
obligations under this Act to promote the common defense and se-
curity and to protect the health and safety of the public.
"b. The Commission is authorized to issue licenses to persons
applying therefor for utilization and production facilities involved
in the conduct of research and development activities leading to the
demonstration of the practical value of such facilities for industrial
or commercial purposes. In issuing licenses under this subsection,
the Commission shall impose the minimum amount of such regula-
tions and terms of license as will permit the Commission to fulfill
its obligations under this Act to promote the common defense and
security and to protect the health and safety of the public and will
be compatible with the regulations and terms of license which
would apply in the event that a commercial license were later to
be issued pursuant to section 103 for that type of facility. In is-
suing such licenses, priority shall be given to those activities which
will, in the opinion of the Commission, lead to major advances in
the application of atomic energy for industrial or commercial
purposes.
"c. The Commission is authorized to issue licenses to persons
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 239
applying therefor for utilization and production facilities useful in
the conduct of research and development activities of the types
specified in section 31 and which are not facilities of the type
specified in subsection 104 b. The Commission is directed to im-
pose only such minimum amount of regulation of the licensee as the
Commission finds will permit the Commission to fulfill its obliga-
tions under this Act to promote the common defense and security
and to protect the health and safety of the public and will permit
the conduct of widespread and diverse research and development.
"d. No license under this section may be given to any person for
activities which are not under or within the jurisdiction of the
United States, except for the export of production or utilization
[p. 937]
facilities under terms of an agreement for cooperation arranged
pursuant to section 123 or except under the provisions of section
109. No license may be issued to any corporation or other entity
if the Commission knows or has reason to believe it is owned, con-
trolled, or dominated by an alien, a foreign corporation, or a foreign
government. In any event, no license may be issued to any person
within the United States if, in the opinion of the Commission, the
issuance of a license to such person would be inimical to the com-
mon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
% % # % >H % %
[p. 938]
"SEC. 109. COMPONENT PARTS OF FACILITIES.-—With respect to
those utilization and production facilities which are so determined
by the Commission pursuant to subsection 11 p. (2) or 11 v. (2)
the Commission may (a) issue general licenses for activities re-
quired to be licensed under section 101, if the Commission deter-
mines in writing that such general licensing will not constitute an
unreasonable risk to the common defense and security, and
(b) issue licenses for the export of such facilities, if the Commis-
sion determines in writing that each export will not constitute an
unreasonable risk to the common defense and security.
# >K * * * * *
[p. 939]
"SEC. 123. COOPERATION WITH OTHER NATIONS.-—No coopera-
tion with any nation or regional defense organization pursuant to
sections 54, 57, 64, 82, 103, 104, or 144 shall be undertaken until—
"a. the Commission or, in the case of those agreements for
cooperation arranged pursuant to subsection 144 b., the De-
partment of Defense has submitted to the President the
-------
240 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
proposed agreement for cooperation, together with its recom-
mendation thereon, which proposed agreement shall include
(1) the terms, conditions, duration, nature, and scope of the
cooperation; (2) a guaranty by the cooperating party that
security safeguards and standards as set forth in the agree-
ment for cooperation will be maintained; (3) a guaranty by
the cooperating party that any material to be transferred
pursuant to such agreement will not be used for atomic
weapons, or for research on or development of atomic weap-
ons, or for any other military purpose; and (4) a guaranty by
the cooperating party that any material or any Restricted
Data to be transferred pursuant to the agreement for coopera-
tion will not be transferred to unauthorized persons or beyond
the jurisdiction of the cooperating party, except as specified
in the agreement for cooperation;
"b. the President has approved and authorized the execution
of the proposed agreement for cooperation, and has made a
determination in writing that the performance of the proposed
agreement will promote and will not constitute an unreason-
able risk to the common defense and security; and
"c. the proposed agreement for cooperation, together with
the approval and the determination of the President, has been
submitted to the Joint Committee and a period of thirty days
has elapsed while Congress is in session (in computing such
thirty days, there shall be excluded the days on which either
House is not in session because of an adjournment of more
than three days).
[p. 940]
'CHAPTER 14. GENERAL AUTHORITY
"SEC. 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS.—In the performance of its
functions the Commission is authorized to—
"a. establish advisory boards to advise with and make rec-
ommendations to the Commission on legislation, policies, ad-
ministration, research, and other matters, provided that the
Commission issues regulations setting forth the scope, proce-
dure, and limitations of the authority of each such board;
"b. establish by rule, regulation, or order, such standards
and instructions to govern the possession and use of special
nuclear material, source material, and byproduct material as
the Commission may deem necessary or desirable to promote
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 241
the common defense and security or to protect health or to
minimize danger to life or property;
"c. make such studies and investigations, obtain such infor-
mation, and hold such meetings or hearings as the Commission
may deem necessary or proper to assist it in exercising any
authority provided in this Act, or in the administration or
enforcement of this Act, or any regulations or orders issued
thereunder. For such purposes the Commission is authorized
to administer oaths and affirmations, and by subpena to re-
quire any person to appear and testify, or to appear and pro-
duce documents, or both, at any designated place. No person
shall be excused from complying with any requirements under
this paragraph because of his privilege against self-incrimina-
tion, but the immunity provisions of the Compulsory Testi-
mony Act of February 11, 1893, shall apply with respect to
any individual who specifically claims such privilege. Wit-
nesses subpenaed under this subsection shall be paid the same
fees and mileage as are paid witnesses in the district courts
of the United States;
"d. appoint and fix the compensation of such officers and
employees as may be necessary to carry out the functions of
the Commission. Such officers and employees shall be ap-
pointed in accordance with the civil-service laws and their
[p. 948]
compensation fixed in accordance with the Classification Act
of 1949, as amended, except that, to the extent the Commission
deems such action necessary to the discharge of its responsi-
bilities, personnel may be employed and their compensation
fixed without regard to such laws: Provided, hoivever, That
no officer or employee (except such officers and employees
whose compensation is fixed by law, and scientific and techni-
cal personnel) whose position would be subject to the Classi-
fication Act of 1949, as amended, if such Act were applicable
to such position, shall be paid a salary at a rate in excess of
the rate payable under such Act for positions of equivalent
difficulty or responsibility. The Commission shall make
adequate provision for administrative review of any deter-
mination to dismiss any employee;
"e. acquire such material, property, equipment, and facili-
ties, establish or construct such buildings and facilities, and
modify such buildings and facilities from time to time, as it
may deem necessary, and construct, acquire, provide, or ar-
range for such facilities and services (at project sites where
such facilities and services are not available) for the housing,
-------
242 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
health, safety, welfare, and recreation of personnel employed
by the Commission as it may deem necessary, subject to the
provisions of section 174;
"f. with the consent of the agency concerned, utilize or
employ the services or personnel of any Government agency
or any State or local government, or voluntary or uncompen-
sated personnel, to perform such functions on its behalf as
may appear desirable;
"g. acquire, purchase, lease, and hold real and personal
property, including patents, as agent of and on behalf of the
United States, subject to the provisions of section 174, and to
sell, lease, grant, and dispose of such real and personal
property as provided in this Act;
"h. consider in a single application one or more of the activ-
ities for which a license is required by this Act, combine in a
single license one or more of such activities, and permit the
applicant or licensee to incorporate by reference pertinent
information already filed with the Commission;
"i. prescribe such regulations or orders as it may deem
necessary (1) to protect Restricted Data received by any per-
son in connection with any activity authorized pursuant to this
Act, (2) to guard against the loss or diversion of any special
nuclear material acquired by any person pursuant to section
53 or produced by any person in connection with any activity
authorized pursuant to this Act, and to prevent any use or
disposition thereof which the Commission may determine to
be inimical to the common defense and security, and (3) to
govern any activity authorized pursuant to this Act, including
standards and restrictions governing the design, location, and
operation of facilities used in the conduct of such activity, in
order to protect health and to minimize danger to life or
property;
"j. without regard to the provisions of the Federal Property
and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended, except
section 207 of that Act, or any other law, make such disposi-
tion as it may deem desirable of (1) radioactive materials,
and (2) any other property, the special disposition of which
is, in the opinion of the Commission, in the interest of the
national security: Provided, however, That the property
furnished to licensees in accordance with the provisions of
subsection 161 m. shall not be deemed to be property disposed
of by the Commission pursuant to this subsection;
[p. 949]
"k. authorize such of its members, officers, and employees
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 243
as it deems necessary in the interest of the common defense
and security to carry firearms while in the discharge of their
official duties. The Commission may also authorize such of
those employees of its contractors engaged in the protection of
property owned by the United States and located at facilities
owned by or contracted to the United States as it deems
necessary in the interests of the common defense and security
to carry firearms while in the discharge of their official duties;
"1. secure the admittance free of duty into the United States
of purchases made abroad of source materials, upon certifica-
tion to the Secretary of the Treasury that such entry is neces-
sary in the interest of the common defense and security;
"m. enter into agreements with persons licensed under
section 103 or 104 for such periods of time as the Commission
may deem necessary or desirable (1) to provide for the
processing, fabricating, separating, or refining in facilities
owned by the Commission of source, byproduct, or other
material or special nuclear material owned by or made avail-
able to such licensees and which is utilized or produced in the
conduct of the licensed activity, and (2) to sell, lease, or
otherwise make available to such licensees such quantities of
source or byproduct material, and other material not defined
as special nuclear material pursuant to this Act, as may be
necessary for the conduct of the licensed activity: Provided,
however, That any such agreement may be canceled by the
licensee at any time upon payment of such reasonable cancel-
lation charges as may be agreed upon by the licensee and the
Commission: And provided further, That the Commission
shall establish prices to be paid by licensees for material or
services to be furnished by the Commission pursuant to this
subsection, which prices shall be established on such a non-
discriminatory basis as, in the opinion of the Commission,
will provide reasonable compensation to the Government for
such material or services and will not discourage the develop-
ment of sources of supply independent of the Commission;
"n. assign scientific, technical, professional, and adminis-
trative employees for instruction, education, or training by
public or private agencies, institutions of learning, labora-
tories, or industrial or commercial organizations and to pay
the whole or any part of the salaries of such employees, costs
of their transportation and per diem in lieu of subsistence in
accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and training
charges incident to their assignments (including tuition and
other related fees): Provided, however, That (1) not more
-------
244 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
than one per centum of the eligible employees shall be so
assigned during any fiscal year, and (2) any such assignment
shall be approved in advance by the Commission or shall be
in accordance with a training program previously approved by
the Commission: And Provided further, That appropriations
or other funds available to the Commission for salaries or
expenses shall be available for the purposes of this subsection;
"o. delegate to the General Manager or other officers of the
Commission any of those functions assigned to it under this
Act except those specified in sections 51, 57 a. (3), 61, 102
(with respect to the finding of practical value), 108, 123,
145 b. (with respect to the determination of those persons to
whom the Commission may reveal Restricted Data in the na-
tional interest), 145 e., and 161 a.;
"p. require by rule, regulation, or order, such reports, and
the keeping of such records with respect to, and to provide for
[p. 950]
such inspections of, activities and studies of types specified in
section 31 and of activities under licenses issued pursuant to
sections 53, 63, 81, 103, and 104, as may be necessary to
effectuate the purposes of this Act, including section 105; and
"q. make, promulgate, issue, rescind, and amend such rules
and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes
of this Act.
*******
[p. 951]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 245
l.lb(l) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
H.B. REP. No. 2181, 83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954).
AMENDING THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946, AS
AMENDED, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
JULY 12, 1954.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. COLE of New York, from the U.S. Congress Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H. R. 9757]
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, to whom was referred
the bill (H. R. 9757) to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1946,
as amended, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
unanimously report favorably thereon and recommend that the
bill do pass. Some individual members of the Joint Committee
hold divergent views on certain sections of the bill which are at-
tached hereto or will be presented appropriately in their respective
Houses.
This report describes the background of H. R. 9757, which is the
committee-approved revision of H. R. 8862 on which public and
executive hearings have been held, sets forth the basic considera-
tions which impelled the Joint Committee to report it favorably,
and furnishes a section-by-section analysis of the bill.
CHANGING PERSPECTIVES IN ATOMIC ENERGY
The primary purpose of H. R. 9757 is to bring the Atomic
Energy Act of 1946 into accord with atomic progress and to make
our Nation's legislative controls better conform with the scientific,
technical, economic, and political facts of atomic energy as they
exist today—almost a decade after S. 1717 became the law of the
land (Public Law 555, 79th Cong.).
The organic law was written at the very outset of the atomic
era. Those who participated in drafting that law were keenly
aware that many unknown factors were involved in measuring
the future impact of this new source of energy upon our national
life. Indeed, the law warned in its findings and declaration that
"any legislation will necessarily be subject to revision from time
-------
246 LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
to time." We deem it a tribute to the special committee which
drafted S. 1717, 79th Congress, and to the late Senator Brien
McMahon, sponsor of the legislation and subsequently chairman of
the Joint Committee, that the organic law has served our Nation
so well for nearly a full decade. We would also record our satisfac-
[P. 1]
tion with the fact that, at a time when atomic energy was popularly
associated only with the atom bomb, the organic law specifically
called attention to constructive uses of the atom, by declaring
that-
subject at all times to the paramount objective of assuring the common defense
and security, the development and utilization of atomic energy shall, so far as
practicable, be directed toward improving the public welfare, increasing the
standard of living, strengthening free competition in private enterprise, and
promoting world peace.
Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, our Nation has developed,
in the form of our atomic-weapon stockpile, a degree of deterring
power which may well constitute the free world's greatest material
asset in its effort to avert another worldwide war. The elementary
requirements of national security have compelled us to give mili-
tary uses of the atom top priority. Yet we have simultaneously
developed, to a considerable degree, beneficent applications of this
new force.
The past 8 years have witnessed extraordinary scientific and
technical achievements in atomic energy, both on the peacetime
and military sides. Technological developments—some promising
longer and richer lives for all privileged to share in the peacetime
benefits of the atom, and others posing grave threats to the very
existence of civilization—have proceeded much more rapidly than
was expected in 1946. As a result, atomic-energy legislation which
was once fully responsive to assuring the common defense and
promoting the national welfare must now be revised to take
account of existing realities in atomic energy, in our Nation and
throughout the world.
When the original act was written, the United States possessed
a monopoly of atomic weapons. In a world where just and lasting
peace was fervently sought though not yet assured, simple pru-
dence dictated stringent security regulations aimed at prolonging
our monopoly. It was widely believed that the Soviet Union might
not explode its first atomic bomb for many years to come, and that
still more years might pass before it could produce atomic weapons
in quantity. In point of fact, however, the Soviet Union broke our
atomic monopoly less than 3 years after the Atomic Energy Act of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 247
1946 was put on the statute books. In the fall of 1953, less than a
year after our first full-scale fusion-weapon test, the Soviets also
achieved a thermonuclear explosion. This clearly does not mean
that the security regulations contained in the Atomic Energy Act
of 1946 served no useful purpose, or that an indiscriminate relaxa-
tion of these safeguards is now in order. It does mean that our
provisions for the control of information must now be revised to
protect our national interest in a world where the forces of evil
have added to their conventional arms a growing ability to launch
a devastating atomic blow against the free world.
When the organic law was enacted, atomic bombs were regarded
by most as strategic weapons. Tactical applications of the military
atom were but dimly perceived. Still less was it recognized that
the time would soon come when tactical atomic weapons could
profoundly, perhaps even decisively, affect the operations of the
ground forces defending Western Europe. With our Nation the
sole possessor of atomic weapons, and with these weapons hus-
banded for a strategic counterblow against an aggressor, there was
no need for acquainting friendly nations with information concern-
ing the effects and military employment of tactical atomic weapons.
[p. 2]
Today, however, we are engaged with our allies in a common
endeavor, involving common planning and combined forces, to dam
the tide of Red military power and prevent it from engulfing free
Europe. America's preponderance in atomic weapons can offset
the numerical superiority of the Communist forces, and serve
emphatic notice on the Soviet dictators that any attempt to occupy
free Europe, or to push further anywhere into the free world,
would be foredoomed to failure. Yet, so long as our law prohibits
us from giving our partners in these joint efforts for common
defense such atomic information as is required for realistic mili-
tary planning, our own national security suffers.
To contrast still further differences between the perspective of
1946 and that of 1954: It was commonly believed 8 years ago that
the generation of useful power from atomic energy was a distant
goal, a very distant goal. Atomic energy then was 95 percent for
military purposes, with possibly 5 percent for peacetime uses.
The resources of the Atomic Energy Commission and of its con-
tractors appeared fully adequate to develop atomic-power reactors
at a rate consistent with foreseeable technical progress. Moreover,
there was little experience concerning the health hazards involved
in operating atomic plants, and this fact was in itself a compelling
argument for making the manufacture and use of atomic materials
a Government monopoly.
-------
248 LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
Today, however, we can draw on the experience acquired in
designing, building, and operating more than a score of atomic
reactors. It is now evident that greater private participation in
power development need not bring with it attendant hazards to the
health and safety of the American people. Moreover, the atomic-
reactor art has already reached the point where atomic power at
prices competitive with electricity derived from conventional fuels
is on the horizon, though not within our immediate reach. For
more than 21/2 years, the experimental breeder reactor has actually
been producing relatively small amounts of electricity at the na-
tional reactor testing station in Idaho. The land-based prototype
of the atomic engine propelling the U. S. S. Nautilus has already
produced more than enough power to send an atomic submarine
around the world, fully submerged and at full speed. The Westing-
house Electric Corp. and the Duquesne Power & Light Co. are now
constructing the Nation's first large-scale atomic-power reactor,.
which will generate 60,000 kilowatts of electricity—an amount
sufficient to furnish light and power for a sizable city.
Many technological problems remain to be solved before wide-
spread atomic power, at competitive prices, is a reality. It is clear
to us that continued Government research and development, using
Government funds, will be indispensable to a speedy and resolute
attack on these problems. It is equally clear to us, however, that
the goal of atomic power at competitive prices will be reached
more quickly if private enterprise, using private funds, is now
encouraged to play a far larger role in the development of atomic
power than is permitted under existing legislation. In particular,
we do not believe that any developmental program carried out
solely under governmental auspices, no matter how efficient it may
be, can substitute for the cost-cutting and other incentives of free
and competitive enterprise.
Today we are not alone in the drive to achieve peacetime atomic
power. Eight years ago, besides the United States, only the United
[P. 3]
Kingdom, Canada, and—as we have recently come to find—the
Soviet Union, had major atomic energy projects in being. The
possibility of cooperating with other nations to gain mutual advan-
tage in the area of peacetime power appeared far in the future.
As against this, however, more than 20 countries now have
vigorous atomic energy programs, and several of them are pressing
toward the construction of atomic power plants to turn out useful
amounts of electricity.
In 1946, finally, our Nation earnestly hoped that worldwide
agreement on international control of atomic energy might soon be
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 249
secured. It was reasonable, therefore, that the original act should
prohibit an exchange of information on commercial uses of atomic
energy with other nations until such time as the Congress declared
that effective and enforcible international safeguards against the
use of atomic energy for destructive purposes had been established.
But our hopes of 1946 have been thwarted by unremitting Soviet
opposition to the United Nations plan for the control of atomic
energy. Although we would be morally derelict if we abandoned
our hopes for the eventual effective international regulation of all
armaments, legislative policy cannot now be founded on the
expectation that the prospect of such control is either likely or
imminent.
In summary: Statutory provisions which were in harmony with
the state of atomic development in 1946 are no longer consistent
with the realities of atomic energy in 1954. Legislation not
responsive to the needs and problems of today can serve only to
deny our Nation, and like-minded nations as well, the true promise
of atomic energy—both in augmenting the total military strength
of the free world, and in increasing opportunities for beneficent
uses of the atom.
HISTORY OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION
As the committee of Congress required by statute to "make con-
tinuing studies of the development, use and control of atomic
energy," the joint committee has, since it first met in 1947, con-
cerned itself with the relationship between a changing and growing
atomic program and the overall legislative requirements of this
new field. As a result, the joint committee has, from time to time,
recommended to the Congress certain amendments to the basic law
as circumstances have demanded.
In the summer of 1952, the committee decided to begin an
intensive study of the problems of atomic power development, and
requested the Commission to prepare a statement of its views on
this matter. Pending completion of the Commission statement, the
committee prepared and issued in December 1952, a 415-page print
entitled "Atomic Power and Private Enterprise." This print, the
first compilation on the subject, sought to illuminate the problems
associated with increased peacetime atomic energy developments.
In the spring of 1953 the Commission submitted its policy state-
ment on atomic power, and the committee held extensive hearings
on the subject. During the course of these hearings, the Atomic
Energy Commission emphasized that maximum progress in this
area required greater contributions in manpower, dollars, and
resources from private enterprise, and that legislative revisions
-------
250 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
would be needed to make this possible. Witnesses from the
Department of Defense and the Department of State reported that
[p. 4]
our nation could invigorate its atomic power development effort
without subtracting from our atomic military strength, and that
such a broadened attack on peacetime power would advantage our
country in its international relations.
The testimony of executive branch representatives and of spokes-
men for science, industry, labor, and management heard by the
joint committee in the course of the 1953 hearings on atomic power
development appears in the 649 page joint committee publication
on the subject of Atomic Power Development and Private Enter-
prise, published in the fall of 1953.
The committee has, in addition, maintained a continuing and
active interest in all other phases of the atomic program affected
by the proposed legislation. Last spring, its Security Subcommit-
tee inquired into the procedures of the Atomic Energy Commission
for safeguarding classified information. Its Research and Devel-
opment Subcommittee held extended hearings on the Commission's
5-year reactor development program and on other related scientific
and engineering activities. The weapons program has demanded
a large portion of the committee's intense attention.
Thus, through studies, inspections, meetings, hearings, and con-
tinuing day-to-day contact with the atomic energy program the
committee has amassed a body of information and experience
which forms the base underlying the legislation now recommended.
On February 17 of this year, the President of the United States
submitted to the Congress a series of recommendations incorpo-
rating the proposals of the executive branch for amending the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946. These amendments, aimed at
"strengthening the defense and economy of the United States and
of the free world," sought to accomplish the following:
First, widened cooperation with our allies in certain atomic energy matters;
Second, improved procedures for the control and dissemination of atomic
energy information; and
Third, encouragement of broadened participation in the development of
peacetime uses of atomic energy in the United States.
Following submission of the President's message to the Con-
gress, the Joint Committee, sitting as a subcommittee of the whole,
drafted a series of amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1946.
On April 15 and 19, the chairman and vice chairman of the Joint
Committee introduced into the House and Senate H. R. 8862 and S.
3323, the resulting companion bills. At the time these bills were
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 251
introduced, attention was drawn to the fact that they would un-
doubtedly be subject to revision by the Joint Committee during the
course of public and executive hearings on the proposed legislation.
The committee met almost daily in its consideration of these bills
and held many public hearings, at which witnesses representing
Government and industry were heard.
Throughout, our deliberations were marked with the spirit of
nonpartisanship which has characterized the work of the Joint
Committee from its inception. Virtually all differences of opinion
originally existing between committee members concerning specific
provisions of the legislation were resolved in the course of our dis-
cussions, and through a more complete understanding of the prob-
lems and the provisions of the measure, and our hearings ended
[p. 5]
with essential unanimity having been reached on the general
provisions of the bills.
On June 30, new bills incorporating the revisions made during
the executive meetings on H. R. 8862 and S. 3323, were introduced.
It is these bills, H. R. 9757 and S. 3690, which we now unanimously
report favorably.
We are aware of the heavy responsibility we now assume in
commending this legislation to the Congress, and thereby to the
American people. Many imponderables are still involved in trying
to chart the future course of atomic progress, and we presume
that the legislative changes we now recommend will themselves
undoubtedly require revision from time to time.
It is our deep conviction, however, that this legislation will speed
atomic progress and will promote the security and well-being of the
Nation. It accomplishes the purposes set forth in the President's
February 17 message to the Congress. It addresses itself to a
needed, across-the-board modernization of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1946. It proposes changes wherever 8 years of testing the or-
ganic law in the hard crucible of actual experience has led the com-
mittee to conclude that revisions would make for greater security,
efficiency, and economy in the operation of our national atomic
energy program.
THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
Widened cooperation ivith our allies in certain atomic energy
matters
H. R. 9757 and S. 3690 authorize the negotiation of bilateral
agreements for cooperation with foreign nations in the area of
peacetime uses of atomic energy under carefully stipulated safe-
-------
252 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
guards. The Commission may transfer and exchange restricted
data dealing with industrial, nonmilitary uses of atomic energy.
Also, under explicitly stated safeguards, the Commission may
transfer to another nation, party to an "agreement for coopera-
tion," atomic materials in quantities needed for the development
or utilization of atomic energy for nonmilitary and research pur-
poses. Besides allowing bilateral agreements in this field, the
legislation also authorizes the President to enter into an interna-
tional arrangement with a group of nations for the purpose of
international cooperation in nonmilitary applications of atomic
energy and thereafter to cooperate with that group of nations,
pursuant to agreements for cooperation. The legislation provides
a mechanism to implement the President's peacetime International
Atomic Pool Plan, outlined in his speech before the United Nations
on December 8, 1953.
On the military side, the legislation permits the Department of
Defense, under comprehensive security safeguards, to transfer to
another nation, or to a regional defense organization of which we
are a member, restricted data concerning the tactical employment
of atomic weapons. Such information includes data necessary to
the development of defense plans, the training of personnel in the
employment of, and defense against, atomic weapons, and the
evaluation of the capabilities of potential enemies in the employ-
ment of atomic weapons. The types of information that may be
communicated to others to achieve these objectives are carefully
delineated, and it is made clear that no information which would
reveal important or significant data on the design or fabrication
of the nuclear portions of atomic weapons, or on the detailed
[p. 6]
engineering of other important parts of atomic weapons, can be
revealed.
We believe that peacetime international atomic energy coopera-
tion on the basis of the terms set forth in this legislation will
redound to the mutual benefit of all concerned in such common
undertakings. We believe also that the degree of military atomic
cooperation envisaged in these amendments will increase the effec-
tiveness of our joint defense planning with other nations in our
mutual defense. We further believe that the attendant gains to
our own security will more than offset the risks taken when any
classified military information, irrespective of its sensitivity or
quantity, passes beyond our exclusive control.
In making our recommendations for international cooperation,
we have proceeded under the policy that security restrictions which
prove to be onerous or unnecessary can always be relaxed, whereas
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 253
the act of abandoning exclusive control over any item of informa-
tion is irrevocable. Accordingly, we have approached these sec-
tions of legislation with great circumspection—preferring to
resolve any doubts on the side of caution.
Improvement of procedures for the control and dissemination of
atomic energy information
The information control provisions of the organic law and of
these bills are built around the concept of restricted data, which
the Atomic Energy Act of 1946 defines as "all data concerning the
manufacture or utilization of atomic weapons, the production of
fissionable material, or the use of fissionable material in the pro-
duction of power, but shall not include any data which the Com-
mission from time to time determines may be published without
adversely affecting the common defense and security."
Clearance for access to restricted data has been contingent upon
an investigation as to character, associations, and loyalty of the
individual. The same investigative requirements have applied
to all personnel employed by the Atomic Energy Commission or its
contractors, whether such employees would in fact have subsequent
access to only small amounts of classified information of little
security significance, or whether their positions required broad and
continuing access to the most sensitive data in the atomic program.
The amended legislation would permit the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, on the basis of established criteria, to relate the scope of
background investigation required to the extent and sensitivity of
the classified information to which an employee would have access
while on the project. We believe that such a practice will make
for greater overall security and greater protection of atomic
secrets, by permitting the resources of our investigative agencies
to be concentrated on those areas where painstaking and scrupulous
background checks are most urgently required.
As atomic weapons have more and more assumed the status of
conventional armaments in our military services, an increasing
number of Department of Defense personnel have required access
to restricted data. The Atomic Energy Commission is now per-
mitted to disclose restricted data to military personnel qualifying
for such information on a need-to-know basis and possessing the
appropriate service clearance. At the same time, Commission con-
tractors are prohibited from revealing or disclosing restricted data
[p. 7]
to military personnel on the basis of their military clearance, re-
quiring instead that potential recipients first secure an Atomic
Energy Commission clearance—based on investigation by the
-------
254 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Federal Bureau of Investigation or by the Civil Service Commis-
sion. The amendments would remedy this administrative anomaly
by permitting contractors and licensees of the Commission to give
Department of Defense personnel access to restricted data under
conditions which would assure safeguarding of the information.
Much restricted data concerns the military utilization of atomic
weapons. Responsibility for the control of all restricted data,
however, is vested in the Atomic Energy Commission. In certain
instances, the Department of Defense has desired to remove mili-
tary utilization information from the restricted data category, and
without putting it in the public domain, to handle it under the
safeguards used to protect other classified military information.
Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, however, information can
be removed from the restricted data category only through de-
classification, following a Commission determination that the
publication of this data would not adversely affect the common
defense and security. To meet this problem, the bill would permit
information relating primarily to the utilization of atomic weapons
to be removed from the restricted data category after a joint
determination by the Commission and the Department of Defense
that the data related primarily to military utilization, and that it
should and could be safeguarded under the Espionage Act and
other applicable statutes. The Department of Defense would also
be given a voice with the Atomic Energy Commission in declassifi-
cation actions involving a restricted data which relates primarily
to military utilization of atomic weapons.
The joint committee has been keenly aware of the critical role
of information control in helping assure this Nation's continued
atomic supremacy. We have recommended legislative changes in
this area only after exhaustive consideration of all the factors
involved, and on the basis of our carefully considered judgment
that these changes will promote our common defense and security.
The domestic development of peacetime uses of atomic energy
The organic law makes the production and use of fissionable
material a Government monopoly. Private industry is permitted
neither to own nor possess such material, nor to own or operate
atomic reactors or other facilities capable of producing or utilizing
these same materials. The basic law stipulates that "All right,
title, and interest within or under the jurisdiction of the United
States, in or to any fissionable material, now or hereafter produced,
shall be the property of the Commission, and shall be deemed to be
vested in the Commission by virtue of this act." It defines
"fissionable material" as "plutonium, uranium enriched in the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 255
isotope-235, or any other material which the Commission deems to
be capable of releasing substantial quantities of energy through
nuclear chain reactions of the material, or any material artificially
enriched by any of the foregoing. * * *"
The phrase "fissionable material" is stricken from the proposed
legislation, and the new words "special nuclear material" are sub-
stituted in its stead. This change is intended to clarify the original
provision of the act to give to the Commission, in addition to the
power to determine and regulate the use of materials utilizable in
[P. 8]
the fission process, the power to perform the same functions in
respect to materials which can be utilized in fusion processes.
This report has already summarized the considerations under-
lying the stringent prohibitions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1946
against private participation in atomic energy. It has also made
clear that changing conditions now not only permit but require a
relaxation of these prohibitions if atomic energy is to contribute
in the fullest possible measure to our national security and
progress.
The recommended legislation therefore permits the Commission
to license private industry, to possess and use special nuclear
materials. The United States Government, however, would retain
title to such materials. The legislation also permits private per-
sons, under license of the Commission, to own reactors intended to
produce and utilize such materials.
It is our firmly held conviction that increased private participa-
tion in atomic power development, under the terms stipulated in
this proposed legislation, will measurably accelerate our progress
toward the day when economic atomic power will be a fact. It is
likewise our conviction that the safeguards written into this legisla-
tion will prevent special interests from winning undue advantages
at the expense of the national interest.
We do not believe that the efforts of free enterprise, using its
own resources and moneys, are by themselves adequate to achieve
the speediest possible attack on the goal of peacetime power.
Neither do we believe that maximum progress toward this objec-
tive will be afforded by an effort relying exclusively on govern-
mental research and development, using the public's moneys. We
believe, rather, that teamwork between Government and industry
—teamwork of the type encouraged by these amendments—is the
key to optimum progress, efficiency, and economy in this area of
atomic endeavor. In other words, our legislative proposals aim at
encouraging flourishing research and development programs under
both Government and private auspices.
-------
256 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
We are mindful of the fact that in the immediate future, rela-
tively few firms may be involved in this effort. We acknowledge
that dangers of restrictive patent practices are present, though not
inherent, in such a situation. Accordingly, we recommend to the
Congress that holders of patents on inventions of primary im-
portance to the peacetime uses of atomic energy be required to
license such patents to others in return for fair royalties. This
requirement of compulsory licensing will apply to all patents in
the field which are sought in the next 5 years.
Other matters
During the course of its deliberations on these amendments, the
committee has scrutinized the entire organic law, revising it in
such instances where 8 years of experience have argued that
changes were desirable. As a result, all of the 21 sections of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946 have been changed. Some of the
proposed revisions affect matters of substance—they attempt to
afford legislative answers for problems not existing at the time the
organic law was drafted. Many of the suggested changes are
minor—they are in the nature of perfecting amendments, or else
they resolve possible ambiguities in the construction of the lan-
guage of the original law. These revisions are set forth in the
[p. 9]
section-by-section analysis, and in the columnar comparison sec-
tions of this report.
Considered in their entirety, the amendments, in our opinion,
make our Nation's atomic energy legislation a more responsive
and adequate instrument for dealing with the problems posed by
the advent and evolution of this epochal new force.
Yet we are aware that legislation, standing by itself, can never
substitute for prudent and courageous administration of our
atomic enterprise by the responsible officials of the executive
branch, for continuing understanding and support of our atomic
program in the Congress, and—most of all—for that enlightened
and informed public opinion which is the bedrock of wise national
policy in our democratic society.
We have every confidence that the domestic problems created by
atomic energy can be resolved through the application of wisdom,
willingness of compromise, and good will. We are no less confident
that the critical international problems arising out of the growth
of nuclear stockpiles could likewise be amenable to resolution
through these same means.
We in America cannot be held accountable for the failure of
the Communist rulers to join with the free nations of the world in
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 257
ushering in an era of true atomic peace. We in America are
accountable, however, for what we ourselves do, or do not do, in
our striving's toward this goal.
We of this generation have been visited with a new form of
energy which can ravage this planet beyond recognition, or make
it fair beyond the wildest dreams of our fathers. It is the hope,
it is the prayer of those of us who now commend this legislation
to the Congress that the atom will be not the destroyer but the
servant of humanity.
CHAPTER 1. DECLARATION, FINDINGS, AND PURPOSES
In this chapter are set forth the basic statements of policy and
aims of the legislation and the constitutional findings in support
of the legislation.
Section 1: The aim of the bill is to assure that atomic energy
makes the maximum contribution to the general welfare of the
Nation, subject to the paramount objective of having it make the
maximum contribution to the common defense and security. The
ends toward which the development of atomic energy are directed
are further stated to be "to promote world peace, improve the
general welfare, increase the standard of living, and strengthen
free competition in private enterprise."
Section 2: The legal basis of the proposed legislation is the con-
stitutional powers of the United States including, among others,
to provide for the common defense; to raise and support armies;
to provide and maintain a navy; to make all needful rules and
regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to
the United States; and to regulate commerce with foreign nations
and among the several States.
Title to special nuclear material is vested in the United States so
that there is adequate means of providing the United States with
the materials for weapons or other preempting national uses in
times of need. The use of the special nuclear material by others in
facilities which, for the first time, are permitted to be owned by
[p. 10]
persons other than the United States Government, is regulated
under the power, among the others cited, of the United States to
provide for the regulation of its own property. In view of the
broad powers conferred upon the Congress by article 4, section 3,
clause 2, of the Constitution, there can be no doubt of the authority
of the Congress to exercise its powers to provide for any manner
of regulation needed to protect the national interests, and the in-
terests of the public.
-------
258 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Section 3: The bill specifies that the Commission shall carry out
programs of encouraging research; of disseminating technical in-
formation and controlling and declassifying restricted data; of
controlling atomic energy and special nuclear material; of encour-
aging widespread participation in the atomic-energy program;
and of international cooperation, subject to suitable safeguards;
and of administration.
*******
[p. 11]
CHAPTER 4. RESEARCH
This chapter provides the Commission with the statutory au-
thority to see that adequate research is performed in the program.
Section 31 provides the Commission with the authority to enter
contracts or other arrangements to have research work performed
for the Commission within very broad scientific areas.
[p. 14]
CHAPTER 6. SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL
Section 53 sets forth the uses for which the Commission may
license and distribute special nuclear material. These include
research of the type specified in section 31, research and develop-
ment or medical therapy under a license under section 104, or com-
mercial operation under a license issued under section 103. The
Commission is authorized to issue general or special licenses for
the possession of special nuclear material, and to make a charge
for the use of such material. The Commission is required to make
a charge for such use if it is in connection with a commercial
license issued under section 103. An additional charge for special
nuclear material consumed by a licensee under section 103 is based
on the cost to the Commission of producing or acquiring the special
[P. 15]
nuclear material. The charges for the other uses are in the discre-
tion of the Commission, but must be established by rule so as to be
fair to all in similar situations. The statutory conditions on per-
mitting the use or possession by others of special nuclear material
are set forth, and include:
1. Title shall remain in the United States.
2. Only those rights specified in the license are to be granted
to the licensee.
3. No license is transferable except pursuant to the bill.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 259
4. All special nuclear material is subject to the right of re-
capture or control in the event of war or a national emergency.
5. Special nuclear material may be used or produced in
utilization and production facilities only in accordance with
the provisions of the bill.
6. The possession shall be subject to such terms that no
user will be permitted to construct an atomic weapon.
7. The possession is subject to the health and safety stand-
ards established by the Commission.
8. The licensee will hold the United States and the Commis-
sion harmless from damages resulting from the use or posses-
sion of the material.
In distributing the material, the Commission is directed to en-
courage independent research.
*******
[p. 16]
Section 62 prohibits any person from transferring any source
material except pursuant to a license issued by the Commission.
Section 63 specifies the criteria under which the Commission is
authorized to distribute source material within the United States.
In addition to such distribution for use in research of the type
specified in section 31, for use in a research and development facil-
ity, or for medical therapy, licensed under section 104, or for use
in a commercial facility licensed under section 103, as is permitted
for special nuclear material, source material may also be distrib-
uted for any other use approved by the Commission as an aid to
science or industry. The criteria for having the Commission es-
tablish general or specific licensing provisions are set forth. Also,
the method of establishing prices for the source materials so sold
is specified. This is tied to the method of charging for materials
generally furnished to licensees under section 161 m., and the price
is to be such that the Government will receive reasonable compen-
sation, and yet will not discourage the development of sources of
supply independent of the Government. The Commission is given
authority to determine whether or not charges shall be made
for the use of such material, depending, among other factors,
upon whether or not a profit is to be made from such use by the
distributee.
[p. 17]
Section 69 prohibits the Commission from licensing any person
to have source material if such licensing would be inimical to the
-------
260 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
common defense and security or to the health and safety of the
public.
CHAPTER 8. BYPRODUCT MATERIAL
Section 81: This section permits the Commission to distribute
and permit other persons producing byproduct materials to dis-
tribute such material to licensees of the Commission who will abide
by Commission regulations on the use of those materials, the regu-
[p. 18]
lations having been imposed to protect the common defense and
security and the health and safety of the public.
*******
CHAPTER 10. ATOMIC ENERGY LICENSES
This chapter sets forth the provisions and conditions for licens-
ing the facilities which utilize or produce special nuclear material.
Section 101 contains a prohibition against having or dealing
with any utilization or production facility except pursuant to a
license issued by the Commission.
Section 102 requires the Commission to find that a type of utili-
zation or production facility is of practical value before it can issue
licenses for commercial installations of such facilities under sec-
tion 103. This finding separates the issuance of research and de-
velopment licenses for any facility under section 104 b., and the
issuance of commercial licenses under section 103. This finding of
practical value is required by the act, which also requires a report
to be filed with Congress with respect to the social, political, eco-
nomic, and international effects of the utilization of special nuclear
material before the issuance of any license. In view of the provi-
sions in the act requiring the Commission to keep the joint com-
mittee fully and currently informed, the addition provisions in the
bill requiring the joint committee to investigate the development
of the atomic-energy industry during the first 60 days of each
session of Congress, and the amount of study that has already been
put into this proposed legislation, it is felt that the requirement
for the report to Congress should be discontinued.
Section 103: This section specifies the conditions for the issu-
ance of licenses for types of utilization or production facilities that
[p. 19]
have been found to be of practical value. For each such type, the
Commission is required to issue licenses to all qualified applicants
without other discretion on its part. The licensed operations are
subject to regulation by the Commission in the interest of the com-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 261
mon defense and security and in order to protect the health and
safety of the public. The Commission is authorized to issue li-
censes for specified periods up to 40 years. Licenses cannot be
granted to any person where the issuance of such a license would
be inimical to the common defense and security or the health and
safety of the public.
Section 104 provides the conditions for the issuance of licenses
for medical therapy purposes, and for research and development
facilities. With respect to the use of utilization facilities in medi-
cal therapy, the Commission is required to permit the widest
amount of effective medical therapy possible with the amount of
special nuclear material available for the purposes. The Com-
mission is directed to impose only the minimum amount of regu-
lation on medical therapy licenses.
With respect to utilization and production facilities which are
in the research and development stage, but which look toward the
demonstration of any type of facility as having practical value, the
Commission is authorized to issue licenses and is directed to im-
pose only those regulations which would be compatible with any
regulations which might be imposed later if that type of facility is
shown to be of practical value. The Commission is directed to
issue licenses giving priority to those facilities which will lead to
major advances in the application of atomic energy for industrial
or commercial purposes.
With respect to other research and development facilities, the
Commission is authorized to issue licenses for them and to impose
the minimum amount of regulation.
All of the facilities authorized to be licensed under this section
are subject to the same general conditions as facilities licensed un-
der section 103, namely, ownership and control in United States
citizens, and operation to be consonant with the common defense
and security and with the health and safety of the public.
* sjc * * * ff *
[p. 20]
CHAPTER 11. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
This chapter provides for international arrangements in the
field of atomic energy, and also includes statutory provision for
agreements for cooperation which do not rise to the stature of
international arrangements. An international arrangement is de-
fined to be a treaty or an executive agreement approved by both
Houses of Congress.
Section 121 declares that the provisions of the statute are to be
superseded by the terms of any international arrangement during
-------
262 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the time that such terms conflict with the provisions of the statute.
The force of this section is, of course, in existing law even without
any statutory provision. It is, however, reincorporated from the
act.
Section 122 provides that the Commission shall give maximum
effect to the policies contained in international arrangements, and
is in the act.
Section 123 contains the provisions to be included in, and the
procedures to be followed in entering into, agreements for coop-
eration with another nation or with a regional defense organiza-
tion. The provisions to be incorporated in any such agreement
for cooperation include:
(1) The terms, conditions, duration, nature, and scope of
the cooperation;
(2) A guaranty by the cooperating party that security
safeguards and standards as set forth in the agreement for
cooperation will be maintained;
(3) A guaranty by the cooperating party that any material
to be transferred pursuant to any such agreement will not be
used for atomic weapons, or for research or on development
of atomic weapons, or for any other military purpose; and
(4) A guaranty by the cooperating party that any material
or any restricted data to be transferred pursuant to the agree-
ment for cooperation will not be transferred to unauthorized
persons or beyond the jurisdiction of the cooperating party,
except as specified in the agreement.
The procedures that any such agreement for cooperation must
take is:
(1) It must be approved by the Commission, or, in the case
of the transfer of restricted data for the development of mili-
tary plans pursuant to section 144 b., the Department of
Defense.
(2) The President must approve the agreement for coop-
eration. He must also make a determination in writing that
the performance of the agreement for cooperation will pro-
mote and will not constitute an unreasonable risk to the com-
[p. 21]
mon defense and security.
(3) The proposed agreement for cooperation together with
the Presidential approval and determination must lie before
the joint committee for 30 days while Congress is in session.
Through the provisions that are required to be incorporated in
the agreement for cooperation and through the procedures set
forth in this section, there are ample and sufficient statutory safe-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 263
guards on the international cooperation. Almost any cooperation
with any foreign country can be said to involve some risk to the
common defense and security of the United States. The pro-
visions incorporated in section 123 are designed to permit coopera-
tion where, upon weighing those risks in the light of the safeguards
provided, there is found to be no unreasonable risk to the common
defense and security in permitting the cooperation.
It should be specifically pointed out that no cooperation is per-
mitted which would disclose the basic secrets involved in the de-
sign or fabrication of atomic weapons. In section 144 a., the
section dealing with cooperation relating to restricted data, the
subject matter in which such cooperation is possible, is specified to
include only:
(1) Refining, purification, and subsequent treatment of
source material;
(2) Reactor development;
(3) Production of special nuclear material;
(4) Health and safety;
(5) Industrial and other applications of atomic energy for
peaceful purposes; and
(6) Research and development relating to the foregoing.
This subsection provides further, that "no such cooperation shall
involve the communication of Restricted Data relating to the de-
sign or fabrication of atomic weapons."
In section 144 b., the section permitting cooperation with a
nation or regional defense organization with respect to restricted
data, the subject matter includible in that cooperation is limited to
that restricted data necessary to:
(1) The development of defense plans;
(2) The training of personnel in the employment of and
defense against atomic weapons; and
(3) The evaluation of the capabilities of potential enemies
in the employment of atomic weapons.
This subsection provides further that "no such cooperation shall
involve communication of restricted data relating- to the design or
fabrication of atomic weapons except with regard to the external
characteristics, including size, weight, and shape, yields and ef-
fects, and systems employed in the delivery or use thereof but not
including any data in these categories unless in the joint judgment
of the Atomic Energy Commission and the Department of De-
fense such data will not reveal important information concerning
the design or fabrication of the nuclear components of an atomic
weapon."
*******
[p. 22]
-------
264 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
CHAPTER 14. GENERAL AUTHORITY
This chapter sets forth the general powers of the Commission
in operating or regulating any of the activities authorized by this
bill.
Section 161 permits the Commission to: Establish advisory
boards; to issue rules on the possession of dangerous materials; to
hold hearings; to appoint officers and employees; to acquire prop-
erty; to use the personnel or services of any other Government
agency; to acquire real or personal property including patents; to
combine in one license one or more of the activities of which
licenses are required by the bill; to prescribe regulations to pro-
tect restricted data, to guard against the loss or diversion of spe-
cial nuclear material, and to govern activities authorized pursuant
to the bill, including health and safety regulations; to dispose of
radioactive materials or property where special disposition is
needed in the interests of national security; to authorize its per-
sonnel to carry firearms and also to authorize employees of the
contractors who protect the property of the United States to carry
firearms; to import, duty free, source and other material obtained
abroad; to enter agreements with licensees under section 103 or 104
to provide services or materials to such licensees where those serv-
ices and materials are not otherwise commercially available; to
permit small numbers of its employees to obtain further instruc-
tion and training outside of the Commission each year; to delegate
to its employees and officers all functions authorized by the act
except those specified functions which have the highest degree of
importance to the program; to require persons in the program to
keep records and reports and to authorize the inspection of the
activities of persons in the program and to make rules and regu-
lations necessary to carry out the purposes of the act.
*******
[p. 26]
COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CLAUSE 3
The following is submitted in compliance with clause 3 of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives (existing law
proposed to be eliminated is enclosed in black brackets in the
left-hand column, provisions in the existing law proposed to be
changed are italicized in the left-hand column, and new matter
proposed to be added to the law is italicized in the right-hand
column):
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
265
PRESENT LAW
THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF
1946
With Amendments Through the
Eighty-Third Congress (1st Sess.)
AN ACT For the development and con-
trol of atomic energy
Be it enacted by the Senate and
House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress
assembled,
DECLARATION OF POLICY
SECTION 1. (a) FINDINGS AND DEC-
LARATION.— [Research and experimen-
tation in the field of nuclear chain reac-
tion have attained the stage at which
the release of atomic energy on a large
scale is practical. The significance of
the atomic bomb for military purposes
is evident. The effect of the use of
atomic energy for civilian purposes
upon the social, economic and politi-
cal structures of today cannot now be
determined. It is a field in which un-
known factors are involved. There-
fore, any legislation will necessarily be
subject to revision from time to time.
It is reasonable to anticipate, however,
that tapping this new source of energy
will cause profound changes in onr
present way of life.] Accordingly, it is
hereby declared to be the policy of the
people of the United States that, sub-
ject at all times to the paramount ob-
jective of assuring the common defense
and security, the development and
utilization of atomic energy shall, so
far as practicable, be directed toivard
improving the public welfare, in-
creasing the standard of living,
strengthening free competition in pri-
vate enterprise, and promoting world
peace.
PROPOSED BILL
H. R. 9757, 83D CONGRESS 2D
SESSION
A BILL To amend the Atomic Energy
Act of 1946 as amended, and for other
purposes
Be it enacted by the Senate and
House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assem-
bled, That the Atomic Energy Act of
1946, as amended, is amended to read
as follows:
"CHAPTER 1. DECLARATION,
FINDINGS, AND PURPOSE
"SECTION 1. DECLARATION. Atomic
energy is capable of application for
peaceful as well as military purposes.
It is therefore declared to be the policy
of the United States that—
"a. the development, use, and
control of atomic energy shall be
directed so as to make the maxi-
mum contribution to the general
welfare, subject at all times to the
paramount objective of making
the maximum contribution to the
common defense and security; and
"b. the development, use, and
control of atomic energy shall be
directed so as to promote world
peace, improve the general wel-
fare, increase the standard of
living, and strengthen free com-
petition in private enterprise.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.—The Congress
of the United States hereby makes the
following findings concerning the de-
velopment, use, and control of atomic
energy:
"a. The development, utilization,
and control of atomic energy for mili-
tary and for all other purposes are
vital to the common defense and
security.
"b. In permitting the property of the
United States to be used by others,
such use must be regulated in the na-
tional interest and in order to provide
for the common defense and security
and to protect the health and safety of
the public.
"c. The processing and utilization of
source, byproduct, and special nuclear
material affects interstate and foreign
commerce and must be regulated in the
national interest.
-------
266
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
"d. The processing and utilization of
source, byproduct, and special nuclear
[p. 32]
PRESENT LAW
(Section 1.)
(b) PURPOSE OF ACT.—It is the pur-
pose of this Act to effectuate the
policies set out in section 1 (a) by
providing [, among others,] for [the
following major programs relating to
atomic energy] :
(1) A program of assisting and fos-
tering [private] research and develop-
ment to encourage maximum scientific
progress;
(2) A program for the control of
scientific and technical information
[which will permit the] dissemination
of such information to encourage scien-
tific progress [, and for the sharing on
a reciprocal basis of information con-
cerning the practical industrial appli-
cation of atomic energy as soon as
effective and enforceable safeguards
against its use for destructive purposes
can be devised];
(3) [A program of federally con-
ducted research and development to
assure the Government of adequate sci-
entific and technical accomplishment;]
(4) A program for Government con-
trol of the production, [ownership,]
and use of fissionable material to as-
sure the common defense and security
[and to insure the broadest possible
exploitation of the fields] ; and
(5) A program of administration
which will be consistent with the fore-
PROPOSED BILL
material must be regulated in the na-
tional interest and in order to provide
for the common defense and security
and to protect the health and safety of
the public.
"e. Source and special nuclear mate-
rial, production facilities, and utiliza-
tion facilities are affected with the
public interest, and regulation by the
United States of the production and
utilization of atomic energy and of the
facilities used in connection therewith
is necessary in the national interest to
assure the common defense and secu-
rity and to protect the health and
safety of the public.
"f. The necessity for protection
against possible interstate damage oc-
curring from the operation of facilities
for the production or utilization of
source or special nuclear material
places the, operation of those facilities
in interstate commerce for the pur-
poses of this Act.
"g. Funds of the United States may
be provided for the development and
use of atomic energy under conditions
which will provide for the common
defense and security and promote the
general ivelfare.
"h. It is essential to the common
defense and security that title to all
special nuclear material be in the
United States while such special nu-
clear material is within the United
States.
"SEC. 3. PURPOSE.—It is the purpose
of this Act to effectuate the policies set
forth above by providing for—
"a. a program of conducting,
assisting, and fostering research
and development in order to en-
courage maximum scientific and
industrial progress;
"b. a program for the dissemi-
nation of unclassified scientific and
technical information and for the
control, dissemination, and declas-
sification of Restricted Data, sub-
ject to appropriate safeguards, so
as to encourage scientific and in-
dustrial progress;
"c. a program for Government
control of the possession, use, and
production of atomic energy and
special nuclear material so di-
rected as to make the maximum
contribution to the common de-
fense and security and the na-
tional welfare;
"d. a program to encourage
widespread participation in the
development and utilization of
atomic energy for peaceful pur-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
267
poses to the maximum extent con-
sistent with the common defense
and security and icitlt the health
and safety of the public;
"e. a program of international
cooperation to promote the com-
mon defense and security and to
make available to cooperating na-
tions the benefits of peaceful ap-
[p. 33]
PRESENT LAW
going policies and with international
arrangements [made by the United
States,] and which will enable the
Congress to be currently informed so
as to take further legislative action as
may [hereafter] be appropriate.
PROPOSED BILL
plications of atomic energy as
widely as expanding technology
and considerations of the common
defense and security will permit;
and
"f. a program of administration
which will be consistent with the
foregoing policies and programs,
with international arrangements,
and with agreements for coopera-
tion, which will enable the Con-
gress to be currently informed so
as to take further legislative ac-
tion as may be appropriate.
* x * * *
[p. 34]
RESEARCH
SEC. 3. (a) RESEARCH ASSISTANCE.—
The Commission is directed to exercise
its powers in such manner as to insure
the continued conduct of research and
development activities in the fields
specified below by private or public in-
stitutions or persons and to assist in
the acquisition of an ever-expanding
fund of theoretical and practical
knowledge in such fields. To this
end the Commission is authorized
and directed to make arrange-
ments (including contracts, agree-
ments, and loans) for the conduct
"CHAPTER 4, RESEARCH
"SEC. 31. RESEARCH ASSISTANCE.—
"a. The Commission is directed to
exercise its powers in such man-
ner as to insure the continued con-
duct of research and development
activities in the fields specified be-
low, by private or public institutions
or persons, and to assist in the ac-
quisition of an ever-expanding fund
of theoretical and practical knowl-
edge in such fields. To this end the
Commission is authorized and directed
to make arrangements (including con-
tracts, agreements, and loans) for the
>:-. * * * *
[p. 41]
(Section 5.)
(4) DISTRIBUTION OF FISSIONABLE
MATERIAL.—[Without prejudice to its
continued ownership thereof,] the Com-
mission is authorized to distribute fis-
sionable material [owned by it, with
or without charge,] to applicants re-
questing such material (A) for the
conduct of research or development ac-
tivities [either independently or] under
contract or other arrangement with the
Commission, (B) for use in medical
therapy, or (C) for use pursuant to a
license issued under the authority of
section 7. [Such material shall be dis-
tributed in such quantities and on such
terms that no applicant will be enabled
to obtain an amount sufficient to con-
struct a bomb or other military weapon.
The Commission is directed to distrib-
ute sufficient fissionable material to
permit the conduct of widespread in-
dependent research and development
activity, to the maximum extent prac-
ticable. In determining the quantities
of fissionable material to be distributed,
-------
268
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the Commission shall make such pro-
visions for its own needs and for the
conservation of fissionable material as
it may determine to be necessary in
the national interest for the future
development of atomic energy. The
Commission shall not distribute any
material to any applicant, and shall
recall any distributed material from
any applicant, who is not equipped to
observe or who fails to observe such
safety standards to protect health and
to minimize danger from explosion or
other hazard to life or property as may
be established by the Commission, or
who uses such material in violation of
law or regulation of the Commission
or in a manner other than as disclosed
in the application therefor.]
"SEC. 53. DOMESTIC DISTRIBUTION
OF SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL.—
"a. The Commission is authorized to
issue licenses for the possession of, to
make available for the period of the li-
cense, and to distribute special nuclear
material within the United States to
qualified applicants requesting such
material—
"(1) for the conduct of research
and development activities of the
type specified in section 31;
"(2) for use in the conduct of
research and development activ-
ities or in medical therapy under a
license issued pursuant to section
104; or
"(3) for use under a license
issued pursuant to section 103.
"b. The Commission shall establish,
by rule, minimum criteria for the is-
suance of specific or general licenses
for the distribution of special nuclear
material depending upon the degree of
importance to the common defense and
security or to the health and safety of
the public of—
"(1) the physical characteristics
of the special nuclear material to
be distributed;
"(2) the quantities of special nu-
clear material to be distributed;
and
"(3) the intended use of the spe-
cial nuclear material to be distrib-
uted.
"c. The Commission may make a rea-
sonable charge, determined pursuant
to this section, for the use of special
nuclear material licensed and distrib-
uted under subsection 53 a. (1) or sub-
section 53 a. (2) and shall make a
reasonable charge determined pursuant
to this section for the use of special
nuclear material licensed and distrib-
uted under subsection 53 a. (3). The
Commission shall establish criteria in
writing for the determination of
whether a charge will be made for the
use of special nuclear material licensed
and distributed under subsection 53 a.
(1) or subsection 53 a. (2), considering,
among other things, whether the li-
censee is a nonprofit or eleemosynary
institution and the purposes for which
the special nuclear material will be
used.
"d. In determining the reasonable
charge to be made by the Commission
for the use of special nuclear material
distributed to licensees of utilization
or production facilities licensed pur-
suant to section 103 or 104, in addition
to consideration of the cost thereof the
Commission shall take into considera-
tion—
"(1) the use to be made of the
special nuclear material;
[P. 46]
PRESENT LAW
(From section 5 (a) (4).)
Such material shall be distributed
[in such quantities and] on such terms
that no applicant will be enabled to [ob-
tain an amount sufficient] to construct
[a bomb or other military] weapon.
(From section 5 (a) (4).)
The Commission shall not distribute
any material to any applicant, [and
shall recall any distributed material
from any applicant, who is not
equipped to observe or who fails to
observe] such safety standards to pro-
tect health and to minimize danger
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
269
[from explosion or other hazard] to
life or property [as may be established
PROPOSED BILL
"(2) the extent to which the use
of the special nuclear material will
advance the development of the
peaceful uses of atomic energy;
"(3) the energy value of the spe-
cial nuclear material in the par-
ticular use for which the license is
issued;
"(4) whether the special nuclear
material is to be used in facilities
licensed pursuant to section 103
or 104- In this respect, the
Commission shall, insofar as prac-
ticable, make uniform, nondiscrim-
inatory charges for the use of
special nuclear material distrib-
uted to facilities licensed pursuant
to section 103; and
"(5) ivith respect to special nu-
clear material consumed in a fa-
cility licensed pursuant to section
103, the Commission shall make a
further charge based on the cost
to the Commission, as estimated
by the Commission, or the average
fair price paid for the production
of such special nuclear material as
determined by section 5G, which-
ever is lower.
"e. Each license issued pursuant to
this section shall contain and be sub-
ject to the following conditions—
"(1) title to all special nuclear
material shall at all times be in
the United States;
"(2) no right to the special nu-
clear material sliall be conferred
by the license except as defined by
the license;
"(3) neither the license nor any
right under the license shall be as-
signed or otherwise transferred in
violation of the provisions of this
Act;
"'(4) all special nuclear material
shall be subject to the right of re-
capture or control reserved by sec-
tion 108 and to all other provisions
of this Act;
"(5) no special nuclear material
may be used in any utilization or
production facility except in ac-
cordance with the provisions of
this Act;
"(6) special nuclear material
shall be distributed only on terms,
os may be established by rule of
the Commission, such that no user
will be permitted to construct an
atomic weapon;
"(7) special nuclear material
shall be distributed only pursuant
to such safety standards as may
be established by rule of the Com-
mission to protect health and to
minimize danger to life or prop-
erty; and
"(8) the licensee will hold the
United States and the Commission
harmless from any damages re-
[p. 47]
PRESENT LAW
by the Commission, or who uses such
material in violation of law or regula-
tion of the Commission or in a manner
other than as disclosed in the applica-
tion therefor.]
(From section 5 (a) (4).)
The Commission is directed to dis-
tribute sufficient fissionable material to
permit the conduct of widespread in-
dependent research and development
activity, to the maximum extent
practicable. In determining the quan-
tities of fissionable material to be dis-
tributed, the Commission shall make
such provisions for its own needs and
for the conservation of fissionable ma-
terial as it may determine to be neces-
sary in the national interest for the
future development of atomic energy.
PROPOSED BILL
suiting from the use or possession
of special nuclear material by the
licensee.
-------
270
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
"f. The Commission is directed to
distribute within the United States
sufficient special nuclear material to
permit the conduct of widespread
independent research and development
activities, to the maximum extent
practicable and within the limitations
set by the President pursuant to section
41. In the event that applications for
special nuclear material exceed the
amount available for distribution, pre-
ference shall be given to those activities
which are most likely, in the opinion of
the Commission, to contribute to basic
research, to the development of peace-
time uses of atomic energy, or to the
economic and military strength of the
Nation.
[p. 48]
(Section 5 (b).)
(2) LICENSE FOR TRANSFERS RE-
QUIRED.—Unless authorized by a li-
cense issued by the Commission, no
person may transfer or deliver, receive
possession of or title to, or export from
the United States any source material
after removal from its place of deposit
in nature, except that licenses shall not
be required for quantities of source ma-
terials which, in the opinion of the
Commission, are unimportant.
(Section 5 (b).)
(3) ISSUANCE OF LICENSES.—The
Commission shall establish such stand-
ards for the issuance, refusal, or rev-
ocation of licenses as it may deem
necessary to assure adequate source
materials for production, research, or
development activities pursuant to this
Act or to prevent the use of such ma-
terials in a manner inconsistent with
the national welfare. Licenses shall
be issued in accordance with such pro-
cedures as the Commission may by reg-
ulation establish.
SEC. 62. LICENSE FOR TRANSFERS
REQUIRED.—Unless authorized by a
general or specific license issued by the
Commission, which the Commission is
hereby authorized to issue, no person
may transfer or receive in interstate
commerce, transfer, deliver, receive
possession of or title to, or import into
or export from the United States any
source material after removal from its
place of deposit in nature, except that
licenses shall not be required for quan-
tities of source material which, in the
opinion of the Commission, are un-
important.
"SEC. 63. DOMESTIC DISTRIBUTION
OF SOURCE MATERIAL.—
"a. The Commission is authorized to
issue licenses for and to distribute
source material within the United
States to qualified applicants request-
ing such material—
"(1) for the conduct of research
and development activities of the
types specified in section 31;
"(2) for use in the conduct of
research and development activ-
ities or in medical therapy under
a license issued pursuant to sec-
tion 104;
"(3) for use under a license is-
sued pursuant to section 103; or
" (4) for any other use approved
by the Commission as an aid to
science or industry.
"b. The Commission shall establish,
by rule, minimum criteria for the issu-
ance of specific or general licenses for
the distribution of source material de-
pending upon the degree of importance
to the common defense and security or
to the health and safety of the public
of—
"(1) the physical characteristics
of the source material to be dis-
tributed ;
"(2) the quantities of source
material to be distributed; and
"(3) the intended use of the
source material to be distributed.
"c. The Commission may make a rea-
sonable charge determined pursuant to
subsection 161 m., for the source ma-
terial licensed and distributed under
subsection 63 a. (1) or subsection 63 a.
(2), and shall make a reasonable
charge determined pursuant to subsec-
tion 161 m., for the source material li-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
271
censed and distributed under subsection
63 a. (3). The Commission shall estab-
lish criteria in writing for the deter-
mination of ivhether a charge will be
made for the source material licensed
and distributed under subsection 63 a.
[p. 50]
PRESENT LAW
PROPOSED BILL
(1) or subsection (>3 a. (2), considering,
among other tilings, whether the licen-
see is a nonprofit or eleemosynary in-
stitution and the purposes for which
the source material will be used.
-The
[p. 51]
Commission
(Section 5(d)-
shall not—)
(2) license any person to trans-
fer or deliver, receive possession
of or title to, or export from the
United States any source material
if, in the opinion of the Commis-
sion, the issuance of a license to
such person for pnch purpose
would be inimical to the common
defense and security.
(Section 5(c)—Byproduct Mate-
rial—)
(2) PlSTRiRl'TloN.—The Commission
is authorized to distribute, it'itli or
U'itliout charge, byproduct materials to
applicants seeking sucli materials for
research or development activity, medi-
cal therapy, industrial uses, or such
other useful applications as may be
developed. In distributing such mate-
rials, the Commission shall give pre-
ference to applicants proposing to use
such materials in the conduct of re-
search and development activity or
medical therapy. The Commission
shall not distribute any byproduct ma-
terials to any applicant, and shall re-
call any distributed materials from any
applicant, who is not equipped to ob-
serve or who fails to observe such
safety standards to protect health as
may be established by the Commission
or who uses such materials in violation
of law or regulation of the Commission
"SEC. 69. PROHIBITION.—The Com-
mission shall not license any person to
transfer or deliver, receive possession
of or title to, or import into or export
from the United States any source ma-
terial if, in the opinion of the Commis-
sion, the issuance of a license to such
person for such purpose would be inim-
ical to the common defense and security
or the liealth and safety of the public.
"CHAPTER 8. BYPRODUCT
MATERIAL
"SEC. 81. DOMESTIC DISTRIBUTION.
—./Vo person may transfer or receive in
interstate commerce, manufacture, pro-
duce, transfer, acquire, own, possess,
import, or export any byproduct mate-
rial, except to the extent autliorized by
tliis section or by section #„'. The Com-
mission is authorized to issue general
or specific licenses to applicants seek-
ing to use byproduct material for re-
search or development purposes, for
medical therapy, industrial uses, 017-
ricultural uses, or such other useful
applications as may be developed. The
Commission may distribute, sell, loan,
or lease such byproduct material as it
ou'tis to licensees with or witliout
charge: Provided, however. That, for
byproduct material to be distributed by
the Commission for a charge, the Com-
mission shall establish prices on such
equitable basis a,s, in the opinion of the
Commission, (a) will provide reason-
[p. 53]
PRESENT LAW
or in a manner other than as disclosed
in the application therefor.
PROPOSED BILL
able compensation to the Government
for such material, (b) will not discour-
age the use of such material or the de-
velopment of sources of supply of such
material independent of the Commis-
-------
272
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
sion, and (c) will encourage research
and development. In distributing such
material, the Commission shall give
preference to applicants proposing to
use such material either in the conduct
of research and development or in med-
ical therapy. Licensees of the Commis-
sion may distribute byproduct material
only to applicants therefor who are li-
censed by the Commission to receive
such byproduct material. The Com-
mission shall not permit the distribu-
tion of any byproduct material to any
licensee, and shall recall or order the
recall of any distributed material from
any licensee, who is not equipped to ob-
serve or who fails to observe such
safety standards to protect health as
may be established by the Commission
or who uses such material in violation
of law or regulation of the Commission
or in a manner other than as disclosed
in the application therefor or approved
by the Commission. The Commission
is authorized to establish classes of by-
product material and to exempt certain
classes or quantities of material or
kinds of uses or users from the require-
ments for a license set forth in this
section when it makes a finding that the
exemption of such classes or quantities
of such material or such kinds of uses
or users will not constitute an unrea-
sonable risk to the common defense and
security and to the health and safety
of the public.
[p. 54]
UTILIZATION OF ATOMIC
ENERGY
*****
(Section 7.)
(b) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—When-
ever in its opinion, any industrial,
commercial, or other nonmilitary use
of fissionable material or atomic energy
has been sufficiently developed to be of
practical value, the Commission [shall
prepare a report to the President stat-
ing all the facts with respect to such
use, the Commission's estimate of the
social, political, economic, and inter-
national effects of such use and the
Commission's recommendations for nec-
essary or desirable supplemental legis-
lation. The President shall then
transmit this report to the Congress to-
gether with his recommendations. No
license for any manufacture, produc-
tion, export, or use shall be issued by
the Commission under this section until
after (1) a report with respect to such
manufacture, production, export, or use
has been filed with the Congress; and
(2) a period of ninety days in which
the Congress was in session has elapsed
after the report has been so filed. In
computing such period of ninety days,
there shall be excluded the days on
which either House is not in session
because of an adjournment of more
than three days.]
"CHAPTER 10. ATOMIC ENERGY
LICENSES
"SEC. 102. FINDING OF PRACTICAL
VALUE.—Whenever the Commission
has made a finding in writing that any
type of utilization or production facil-
ity has been sufficiently developed to
be of practical value for industrial or
commercial purposes, the Commission
may thereafter issue licenses for such
type of facility pursuant to section 103.
[p. 56]
PRESENT LAW
(Section 7.)
(c) ISSUANCE OF LICENSES.—After
such ninety-day period, unless here-
after prohibited by law, the Commis-
sion may license such manufacture,
production, export or use in accordance
with such procedures and subject to
such conditions as it may by regulation
establisli to effectuate the provisions of
this Act. The Commission is author-
ized and directed to issue licenses on a
nonexclusive basis [and to supply to
the extent available appropriate quan-
tities of fissionable material] to licen-
sees (1) whose proposed activities will
serve some useful purpose proportion-
ate to the quantities of fissionable ma-
terial to be consumed; (2) who are
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
273
equipped to observe such safety stand-
ards to protect health and to minimize
danger [from explosion or other haz-
ard] to life or property as the Commis-
sion may establish; and (3) who agree
to make available to the Commission
such technical information and data
concerning [their] activities pursuant
to such licenses as the Commission may
determine necessary to [encourage sim-
ilar activities by as many licensees as
possible]. Each such license shall be
issued for a special period, [shall be
revocable at any time by the Com-
mission in accordance with such
procedures as the Commission may es-
tablish,] and may be renewed upon the
expiration of such period. [Where
activities under any license might serve
to maintain or to foster the growth of
monopoly, restraint of trade, unlawful
competition, or other trade position
inimical to the entry of new, freely
competitive enterprises in the field, the
Commission is authorized and directed
to refuse to issue such license or to
establish such conditions to prevent
these results as the Commission, in con-
sultation with the Attorney General,
may determine. The Commission
shall report promptly to the Attorney
General any information it may have
with respect to any utilization of fis-
sionable material or atomic energy
which appears to have these results.]
No license may be given to any person
for activities which are not under or
within the jurisdiction of the United
States, to any foreign government, or
to any person within the United States
if, in the opinion of the Commission,
the issuance of a license to such person
would be inimical to the common de-
fense and security.
PROPOSED BILL
"SEC. 103. COMMERCIAL LICENSES.—
"a. Subsequent to a finding by the
Commission as required in section 102,
the Commission may issue licenses to
transfer or receive in interstate com-
merce, manufacture, produce, transfer,
acquire, possess, import, or export un-
der the terms of an agreement for co-
operation arranged pursuant to section
123, such type of utilization or pro-
duction facility. Such licenses shall be
issued in accordance with the provi-
sions of chapter 16 and subject to such
conditions as the Commission may by
ride or regulation establish to effect-
uate the purposes and provisions of
this Act.
"b. The Commission shall issue such
licenses on a nonexclusive basis to
applicants (1) whose proposed activi-
ties will serve a useful purpose propor-
tionate to the quantities of special
nuclear material to be utilized; (2)
who are equipped to observe and who
agree to observe such safety standards
to protect health and to minimize dan-
ger to life or property as the Commis-
sion may by rule establish; and (3)
who agree to make available to the
Commission such technical information
and data concerning activities under
such licenses as the Commission may
determine necessary to promote the
common defense and security and to
protect the health and safety of the
public. All such information may be
used by the Commission only for the
purposes of the common defense and
security and to protect the health and
safety of the public.
"c. Each such license shall be issued
for a specified period, as determined by
the Commission, depending on the type
of activity to be licensed, but not ex-
ceeding forty years, and may be re-
newed upon the expiration of such
period.
"d. No license under this section may
be given to any person for activities
which are not under or within the ju-
risdiction of the United States, except
for the export of production or uti-
lization facilities under terms of an
agreement for cooperation arranged
pursuant to section 1'23, or except un-
der the provisions of section 109. No
license may be issued to any corpora-
tion or other entity if the Commission
knows or has reason to believe it is
owned, controlled, or dominated by an
-------
274
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
alien, a foreign corporation, or a for-
eign government. In any event, no
license may be issued to any person
within the United States if, in the
opinion of the Commission, the issu-
ance of a license to such person would
be inimical to the common defense and
security or to the health and safety of
the public.
[p. 57]
PRESENT LAW
(Prom Section 7 (a).)
[No license may permit any such
activity if fissionable material is pro-
duced incident to such activity, except
as provided in sections 3 and 4. Noth-
ing in this section shall be deemed
to require a license for the conduct of
research or development activities re-
lating to the manufacture of such
equipment or devices or the utilization
of fissionable material or atomic en-
ergy, or for the manufacture or use of
equipment or devices for medical ther-
apy.]
(From Section 4 (e).)
[Licenses shall be issued in accord-
ance with such procedures as the
Commission may by regulation estab-
lish and shall be issued in accordance
with such standards and upon such
conditions as will restrict the produc-
tion and distribution of such facilities
to effectuate the policies and purposes
of this Act. Nothing in this section
shall be deemed to require a license for
such manufacture, production, trans-
fer, or acquisition incident to or for the
conduct of research or development
activities in the United States of the
types specified in section 3, or to pro-
hibit the Commission from manufac-
turing or producing such facilities for
its own use.]
PROPOSED BILL
"SEC. 104. MEDICAL THERAPY AND
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.—
"a. The Commission is authorized to
license utilization facilities for use in
medical therapy. In issuing such li-
censes the Commission is directed to
permit the widest amount of effective
medical therapy possible with the
amount of special nuclear material
available for such purposes and to im-
pose the minimum amount of regula-
tion consistent with its obligations
under this Act to promote the common
defense and security and to protect the
health and safety of the public.
"b. The Commission is authorized to
issue licenses for utilization and pro-
duction facilities involved in the con-
duct of research and development
activities leading to the demonstra-
tion of the practical value of such fa-
cilities for industrial or commercial
purposes. In issuing licenses under
this subsection, the Commission shall
impose the minimum amount of such
regulations and terms of license as will
permit the Commission to fulfill its ob-
ligations under this Act to promote the
common defense and security and to
protect the health, and safety of the
public and will be compatible with the
regulations and terms of license which
ivould apply in the event that a com-
mercial license were later to be issued
pursuant to section 103 for that type of
facility. In issuing such licenses, pri-
ority shall be given to those activities
which will, in the opinion of Hie Com-
mission, lead to major advances in the
application of atomic energy for in-
dustrial or commercial purposes.
"c. The Commission is authorized to
issue licenses for utilization and pro-
duction facilities useful in the conduct
of research and development activities
of the types specified in section 31 and
which are not facilities of the type
specified in subsection 104 b. The Com-
mission is directed to impose only such
minimum amount of regulation of the
licensee that the Commission finds will
permit the Commission to fulfill its ob-
ligations under this Act to promote the
common defense and security and to
protect the health and safety of the
public and ivill permit the conduct of
widespread and diverse research and
development.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
275
"d. No license under this section may
be given to any person for activities
which are not under or ivithin the ju-
risdiction of the United States, except
for the export of production or utiliza-
tion facilities under terms of an agree-
[P. 58]
PRESENT LAW
PROPOSED BILL
ment for cooperation arranged pur-
suant to section 123 or except under
the provisions of section 109. No li-
cense may be issued to any corporation
or other entity if the Commission knows
or has reason to believe it is owned,
controlled, or dominated by an alien, a
foreign corporation, or a foreign gov-
ernment. In any event, no license may
be issued to any person ivithin the
United States if, in the opinion of the
Commission, the issuance of a license
to such person would be inimical to the
common defense and security or to the
health and safety of the public.
:;: * * :;: X
[p. 59]
"SEC. 109. COMPONENT PARTS OF
FACILITIES.—With respect to those
utilization and production facilities
which are so determined by tlie Com-
mission pursuant to subsection 11 p.
(2), or 11 w. (2) the Commission may
(a) issue general licenses for activities
required to be licensed under section
101, if the Commission determines in
writing that such general licensing
will not constitute an unreasonable
risk to the common defense and se-
curity, and (b) issue licenses for the
export of such facilities, if the Com-
mission determines in ivriting that
each export will not constitute an un-
reasonable risk to the common defense
and security.
# * * * #
[P- 61]
PRESENT LAW
INTERNATIONAL ARRANGE-
MENTS
(Section 10 (a) (3).—)
(3) Nothing contained in this section
shall prohibit the Commission, when
in its unanimous judgment the common
defense and security would be substan-
tially promoted and would not be en-
dangered, subject to the limitations
hereinafter set out, from entering into
specific arrangements involving the
communication to another nation of
restricted data * "! * Provided,
(1) that no such arrangement
shall involve the communication of
restricted data on design and fab-
rication of atomic weapons;
(2) that no sucli arrangement
shall be entered into with any na-
tion threatening the security of
the United States;
(3) that the restricted data in-
volved shall be limited and circum-
scribed to the maximum, degree
consistent with the common de-
fense and security objective in
vieiv, and that in the judgment of
the Commission the recipient na-
tion's security standards appli-
cable to such data are adequate;
(4) that the President, after se-
curing the written recommenda-
tion of the National Security
Council, has determined in writing
(incorporating the National Se-
curity Council recommendation)
tliat the arrangement would sub-
stantially promote and would not
endanger the common defense and
security of the United States, giv-
ing specific consideration to the
security sensitivity of the re-
stricted data involved and the
adequacy and sufficiency of the
security safeguards undertaken to
be maintained by the recipient na-
tion; and
(5) that before the arrangement
is consummated by the Commis-
sion the Joint Committee on Atomic
-------
276
LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
Energy has been fully informed
for a period of thirty days in
PROPOSED BILL
"CHAPTER 11. INTERNATIONAL
ACTIVITIES
"SEC. 123. COOPERATION WITH OTHER
NATIONS.—No cooperation with any
nation or regional defense organization
pursuant to sections 54, 57, 64, 82, 103,
104, or 144 shall be undertaken until—
"a. the Commission or, in the
case of those agreements for coop-
eration arranged pursuant to sub-
section 144 b., the Department of
Defense has approved the pro-
posed agreement for cooperation,
which proposed agreement shall
include (1) the terms, conditions,
duration, nature, and scope of the
cooperation; (2) a guaranty by
the cooperating party that security
safeguards and standards as set
forth in the agreement for cooper-
ation will be maintained; (3) a
guaranty by the cooperating party
that any material to be trans-
ferred pursuant to such agreement
will not be used for atomic weap-
ons, or for research on or develop-
ment of atomic weapons, or for
any other military purpose; and
(4) a guaranty by the cooperating
party that any material or any
Restricted Data to be transferred
pursuant to the agreement for co-
operation will not be transferred
to unauthorized persons or beyond
the jurisdiction of the cooperating
party, except as specified in the
agreement for cooperation;
"b. the President has approved
and authorized the execution of
the proposed agreement for coop-
eration, and has made a de-
termination in writing that the
performance of the proposed
agreement will promote and will
not constitute an unreasonable
risk to the common defense and
security; and
"c. the proposed agreement for
cooperation, together with the ap-
proval and the determination of
[p. 62]
PRESENT LAW
which the Congress was in session
(in computing such thirty days,
there shall be excluded the days on
which either House is not in ses-
sion because of an adjournment of
more than three days).
PROPOSED BILL
the President, has been submitted
to the Joint Committee and a pe-
riod of thirty days has elapsed
while Congress is in session (in
computing such thirty days, there
fhall be excluded the days on
which either House is not in ses-
sion because of an adjournment of
more than three days).
"SEC. 124. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC
POOL.—The President is authorized to
enter into an international arrange-
ment with a group of nations provid-
ing for international cooperation in the
non-military applications of atomic
energy and he may thereafter cooper-
ate with that group of -nations pur-
suant to sections 54, 57, 64, 82,103,104,
or 144 a.: Provided, however, That the
cooperation is undertaken pursuant to
ail agreement for cooperation entered
into in accordance with section 123.
* * * # #
[p. 63]
GENERAL AUTHORITY
SEC. 12. (a) In the performance of
its functions the Commission is author-
ized to—
(1) establish advisory boards to
advise with and make recommen-
dations to the Commission on leg-
islation, policies, administration,
research, and other matters;
(2) establish by regulation or
order such standards and instruc-
tions to govern the possession and
use of fissionable and byproduct
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
277
materials as the Commission may
deem necessary or desirable to
protect health or to minimize dan-
ger [from explosions and other
hazards] to life or property.
(3) make such studies and in-
vestigations, obtain such informa-
tion, and hold such hearings as the
Commission may deem necessary
or proper to assist it in exercising
any authority provided in this Act,
or in the administration or en-
forcement of this Act, or any
regulations or orders issued there-
under. For such purposes the
Commission is authorized to ad-
minister oaths and affirmations,
and by subpena to require any per-
son to appear and testify, or to
appear and produce documents, or
both, at any designated place. No
person shall be excused from com-
plying with any requirements un-
der this paragraph because of his
privilege against self-incrimina-
tion, but the immunity provisions
of the Compulsory Testimony Act
of February 11, 1893 [(U. S. C.,
title 19, sec. 46) ], shall apply with
respect to any individual who spe-
PROPOSED BILL
"CHAPTER 14. GENERAL
AUTHORITY
"SEC. 161. In the performance of its
functions the Commission is authorized
to—
"a. establish advisory boards to
advise with and make recommen-
dations to the Commission on leg-
islation, policies, administration,
research, and other matters, pro-
vided tliat the Commission issues
regulations setting fortli the scope,
procedure, and limitations of the
authority of each such board;
"b. establish by rule, regulation,
or order, such standards and in-
structions to govern the possession
and use of special nuclear mate-
rial, source material, and byprod-
uct material as the Commission
may deem necessary or desirable
to promote the common defense
and security or to protect health
or to minimize danger to life or
property;
"c. make such studies and in-
vestigations, obtain such informa-
tion, and hold such meetings or
hearings as the Commission may
deem necessary or proper to assist
it in exercising any authority
provided in this Act, or in the
administration or enforcement of
this Act, or any regulations or or-
ders issued thereunder. For such
purposes the Commission is au-
thorized to administer oaths and
affirmations, and by subpena to
require any person to appear and
testify, or to appear and produce
documents, or both, at any desig-
nated place. No person shall be
excused from complying with any
requirements under this para-
graph because of his privilege
against self-incrimination, but the
immunity provisions of the Com-
pulsory Testimony Act of Feb-
ruary 11, 1893, shall apply with
respect to any individual who
[p. 74]
PRESENT LAW
specifically claims such privilege.
Witnesses subpenaed under this
subsection shall be paid the same
fees and mileage as are paid wit-
nesses in the district courts of the
United States;
(From section 2 (a) (3).)
The Commission shall hold such
meetings, conduct such hearings, and
receive such reports as may be neces-
sary to enable it to carry out the pro-
visions of this Act.
(Section 12 (a).)
(4) appoint and fix the compen-
sation of such officers and and em-
ployees as may be necessary to
carry out the functions of the
Commission. Such officers and
employees shall be appointed in
accordance with the civil-sarvice
-------
278
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
laws and their compensation fixed
in accordance with the Classifica-
tion Act of 1923, as amended, ex-
cept that to the extent the
Commission deems such action
necessary to the discharge of its
responsibilities, personnel may be
employed and their compensation
fixed without regard to such laws.
The Commission shall make ade-
quate provision for administrative
review of any determination to
dismiss any employee;
(5) acquire such materials,
property, equipment, and facili-
ties, establish or construct such
buildings and facilities, and mod-
ify such buildings and facilities
from time to time as it may deem
necessary, and construct, acquire,
provide, or arrange for such facil-
ities and services (at project sites
where such facilities and services
are not available) for the housing,
health, safety, welfare, and recre-
ation of personnel employed by the
Commission as it may deem neces-
sary ;
(6) with the consent of the
agency concerned, utilize or em-
ploy the services or personnel of
any Government agency or any
State or local government, or vol-
untary or uncompensated person-
nel, to perform such functions on
its behalf as may appear desirable;
PROPOSED BILL
cifically claims such privilege.
Witnesses subpenaed under this
subsection shall be paid the same
fees and mileage as are paid wit-
nesses in the district courts of the
United States;
"d. appoint and fix the compen-
sation of such officers and em-
ployees as may be necessary to
carry out the functions of the
Commission. Such officers and
employees shall be appointed in
accordance with the civil-service
laws and their compensation fixed
in accordance with the Classifica-
tion Act of 1949, as amended,
except that, to the extent the
Commission deems such action
necessary to the discharge of its
responsibilities, personnel may be
employed and their compensation
fixed without regard to such laws:
Provided, however, That no officer
or employee (except such officers
and employees wlwse compensa-
tion is fixed by lnu>, and scientific
and technical personnel) whose
position would be subject to the
Classification Act of 1949, as
amended, if sitcli Act were appli-
cable to such position, shall be
paid a salary at a rate in excess of
the rate payable under such Act
for positions of equivalent diffi-
culty or responsibility. The Com-
mission shall make adequate pro-
vision for administrative review
of any determination to dismiss
any employee;
"e. acquire such material, prop-
erty, equipment, and facilities,
establish or construct such build-
ings and facilities, and modify
such buildings and facilities from
time to time, as it may deem nec-
essary, and construct, acquire, pro-
vide, or arrange for such facilities
and services (at project sites
where such facilities and services
are not available) for the housing,
health, safety, welfare, and recre-
ation of personnel employed by the
Commission as it may deem neces-
sary, subject to the provisions of
section 174;
"f. with the consent of the
agency concerned, utilize or em-
ploy the services or personnel of
any Government agency or any
State or local government, or vol-
untary or uncompensated per-
sonnel, to perform such functions
on its behalf as may appear de-
sirable ;
[p. 75]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
279
PRESENT LAW
(7) acquire, purchase, lease,
and hold real and personal prop-
erty as agent of and on behalf of
the United States and to sell,
lease, grant, and dispose of such
real and personal property as pro-
vided in this Act; and
(8) without regard to the pro-
visions of the Surplus Property
Act of 1941 or any other law, make
such disposition as it may deem
desirable of (A) radioactive ma-
terials, and (B) any other prop-
erty the special disposition of
which is, in the opinion of the
Commission, in the interest of the
national security.
(9) authorize such of its mem-
bers, officers, and employees as it
deems necessary in the interest of
the common defense and security
to carry firearms while in the dis-
PKOPOSED BILL
"g. acquire, purchase, lease, and
hold real and personal property,
including patents, as agent of and
on behalf of the United States sub-
ject to provisions of section 174,
and to sell, lease, grant, and dis-
pose of such real and personal
property as provided in this Act;
"h. The Commission may con-
sider in a single application one or
more of the activities for ivhich a
license is required by this Act and
is authorized to combine in a single
license one or more of such activi-
ties. The Commission is also
authorized to permit the applicant
or licensee to incorporate by refer-
ence pertinent information already
filed with the Commission.
"i. The Commission is author-
ized to prescribe such regulations
or orders as it may deem necessary
(1) to protect Restricted Data re-
ceived by any person in connection
with any activity authorized pur-
suant to Act, (2) to guard against
the loss or diversion of any special
nuclear material acquired by any
person pursuant to section 53 or
produced by any person in connec-
tion with any activity authorized
pursuant to this Act, and to pre-
vent any use or disposition thereof
which the Commission may deter-
mine to be inimical to the common
defense and security, and (3) to
govern any activity authorized
pursuant to this Act, including
standards and restrictions govern-
ing the design, location, and oper-
ation of facilities used in the
conduct of such activity, in order
to protect health and to minimize
danger to life or property.
"j. without regard to the pro-
visions of the Federal Property
and Administrative Services Act
of 1949, as amended, except sec-
tion 207 of that Act, or any other
law, make such disposition as it
may deem desirable of (1) radio-
active materials, and (2) any
other property, the special disposi-
tion of which is, in the opinion of
the Commission, in the interest of
the national security: Provided,
however, That the property fur-
nished to licensees in accordance
with the provisions of subsection
1C>1 m. shall not be deemed to be
property disposed of by the Com-
mission pursuant to this subsec-
tion;
"k. authorize such of its mem-
bers, officers, and employees as it
deems necessary in the interest of
the common defense and security
to carry firearms while in the dis-
[p. 76]
PRESENT LAW
charge of their official duties. The
Commission may also authorize
such of those employees of its con-
tractors engaged in guard duties
at facilities owned by the United
States as it deems necessary in the
-------
280
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
interest of the common defense
and security to carry firearms
while in the discharge of their offi-
cial duties.
PROPOSED BILL
charge of their official duties. The
Commission may also authorize
such of those employees of its con-
tractors engaged in the protection
of property owned by the United
States and located at facilities
owned by or contracted to the
United States as it deems neces-
sary in the interests of the com-
mon defense and security to carry
firearms while in the discharge
of their official duties;
"I. secure the admittance free
of duty into the United States of
purchases made abroad of source
materials and other materials and
supplies essential to its program,
upon certification to the Secretary
of the Treasury that such entry is
necessary in the interest of the
common defense and security:
Provided, however, That the au-
thority granted by this subsection
shall not be used to admit free of
duty materials and supplies, other
than source materials, which are
adequately available within the
United States;
"m. enter into agreements with
persons licensed under section 103
or 104 for such periods of time as
the Commission may deem neces-
sary or desirable (1) to provide
for the processing, fabricating,
separating, or refining in facilities
owned by the Commission of
source, byproduct, or other mate-
rial or special nuclear material
owned by or made available to
such licensees and which is utilized
or produced in the conduct of the
licensed activity, and (2) to sell,
lease, or otherwise make available
to such licensees such quantities
of source or byproduct material,
and other material not defined as
special nuclear material pursuant
to this Act, as may be necessary
for the conduct of the licensed ac-
tivity: Provided, however, That
any such agreement may be can-
celed by the licensee at any time
upon payment of such reasonable
cancellation charges as may be
agreed upon by the licensee and
the Commission: And provided
further, That the Commission
shall establish prices to be paid by
licensees for material or services
to be furnished by the Commission
pursuant to this subsection, which
prices shall be established on such
a nondiscriminatory basis as, in
the opinion of the Commission, will
provide reasonable compensation
to the Government for such mate-
rial or services and will not dis-
courage the development of
sources of supply independent of
the Commission;
[p. 77]
PRESENT LAW
(Section 10.)
(c) INSPECTIONS, RECORDS, AND
REPORTS.—The Commission is—
(1) authorized by regulation or
order to require such reports and
the keeping of such records with
respect to, and to provide for such
inspections of, activities and stud-
ies of types specified in section 3
and of activities under licenses is-
sued pursuant to section 7 as may
be necessary to effectuate the pur-
poses of this Act;
(2) authorized and directed by
regulation or order to require reg-
ular reports and records with re-
spect to, and to provide for
frequent inspections of, the pro-
duction of fissionable material in
the conduct of research and devel-
opment activities.
(Section 12 (a).)
(10) make, promulgate, issue,
rescind, and amend such rules and
regulations as may be necessary to
carry out the purposes of this Act.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
281
PROPOSED BILL
"n. assign scientific, technical,
professional, and administrative
employees for instruction, educa-
tion, or training by public or pri-
vate agencies, institutions of
learning, laboratories or indus-
trial or commercial organizations
and to pay the whole or any part
of the salaries of sucli employees,
cost of their transportation and
per diem in lieu of subsistence in
accordance ivith applicable laws
and regulations, and training
charges incident to their assign-
ments (including tuition and other
related fees) : Provided however,
That (1) no more than one per
centum of the eligible employees
shall be so assigned during any
fiscal year, (2) any such assign-
ment shall be approved in advance
by the Commission or shall be in
accordance with a training pro-
gram previously approved by the
Commission: And provided fur-
ther, That appropriations or other
funds available to the Commission
for salaries or expenses shall be
available for the purposes of this
subsection;
"o. the Commission may dele-
gate to the General Manager or
other officers any of those func-
tions assigned to it under this Act
except those specified in sections
51, 57 a. (3), C,l, 102 (with respect
to the finding of practical value),
108, 123, 145 b. (with respect to
the determination of those persons
to whom the Commission may re-
veal Restricted Data in the na-
tional interest), H5 e., and 1G1 a.;
"p. require by rule, regulation,
or order, such reports, and the
keeping of such records with re-
spect to, and to provide for such
inspections of, activities and stud-
ies of types specified in section 31
and of activities under licenses
issued pursuant to sections 53, 63,
81, 103, and 104, as may be neces-
sary to effectuate the purposes of
this Act, including section 105;
and
"q. make, promulgate, issue, re-
scind, and amend such rules and
regulations as may be necessary
to carry out the purposes of this
Act.
[p. 78]
SEPARATE VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
I have been impressed by the spirit of patriotic unselfishness and
the display of bipartisanship demonstrated by the committee and
its staff through the long days spent in preparation of this bill.
The atomic energy program is both highly technical and com-
plex. The framers of this law had to examine and understand the
past and present complexities of nuclear energy activities and try
somehow to predict the future. Issues arose which went to the
very roots of individual political and economical philosophies, and
yet these were resolved by the members of the committee in a
spirit of compromise and good will which is the very essence of our
democratic legislative process. The difficult questions of compul-
sory licensing of patents, of antitrust provisions, and of licensing
and regulatory provisions were settled in this fashion.
-------
282 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
I am frank to state that several portions of this bill do not have
my unqualified endorsement, but I am compelled to join the major-
ity in its favorable report on S. 3690 because, on balance, the com-
promises reached have been for the greater good, and I can accept
—as should any reasonable man in a position of responsibility—
something less than what I think is perfect in each of its parts if
the whole structure is worthwhile. But to compromise on any-
thing of deep principle is personally and morally repugnant to me.
Therefore, in all conscience, I must append a statement of my
views on the all-important matter of international cooperation.
I urge that section 124 of the bill be struck, and that the words
"group of nations" be inserted in sections lib, 54, 57, 64, 82, 103,
104, and 144 to make those sections read as in the committee print
of May 21, 1954.
I have not taken this position lightly; I take it because I believe
the very existence of our civilization depends on our finding some
way to end safely the mounting atomic and hydrogen armaments
race which bodes to annihilate man and all his works. To my
mind, the key to finding such a solution lies in the hearts of men
of good will everywhere; it is a solemn duty for us, the most pow-
erful Nation on earth, to seize the initiative in bringing about a
renascence of the cooperative spirit of common humanity that is
needed to solve the basic causes of war—want, hunger, poverty,
and disease. President Eisenhower gave voice to these thoughts
when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly last
December. There he boldly outlined a plan to bring the great
benefits of atomic energy to mankind everywhere. To my mind,
in this address the President did what we must now do—he rose
to meet the basic problem head on. His proposal gave heart to all.
In testimony before the Joint Committee on June 3, 1954, the
Secretary of State, Mr. John Foster Dulles, made some highly
important comments on the subject of international arrange-
ments for the sharing of atomic knowledge:
[p. 100]
As I see it, a main purpose of the proposed legislation is to do just that—"to
increase our emphasis on the peaceful uses of atomic power at home and
abroad."
*******
We cannot any longer adhere to the theory that knowledge, because it is
capable of use for destruction, must be denied for uses of construction.
*******
By amending the Atomic Energy Act now as proposed, we will be laying some
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 283
of the groundwork for a future era of peace when atomic energy inevitably will
be doing constructive work in the world.
* ******
Three circumstances, (1) the developing Soviet program, (2) our dependence
on foreign uranium, and (3) legitimate hopes for nuclear power abroad, com-
bine to create the need to amend the international cooperation provisions of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946.
*******
Other countries are making progress in atomic power technology. There is
a growing tendency for certain raw materials supplying nations which are not
industrially well advanced to turn to such other countries for nuclear power
information because they have been disappointed by our inability to give
them significant help. It is clear to me that if this trend continues the interests
of the United States will be seriously and detrimentally affected. There is no
need here to emphasize how important it is for us to stay ahead of the U.S.S.E.
in providing knowledge of how to put atomic energy to peaceful uses.
In extending abroad, under proper security safeguards, the evolving technol-
ogy of atomic energy for peaceful purposes, we shall tighten the bonds that tie
our friends abroad to us, we shall assure material resources that we need, and
we shall maintain world leadership in atomic energy—leadership which today is
such a large element of our national prestige.
* ******
In modernizing our atomic-energy law I feel that we will be taking three
steps in the direction of peace: First, we will be increasing the deterrent factor
represented by our weapons stockpile by the provisions we have requested per-
mitting us to integrate certain tactical weapons information into our foreign
military planning. Second, by being able to give our friends abroad atomic
energy information and material, we shall be strengthening our capacity to
build the raw material base on which our entire atomic energy program rests;
and, third, we will be strengthening the ties which unite the free nations by a
sense of fellowship.
*******
Perhaps most significant of all, however, are the hundreds of millions of
people in the world who, having heard of the promise of atomic energy, wait
eagerly to see if there are benefits in it for them in addition to the military
shield which has held off the aggressive forces of Soviet communism for almost
a decade. The military atom is a fearsome thing, even to those who owe their
liberties to it. The constructive uses of atomic energy could promote both
peace and plenty, and so holds a special place in man's dream of the future.
The bills which your Committee is considering need to be enacted if our
Nation is to serve its own interests and at the same time to show the world anew
that our national interests harmonize with the interests of men everywhere.
* * *****
I believe the Secretary of State clearly and forcibly pointed out
that the provisions of the bill which are most important to our
very survival are those that treat with international cooperation.
I share that view.
I also believe that the development of atomic power in this
country is important. Coming from an area of the United States
[p. 101]
-------
284 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
which has high-power costs and no foreseeable way of reducing
these costs except by the speedy development of this new, primor-
dial source of energy—I believe I am as aware as any man of the
responsibilities of this Congress to provide fully for the fastest
development of atomic energy for peacetime uses in this country.
The United States Government has expended many billions of
dollars in the development of its atomic program. While the pri-
mary purpose of this was the creation of armaments, there were
secondary discoveries and advancements of importance in the
peacetime uses of nuclear power. Despite this activity, the field
of peacetime development is still embryonic. To hasten advance-
ment in this art, it is being proposed to Congress that the private
business community of the United States be allowed to share in
the opportunities of developing useful applications of what has
been but barely touched on in our Government monopoly of the
field. In this we can say that the greater good is in making avail-
able to the people of the United States at the earliest moment the
fruits of such combined Government and private development.
We can hardly say that permitting friendly nations to collectively
share in some small part of our knowledge for the purpose of the
peace and good of all mankind is not equally advantageous.
Our responsibilities transcend our national borders. We have
developed materials, knowledge, and techniques which, if ex-
ploited fully for the benefit of all mankind, will redound not only
to our international credit, but more importantly to the establish-
ment of peace and prosperity in all portions of the globe. We are
not alone in this race for atomic-power development. Twenty
nations, as the majority report points out, are embarked upon
atomic development programs. Not the least of these programs
is that of the Soviet Union which now stands second in world
effort on the searching out of the atom's secrets. Coupled with
this is the fact that we and the free world are joined against the
Soviet Union in a competition for the minds and souls of men.
This competition will not be won by words, but by deeds. Consider
the effect on the downtrodden of Asia, for example, if the ^Soviet
Union should seize the initiative in bringing to these power-
starved nations the great benefits of atomic energy. I say on that
day we shall have lost the battle.
It is argued that our national security is in greater jeopardy
if we deal with a "group of nations" as against dealing with one
nation at a time, in transmitting information on peacetime devel-
opments of atomic energy. I find it very difficult to reconcile this
distinction and I would further point out that this is not so, for
the information with which we are here concerned is of a low
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 285
degree of sensitivity and is far removed from the area of infor-
mation on atomic weapons and atomic production that we must
carefully circumscribe.
It is argued by the majority that S. 3690 offers, in section 121,
a possible mechanism for the President to employ in bringing to
reality his great plan for spreading atomic blessings to all. I
maintain that the bill as presented does little more than restate
the powers he already has under the Constitution and existing
law. It is no more than an indication—and a half-hearted indica-
tion at that—of congressional encouragement. It is, to my mind,
inadequate and I urge favorable consideration to the amendment
on this subject which I will introduce on the floor of the Senate.
[P. 102]
In explanation of why I believe that amendment, which will in-
sert the important phrase "group of nations" in the international
portions of the bill, is of transcendent importance, I would point
out the following:
Section 123 of the bill contains carefully drawn conditions under
which the Government is authorized to cooperate bilaterally with
another nation in the field of peacetime development of atomic
energy or with a regional defense organization on tactical uses
of atomic weapons. These stringent safeguards are:
(1) The agreement for cooperation must include (a) the
terms, conditions, duration, nature, and scope of the coopera-
tion; (6) a guaranty by the cooperating party that security
safeguards and standards as set forth in the agreement will
be maintained; (c) a guaranty by the cooperative party that
any material to be transferred will not be used for atomic
weapons or for any other military purpose; and (d) a guar-
anty by the cooperating party that any material or any re-
stricted data to be transferred will not be further transferred
to any unauthorized person or beyond the jurisdiction of a
cooperating party.
(2) The agreement for cooperation must be approved by
the Commission or, in the case of a transfer of military data,
the Department of Defense.
(3) The President himself must approve the agreement
for cooperation and he must also determine in writing that
the performance of the agreement for cooperation will pro-
mote and will not constitute an unreasonable risk to the
common defense and security.
(4) The proposed agreement for cooperation, together with
the President's approval and determination, must lie before
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy for 30 days while
-------
286 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Congress is in session.
These conditions are indeed adequate to protect the national
interest. It should be noted that these agreements for cooperation
can be entered into only bilaterally; that is to say, the statute does
not authorize the President to enter into agreements for coopera-
tion with a group of nations or with an international agency un-
less, as specified in section 124, an international agreement has
previously been entered into with a group of nations. This means
that the President must negotiate a treaty (which must receive
the approval of two-thirds of the Senate before it can be effective),
or an executive agreement (which, under the terms of the law,
must be submitted to both Houses of Congress and receive a favor-
able majority vote before it can become effective), before he can
cooperate under the bill with any group of nations.
I would submit that this is an unwarranted and unwise re-
striction and destroys the pool idea suggested by the President.
If the President can deal with a single nation in the atomic field
under the stringent safeguards prescribed in this bill, then he
should be able to deal with a group of nations under the same
stringent arrangement.
Section 121, which purports to deal with the international
atomic pool, is, in my considered opinion, nothing more than a
restatement of what the President can do now under existing law,
without the necessity of passing this bill.
[P. 103]
In short, section 124 is illusory and a naked grant, since unless
we add the phrase "group of nations," we are, under the language
of this bill, giving voice to a pious hope, but in fact giving no
additional authority to the President to carry out his atomic-pool
plan which he does not already have under existing law.
While I consider it desirable and important for us to cooperate
bilaterally in the field of peacetime atomic energy, I feel neverthe-
less that the real solution to the problem which drives men to war
will not be found until we deal broadly and collectively with many
nations in a spirit of cooperation and partnership to bring the
God-given benefits of this new source of power to our friends all
over the world. It is for these reasons that I urge the reinsertion
of thft phrase "group of nations" in the international section of
the bill.
The very foundation of our foreign policy has been built on a
philosophy of collectiveness. As a result we have seen the free
world grow stronger step by step. It would be wiser for us to take
no action at all, rather than injure the spirit of unity which now
prevails in the free world. Psychologically, I am, afraid that we
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 287
do exactly this if we make it more difficult for us to deal with a
group of nations as against dealing with one nation in this very
important field.
Because of this deep-seated feeling I am constrained to dis-
agree with the committee on this point and submit my own
minority view.
JOHN 0. PASTORE.
I subscribe to the foregoing views of Senator Pastore.
MELVIN PRICE
CHET HOLIFIELD.
[p. 104]
SEPARATE VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE HOLIFIELD
AND REPRESENTATIVE PRICE ON H. R. 9757
8. Inadequate power licensing provisions
H. R. 9757 not only fails to mark out a clear and constructive
program for Federal production of atomic power; it is altogether
deficient in the matter of safeguards to protect the public interest
in the licensing of non-Federal agencies to produce and sell
atomic power.
As noted above, tho nuclear energy resource itself will remain
the property of the Fedora! Government. Thus, in terms of the
public interest, the use of nuclear energy and the use of the
energy in the falling water of streams should be subject to the
same safeguards established by law.
These safeguards involve far more than the bare assurance that
the electricity generated from the resource shall be subject to the
ordinary processes of utility regulation. They are based on the
principles that a public resource must be conserved and developed
for the best possible use, that it must be always kept open for
public use if the people so decide, and that, whatever States
may do or fail to do about it, the use must always be directed
at providing electricity at the lowest possible rates through pre-
venting private capitalization of the value inherent in the right
to use a public resource.
The very fact that there are still six States which have set up no
State agency to regulate the rates charged by.privately owned elec-
tric utilities reveals the extraordinary importance of these public
resource safeguards, and the necessity for their incorporation in
any legislation designed to facilitate the use of atomic energy as a
source of commercial power. These safeguards for the right of the
[p. 120]
-------
288 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
people to get the full value out of their resources, without any toll
being taken above what is necessary to assure the funds required
for development, have already been formulated in detail by Con-
gress in the Federal Power Act which prescribes how hydroelectric
resources may be used. They include:
(1) Safeguard for the prior right of Federal development
of the resource in any specific case where this will best serve
the public interest.
(2) Safeguard for the prior right of public bodies and co-
operatives, as against a private applicant for a license for any
specific development of the resource.
(3) Safeguards for the right to public hearing in connec-
tion with any application, with specific provision for admis-
sion of interested States, State commissions, municipalities,
representatives of interested consumers or competitors as
parties.
(4) Safeguards for the right of Federal or other public re-
capture of any development by a private licensee at the end
of the license period on payment of no more than the licensee's
net investment in the project.
(5) Safeguards for reasonable rates to consumers by pro-
vision requiring licensees as a condition of any license to
agree to Federal regulation where States have provided no
regulation of electric rates, with further provision that in any
rate proceeding the licensee can claim no more than net in-
vestment in the development for rate base purposes.
(6) Safeguards for the preferred position of public and
cooperative electric systems to obtain power supply from
Federal development of the resource.
The bill, as reported, is wholly lacking in such safeguards. It
would enable the Atomic Energy Commission to turn this greatest
energy resource over to private power monopoly under licenses
unconditioned except for the requirements of national security and
public health and safety. Aside from section 271, providing that
nothing in this act shall affect the authority or regulations of
Federal, State, and local regulatory agencies, it is barren of any
recognition of the public interest in securing electric energy from
this new resource at the lowest possible rates. Experience has
shown clearly that such regulatory authority is entirely inade-
quate to protect the public interest in electric power developed
from public resources, unless supplemented by specific standards
governing licenses and the availability of public or cooperative
competition in the distribution of electric energy.
The bill includes no provision to encourage public or cooperative
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 289
distribution of nuclear power. Furthermore, it includes no pro-
visions assuring that privately owned electric utilities producing
nuclear electric energy under license from the Commission shall
sell the power at the lowest possible rates consonant with sound
business practices.
The following comments on specific licensing features of the bill
indicate what we consider essential requirements for protection of
the public interest in use of this new public resource for the gen-
eration of commercial electric power.
[p. 121]
Section 103 (b), establishing the minimum qualifications for
applicants for commercial licenses to construct, own, and operate
facilities for the utilization and production of special nuclear ma-
terial or atomic energy, contains no provisions requiring agree-
ment by the applicant, where the end result is generation of
electric energy for sale, to claim no more than net investment in
such facilities for ratemaking purposes. Such a limitation is
placed upon all licenses for use of the people's waterpower re-
sources under the Federal Power Act. This section of the bill
should be amended to bring it in line with established Federal
power policy.
Section 103 (c), providing for a limitation on the term of com-
mercial licenses issued by the Commission for the ownership and
operation of facilities for the utilization and production of special
nuclear material or atomic energy, contains no provision for the
right of the United States, after reasonable notice, to take over,
maintain, and operate such facilities at the end of the license
period on payment to the licensee of its net investment, plus
severance damages, if any. All private hydroelectric power de-
velopments, licensed under the Federal Power Act, are subject to
such a provision. This section should be amended to bring it in
line with established Federal power policy.
Section 182 (b), providing for due notice to the public before
the issuance of any license for utilization or production facilities
which generate commercial power, is lacking as to both breadth of
notice required and provision of specific procedures in connection
with license applications to assure full protection of the rights of
interested parties. It also lacks specific recognition of those in-
terests whose rights may be affected by Commission action or
whose participation may be in the public interest.
To cure these deficiencies, where generation of nuclear-electric
power is the primary purpose involved, we believe the section
should be amended to provide that notice of applications shall also
be sent to municipalities, and to public and cooperative electric
-------
290 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
systems within transmission distance; that, in case of protests,
conflicting applications, or proposals for special conditions, in-
terested parties shall be accorded opportunity for intervention,
hearing, petition for rehearing, and appeal, in general accord with
the procedures now prevailing under Federal power legislation;
and that the Commission may admit as parties interested States,
State commissions, municipalities, public and cooperative electric
systems, or representatives of interested consumers or security
holders, or any competitor of a party to such proceedings, or any
other person whose participation may be in the public interest.
Section 182 (c), providing for preferred consideration to ap-
plications for facilities which will be located in high-cost power
areas in the United States, lacks a similar provision which has been
the policy of the Government since the Federal Power Act became
law in 1920, according preferred consideration to public bodies
where their applications conflict with those of privately owned
systems. We believe this lack should be overcome to bring the
section into line with established Federal power policy.
Section 183, providing specific terms which must be included
in licenses for the ownership and operation of facilities for the
utilization or production of special nuclear material or atomic
energy, is com-
[P. 122]
ability should extend to inventions or discoveries that affect the
weapons field.
Although drastic penalties are provided for violations of cer-
tain provisions in the bill, no penalty is provided for failing to
report inventions or discoveries under section 151c, which could
involve matters of strategic significance to the atomic-energy
program.
The Patent Compensation Advisory Board created under section
156a, being "advisory" only, apparently could not be delegated au-
thority to make final decisions, as under the McMahon Act, in the
event the Commission found itself bogged down with matters of
compensation, awards, and royalties to the detriment of major
responsibilities.
12. Built-in subsidy feature
Section 2h of the bill makes this finding:
It is essential to the common defense and security of the United States that
title to all special nuclear material be in the United States while such special
nuclear material is within the United States.
Accepting as fundamental to the legislation this finding, which
is implemented in section 52 and other sections of the bill, never-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 291
theless we wish to point out some of its implications for the devel-
opment of atomic-energy enterprise.
What this bill proposes in effect is to relinquish the Federal
Government's exclusive ownership rights in the facilities which
produce or use nuclear material but to retain its exclusive owner-
ship rights in the material itself. As a consequence, the incidents
of private and public ownership are intermingled in such a way
that not only may vexatious problems of administration and ac-
counting control arise, but the private companies licensed for a
maximum period of 40 years to own and operate production facil-
ities (atomic reactors) legally can depend on the Government to
compensate them adequately for whatever they produce during
the life of the license. This constitutes a built-in subsidy for
licensed atomic enterprise until about the year 2000 A. D. The
subsidy implications have been recognized and objected to by in-
dustrial spokesmen appearing before our Joint Committee.
Since the Government, under the bill, owns any nuclear material
which now or may hereafter be produced in privately owned
plants, it cannot refuse to take and pay for what is produced. If
the Government pays less than the cost of production in a given
plant, the action would, in effect, be confiscatory. Therefore the
provision in section 56 of the bill that the Atomic Energy Com-
mission shall pay the same fair price to all licensed producers of
the same material means that the highest cost and least efficient
producer will set the pace on price schedules.
The fact that the Commission is obligated by the same section to
consider the value of the material for official Government use in
determining a fair price constitutes no ground for paying less than
it costs to produce the material. Conceivably, by some happy turn
of international events, the Government's requirements of mate-
rial for atomic weapons could be drastically reduced; and new dis-
coveries of source materials or greatly improved processes of
production in the Government's own plants could yield a surplus-
age of material, reducing its value to the Government to virtually
nothing. Still the Government would have to take the material it
[p. 130]
owns off the hands of private producers at a price fair to them for
40 years during which they may be licensed to do business.
Even though the Commission can establish "guaranteed fair
prices" for only 7 years at a time, as provided in section 56, the
Commission is not thereby relieved of the obligation to pay fair
prices throughout the life of the license.
If the Commission, to forestall the possibility that it may be sad-
dled in the future with huge amounts of nuclear material it doesn't
-------
292 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
need or want, insists on writing into licenses under section 53e or
section 183 a cancellation provision against such contingencies, or
issues licenses for a much shorter period than 40 years, it is ob-
vious that few firms would be persuaded to enter the field under
such uncertainties.
Again, to forestall such conditions, the Commission might easily
persuade itself to grant licenses to only a handful of the largest or
most efficient producers, thereby denying wide access to competing
industrial firms or other interested sectors of industry.
The intertwined complexities implicit in the obligation to com-
pensate producers for the material automatically owned by the
Government and to charge licensed users for such material, create
further subsidy possibilities. \
Section 53 deals with the Commission as a distributor of special
nuclear material to qualified applicants, including licensees under
section 103; while sections 52 and 56 deal with the Commission as
a purchaser of special nuclear material from licensed producers
who produce such material in the burning of the nuclear fuel se-
cured from the Commission. In the first instance, the Commission
is authorized to make a "reasonable charge," in the second, to pay
a "fair price." But the vague generalities set up in lieu of stand-
ards to guide the Commission in determining both these critical
figures leaves a degree of discretion in the administrative body
that would enable it to pay considerably more for the production
than it charged for the original supply of special nuclear material,
thus affording private utilities, let us say, subsidies of undeter-
mined magnitude for their participation in the development of
nuclear power. Such subsidies resulting from dual transactions
might well escape the public eye.
The Federal Power Commission analysis submitted by Chair-
man Kuykendall, in pointing out the lack of legislative standards
and the subsidy possibilities for electric utilities in the sections
discussed immediately above, added this note:
If subsidies are to be permitted, consideration should be given to the question
of the desirability of provisions for passing the benefits of such subsidies on to
the public (hearings, pt. II, p. 1131).
The legal ramifications of the intermingled incidents of public
and private ownership in nuclear-producing facilities have not
been explored by the Committee. We venture to suggest that
private firms, including utilities, may very well find themselves
subject to a variety of Federal statutes affecting Government busi-
ness in private plants, including the Walsh-Healey Act and other
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 293
labor standards laws, inasmuch as the nuclear material used in
their operations will be Government property.
[P. 131]
14- Complicating international arrangements
We stated at the outset our conviction that international matters
relating to atomic energy would be better treated in legislation
separate from that which seeks to open the atomic field to domestic
private enterprise and profitmaking opportunities. Our depend-
ence on foreign sources of uranium, our mutual defense require-
ments, our moral and economic obligations to assist less privileged
nations, our never-ending search for world peace — all these would
seem to pose problems of an order and magnitude that press more
urgently for solution than how to make a profit from the atom.
Some years ago our Government outlined a plan for the inter-
national control of atomic weapons. The plan embraced pro-
cedures, carefully drawn, to provide for the gradual transfer of
our atomic facilities to international control without endangering
national security. It was conceived that the international atomic
authority would maintain an inspection system to make sure that
no nation would deviate from the control arrangements for ag-
gressive ends.
The Soviets would have no part of this plan. In those days,
especially before they had atomic weapons, they insisted that such
weapons be banned outright by treaty rather than put under the
control of an international authority. Nor did they take kindly to
the idea of inspectors corning behind the Iron Curtain. In the face
of persistent and stubborn refusal by Soviet Russia to consider a
control agency, our plan became dormant.
But the United States has never abandoned as a stated policy its
willingness to participate in a really effective program of atomic
armament control. The goal may be too remote for achievement in
our time, but certainly we should do nothing to throw obstacles in
the way of that achievement. Whether the creation of vested
ownership rights in atomic facilities by private persons will nar-
row our opportunities to negotiate in matters which may deter-
mine the life or death of civilized society is a question deserving of
our most earnest consideration.
When President Eisenhower proposed in an address to the
United Nations General Assembly the creation of an international
agency to develop peacetime uses of atomic energy, new hope was
kindled among peoples everywhere that somehow this might be a
vehicle for promoting world peace. Even the Soviets did not dare
-------
294 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
to ignore the compelling force of this appeal for cooperative
peaceful endeavor.
Reportedly, our Secretary of State, entered into preliminary dis-
cussions with the Soviets on the President's proposal. So far as
we know, nothing productive resulted from these meetings. Al-
[P. 133]
though the dismisal record of Soviet intransigence leaves little to
hope for, we see nothing to be gained by closing the door entirely
to possible participation by Soviet Russia in an atomic pool plan
for peaceful uses.
Section 124 of the bill would seem to close that door. Whereas
the President would be authorized to enter into an international
arrangement with a group of nations providing for international
cooperation in the nonmilitary applications of atomic energy, and
to cooperate with that group in specified atomic endeavor, the
proviso is entered that the cooperation must accord with the con-
ditions presented in section 123.
Section 123 requires that agreements for cooperation cannot be
undertaken until a series of conditions are fulfilled by the other
nation or nations involved, including acceptable security safe-
guards and standards. It would be utterly unrealistic to suppose
that Soviet Russia could ever comply with the security and other
requirements laid down in section 123, even though the atomic
pool is intended for nonmilitary uses.
The international atomic pool provision comprising section 124
seems to be a last-minute insertion to suggest that the bill is in-
tended to implement President Eisenhower's proposal. Actually,
the legislative requirements, if any, of the atomic pool proposal
never have been communicated to us. President Eisenhower in his
February 17 message to the Congress making recommendations
for legislation to facilitate cooperation in atomic affairs with other
nations, stated as follows:
These recommendations are apart from my proposal to seek a new basis for
international cooperation in the field of atomic energy as outlined in my address
before the General Assembly of the United Nations last December. Considera-
tion of additional legislation which may be needed to implement that proposal
should await the development of areas of agreement as a result of our discus-
sions with other nations (83d Cong. 2d sess., H. Doc. No. 328, p. 4).
Not only would section 124 preclude the "new basis for inter-
national cooperation" which the President seeks; the wording of
the section is confusing and self-contradictory. It would authorize
the President to enter an "international arrangement," which by
definition in section 11 k excludes "any agreement for coopera-
tion"; and yet section 124 requires than an "agreement for coop-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 295
eration" is necessary if the desired cooperation is to be exercised.
The United States might very well find itself in the position
under section 124 of consummating agreements with other nations
without being able to exercise the cooperation promised by the
agreement unless such cooperation conformed rigidly to the for-
mula contained in section 123.
If the contention is that rhe President could further the atomic
pool idea by the conventional treaty route, or by an international
agreement (which requires approval by both Houses of Congress
under the bill) independent of section 124, then it is difficult to
see what purpose the section serves, except a restrictive one.
The President has broad authority now to negotiate treaties
under the Constitution. Section 124 attempts to prescribe a rigid
and more restrictive formula of negotiation upon the President
and his Secretary of State, The authority to negotiate treaties in
our opinion should be left unfettered, subject always of course to
Senate debate and final ratification.
[p. 134]
No additional authority is conferred upon the President by the
second method embodied in the term "international arrangement,"
i.e., "international agreement." The President already has the
right to send to Congress any international agreement for leg-
islative approval.
Section 124 on its face seems to authorize the President to "enter
into an international arrangement with a group of nations," but
the proviso requires compliance with the provisions of section 123,
which provides for bilateral agreement only between the United
States and an individual nation on all peacetime exchange of nu-
clear material or nuclear information. The reference therefore
to a "group of nations" is misleading because of the proviso.
Again it is restrictive and inflexible rather than helpful. It could
prove to be embarrassing.
While President Eisenhower's original proposal evidently con-
templated a single international atomic pool for peacetime pur-
poses under one universal agreement, our country may be obliged,
or may wish, to proceed by smaller group or regional stages, par-
ticularly in view of the Soviet Union's negative response. If the
negotiations must be undertaken through a bilateral approach,
then the language of section 124 which on its face indicates a
multilateral agreement, again becomes ambiguous and restrictive
on the President.
Section 124 appears to us a premature attempt to legislate in a
delicate field where international diplomatic negotiations are pend-
ing, and it conflicts with the President's admonition in his message
-------
296 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
to the Congress that legislation to implement the atomic pool pro-
posal "should await the development of areas of agreement as a
result of our discussions with other nations."
Section 123, which sets forth a method of cooperation other than
treaties or international agreements, is the principal section of
the bill dealing with the authority of the President to make execu-
tive agreements on the international plane. The President cannot
make any such agreement unless it is approved by the Atomic
Energy Commission or, in case of agreements relating to defense
and military matters, by the Department of Defense. Note that
the Atomic Energy Commission is an independent agency whose
members serve, not at the pleasure of the President, but for a fixed
statutory term.
We seriously question the subordination of the President's au-
thority in the conduct of foreign affairs to the judgment of of-
ficials who may not be in a position to weigh the importance of
countervailing risks, as is the President. In the present juncture
of world affairs it cannot be assumed in case of doubt that no
agreement is preferable to the only obtainable agreement, even
though the obtainable agreement has not all the provisions which
those charged with the technical judgments would like it to have.
In place of requiring the consent of the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion or the Department of Defense, we would prefer merely that
the President, before making an agreement, be required to obtain
a statement from the Commission or the Department of Defense as
to the desirability and sufficiency of the agreement in respect to
the matters referred to in section 123a.
Many of the provisions in section 123 as well as some of the pro-
visions in section 144 to which we will refer seem in part to be
based on the obsolete and false assumption that we have a mo-
nopoly of atomic materials and weapons, that our allies will have
only what we give them and will have nothing to give in return.
[p. 135]
We know that Great Britain, for instance, has manufactured and
exploded atomic bombs.
Section 144a and section 144b both carry a proviso that inter-
national cooperation shall not involve the communication of re-
stricted data relating to the design and fabrication of atomic
weapons except as to limited external characteristics. Taken in
conjunction with the broad definition of "design" in section Hi,
which includes drawings, blueprints, etc., and the development
data behind the design, these restrictions ultimately may work to
our own disadvantage. They hark back to the time when we had
or thought we had a monopoly in this field.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 297
While it is not suggested that there should be a free interchange
of restricted data, we fear that any blanket refusal to exchange
restricted data under any and all circumstances in the future
might debar us from cooperation in particular projects where we
might have much more to gain than to lose. Great Britain, for
example might come up with some discovery comparable in this
field to the jet engine in aviation and might be debarred from
working with us on it because of our own shortsighted and
nonreciprocal policies.
Having in mind that a 1951 amendment which comprises section
10 (a) (3) of the McMahon Act set forth similar restrictions on
communicating design and fabrication data, nevertheless we be-
lieve that new legislation must consider the changing role of
atomic armament in mutual defense. An understanding of this
part of the bill is important and we offer this explanation of its
meaning so that each Member may judge as to whether it goes too
far or not far enough.
The exchange of information on weapons is limited to "external
characteristics, including size, weight, and shape, yields and effects,
and systems employed in the delivery or use thereof." These areas
of disclosure in the main would permit our military personnel to
show our allies an atomic or thermonuclear weapon and describe
these external characteristics, also the explosive power in terms of
equivalent tons of TNT, the blast effect in terms of square miles
destroyed, and the degree of radioactive poisoning of land, water,
and air in the vicinity. It would allow disclosure of methods of
bomb delivery, whether by plane, artillery device, guided missile,
etc.
Apparently American military personnel would be permitted to
train allied personnel in attaching or installing such weapons in
delivery vehicles or devices (sec. 144b (2)). But they would not
be allowed to instruct our allies as to how the weapons are con-
structed internally, how they are assembled or disassembled, or
how they are triggered for explosion.
It is obvious that we do not intend to deliver any of these weap-
ons to any military ally for their own use, as complete knowledge
of the internal working would be necessary for such use or ad-
justment in case the weapon failed to "work" just prior to release.
Therefore we must acknowledge that the bill does not implement
the use of our atomic or hydrogen weapons by our allies on behalf
of the defense of the free world. It does not make it possible to
include such armament in the common arsenal of the North At-
lantic Treaty Organization forces, except as they are retained in
our sole custody.
[p. 136]
-------
298 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
l.lb(2) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
S. REP. No. 1699,83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954)
AMENDING THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1946, AS
AMENDED, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
JUNE 30 (legislative day, JUNE 22), 1954
MR. HlCKENLOOPER, from the U.S. Congress Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 3690]
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, to whom was referred
the bill (S. 3690) to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as
amended, and for other purposes, having considered the same,
unanimously report favorably thereon and recommend that the
bill do pass. Some individual members of the Joint Committee
hold divergent views on certain sections of the bill which are at-
tached hereto or will be presented appropriately in their respective
Houses.
This report describes the background of S. 3690, which is the
committee-approved revision of S. 3323 on which public and execu-
tive hearings have been held, sets forth the basic considerations
which impelled the Joint Committee to report it favorably, and
furnishes a section-by-section analysis of the bill.
*******
[p.i]
NOTE: The body of this report is exactly the same as the preceding House
report.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 299
l.lb(3) COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
H.R. REP. No. 2639,83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954)
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954
AUGUST 6, 1954.—Ordered to be printed
MR. COLE of New York, from the committee on conference,
submitted the following
CONFERENCE REPORT
[To accompany H. R. 9757]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing1 votes of the two
Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 9757) to
amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as amended, and for other
purposes, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed
to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as
follows:
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment as
follows:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate
amendment insert the following: That the Atomic Energy Act of
1946, as amended, is amended to read as follows:
*******
[p. 1]
NOTE : The Conference report consists solely of setting out the Statute.
-------
300
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Lib (4) COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
H.R. REP. No. 2666,83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954)
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954
AUGUST 16, 1954.—Ordered to be printed
MR. COLE of New York, from the committee of conference,
submitted the following
CONFERENCE REPORT
[To accompany H. R. 9757]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 9757) to
amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as amended, and for other
purposes, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed
to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as
follows:
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment as
follows:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate
amendment insert the following: That the Atomic Energy Act of
1946, as amended, is amended to read as follows:
NOTE: This Conference report is the same as l.lb(3).
l.lb(5) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 100 (1954)
l.lb(5)(a) July 23, 26: Debated, passed House, pp. 11655-11656, 11683
11688-11691, 11698-11699, 11713-11715, 11731, 12025
AMENDING ATOMIC ENERGY ACT
OF 1946, AS AMENDED
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I move that the House resolve
itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the
consideration of the bill (H. R. 9757)
to amend the Atomic Energy Act of
1946, as amended, and for other
purposes.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the House resolved it-
self into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
301
consideration of the bill H. R. 9757,
with Mr. TABER in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
By unanimous consent, the first
reading of the bill was dispensed with.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, at the outset I feel an
impulse to express my own very deep
personal gratification at suddenly dis-
covering the identity of the individual
who is to preside over the deliberations
in the consideration of this bill in the
Committee of the Whole. I consider
the selection of this distinguished col-
league of mine as the Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole a rather good
omen for the eventual outcome of the
measure. I am certain that his reputa-
tion for expediting legislative processes
will result in a steady, full, and delib-
erate consideration of the bill without
any excursions into realms having
nothing to do with the measure.
Mr. Chairman, I think it may be of
some interest to the members of the
committee to know the history of this
bill. It is the first bill to revise the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946, which has
been in existence now for 8 years.
There have been perhaps half a dozen
times when the Congress has amended
the act in a very minor or specialized
phase. This is the first bill to make
any serious adjustments in that act.
That fact alone speaks well, I think,
for the framers of the original law.
What we in the Congress did in 1946
through the McMahon Act, we did
rather in desperation and in igno-
rance, not knowing the full implica-
tions of atomic energy, and having no
full conception of what might develop
from it. We therefore took the only
course open to us—that was to wrap
up all knowledge, all information, and
all property relating in any respect to
the use or development of atomic
energy, and figuratively to put all of
that into a steel black box. We pushed
it into a safety deposit vault. We
made it unlawful for anybody to own
fissionable material, to produce it, or
to own the earth from which the ma-
terial comes. We made it unlawful to
disclose any information about atomic
energy, even to the point of condemn-
ing to death people who might seri-
ously violate that law. We put all of
that information and material into a
little black box, we put this in a safety
deposit vault, and then we gave it to
the Atomic Energy Commission and
said "Go ahead." In the Atomic En-
ergy Act of 1946 we made it unlawful
for persons who had any connection
with the atomic program to obtain a
patent in this new field. We made a
complete, arbitrary, and unlimited
Government monopoly of this matter.
As time has passed we have ac-
quired more experience and knowl-
edge. We have learned much more
about this new force than we knew 8
years ago. I speak of what we did in
1946 in no sense of criticism. The
original bill was enacted rather un-
animously, with only one major area
of disagreement. This was with re-
spect to the extent that the military
would have control of the program.
Everybody agreed that there must be
full governmental domination of this
new field.
But now we find that the law can be
adjusted. It has been proposed that it
be adjusted in 3 major fields, 2 of
these having to do with the interna-
tional aspects of the atom, the third
having to do with the domestic appli-
cation of atomic energy.
About 2 years ago, soon after the
joint committee persuaded the Con-
gress to do so, the Congress voted the
appropriations necessary to expand
our production facilities to the point
where we could be reasonably certain
that our military requirements would
be met. Two years ago, also, the joint
committee, under the leadership of the
acting chairman, the gentleman from
North Carolina [Mr. DURHAM], being
satisfied that our security require-
ments were well underway to being
met, set about to inquire into what
-------
302
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
might be done with this new force for
nonmilitary objectives. The {hen act-
ing chairman dispatched letters of in-
quiry to scientists and other persons
throughout the country. Members of
the staff made visits throughout the
country, and came back indicating that
there was a prospect that this force
could be harnessed for the good of
mankind.
At about this same time, the Atomic
Energy Commission displayed the
same attitude, and set about establish-
ing study commissions, composed of
various companies in the country—
utility companies, chemical companies,
machinery companies, and the like.
Many distinguished companies were
involved in this effort. These study
groups were commissioned to look into
this field of constructive uses of the
atom. They came back with varying
reports, some discouraging, some
highly optimistic. Against this back-
ground, the joint committee last sum-
mer undertook an inquiry, through
public hearings, into the field of non-
military, peacetime applications of
atomic energy here in this country.
We held hearings for about 6 weeks.
That was about a year ago. These
hearings gave us some further basis
for encouragement.
The consensus at that time was that
there was no doubt that atomic en-
ergy, from the technical standpoint,
can be made usable in the production
of electrical energy. The important
question concerns the extent to which
atomic energy can be made economi-
cally competitive with coal and oil and
gas and water power in the production
of energy. The energy can be made,
but we are not sure how competitive
it would be with conventional methods
of producing energy. And, even under
this bill, we will not know for several
years to come how competitive it may
be. But there are possible uses of
atomic energy other than for power.
I dare say the long future may show
that atomic energy, nuclear energy,
may have a far greater value in help-
ing mankind through the use of this
energy in preserving foods without
refrigeration, having no consideration
to climate or atmosphere; through
using atomic energy for medical pur-
poses, for the diagnosis of disease and
for treatment of human beings, than
in the production of power. It may be
that the use of this force in the field
of helping the human body alone, will
outweigh its value in generating
electricity.
In any case, we were so encouraged
with the prospects for the peaceful
atom that we set about considering
revisions to the act. Early this year
the President sent the Congress a
message bearing on this problem. He
asked Congress to revise the atomic
energy law in two particulars. The
President asked us to legalize private
endeavors in the atomic energy field
in the area having nothing to do with
weapons—in the area of domestic
peacetime nonmilitary uses of atomic
energy. He also asked that we revise
the act to make it possible for us to
exchange information with our mili-
tary allies regarding the military uses
of atomic weapons and also to co-
operate more closely with friendly na-
tions in the peacetime field.
His message to Congress said noth-
ing about the international atomic pool
which he had proposed to the United
Nations in December of last year and
which was hailed throughout the world
as one of the greatest offerings that
has ever been made on the altar of
peace by any country at any time in
all civilized history. In his United
Nations address, the President ex-
pressed our willingness to explore
with other nations ways and means of
establishing a peacetime international
atomic pool, in which information and
materials would be exchanged, toward
the end of helping people help them-
selves in conquering hunger, poverty,
and disease, which are the seed causes
of war. However, his message to Con-
gress did not ask for legislation to
accomplish that purpose. [p. 11655]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
303
A bill was sent to the Congress from
the Atomic Energy Commission de-
signed to carry out the objectives of
the President's message. That bill
was carefully considered by myself
and others of the committee. Al-
though the bill was not intended to
cover the international atomic pool
idea, it was drafted in such a way
that it would have made the pool
possible. It was drafted, however, so
broadly, and it gave the President
such rather complete, unlimited, and
unrestricted authority, both in the
domestic and in the international field,
that I would not introduce it. I felt
quite certain that it would not be
acceptable to the committee and more
probably that it would not be accepta-
ble to the House. So the bill sent
down to us was not introduced.
Thereupon the vice chairman and I
and others of the committee staff sat
down and drafted our own bill. It had
been my personal purpose and thought
to treat these 3 phases of the amend-
ments to the Atomic Energy Act of
1946 in 3 separate bills. However, as
we got into this subject, we discovered
that the three problems were very
interlocked and interwoven. We real-
ized also that the act itself was in dire
need of being overhauled and modern-
ized and brought up-to-date. We
therefore concluded that all 3 of our
objectives, along with the overall revi-
sion, would be treated as 1 bill. So the
bill was drafted by the chairman and
vice chairman. It was not introduced.
It was submitted to the joint commit-
tee. The joint committee then spent
5 weeks, I believe, going through that
bill paragraph by paragraph, line by
line, and item by item. We concluded
with a bill which was reasonably ac-
ceptable to most members of the
committee.
That bill was then introduced. The
committee then had hearings on the
measure—public hearings. Interested
persons came in and expressed their
criticisms or their approval. The
committee reconvened and considered
those criticisms. Many of the criti-
cisms were adopted; some were not.
This bill reflects the culmination of
those 2 years of effort. If ever there
was a bill that was figuratively ham-
mered out on the anvil of the legisla-
tive process, this bill represents such
a piece of proposed legislation.
At no time have there been any in-
structions, given or accepted, by the
administrative end of the Government,
the Chief Executive or the executive
department. Neither have we done
other than to invite criticisms and rec-
ommendations of the Atomic Energy
Commission.
I should like for the next few min-
utes to point out to you just what the
bill does in those three major fields
which I referred to earlier. If you all
have copies of the bill, which I hope
you do, I again direct your attention
to those various fields, in order to ex-
plain much more clearly the policy of
the bill.
The international phases are cov-
ered in two sections. Section 144
should first be considered by the Com-
mittee of the Whole, Mr. Chairman.
Section 144 is divided into two sub-
sections. The first subsection, (a),
has to do with what might be called
the international pool.
It authorizes the President to in
turn authorize the Atomic Energy
Commission to cooperate with another
nation—I call your attention to the
fact that it is only one nation—and to
communicate to that nation restricted
data in this list of six fields.
First. We may give that nation en-
tering into an agreement for coopera-
tion with us information with respect
to the refining, purification, and sub-
sequent treatment of source material.
Source material is the material in the
ground from which comes this special
nuclear material.
But that authority is in existing law
today. The authority on the part of
the Commission to tell a foreign coun-
try information with respect to what
is set forth here in item No. 1 is al-
-------
304
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
ready in existing law.
Second. This says we can give our
foreign ally, a foreign country, infor-
mation with respect to reactor devel-
opment. That is a rather broad
subject, but that too is contained in
and authorized by the McMahon Act
today. So we are not adding anything
new in that respect.
Third. It deals with the production
of special nuclear material, this being
denned in the act as material capable
of releasing substantial quantities of
atomic energy. That, too, is authorized
in current, existing law.
One thing we have added in this act
—in fourth—is to authorize the dis-
semination of restricted data with re-
spect to health and safety of people.
That is based, and justified, entirely
upon humanitarian grounds. I doubt
if anybody would dispute the justifia-
ble basis for that. We have also au-
thorized—in fifth—the dissemination
of information on industrial and other
applications of atomic energy for
peaceful purposes. That is new.
Sixth authorizes restricted data dis-
semination on research and develop-
ment related to the foregoing, which
is in existing law.
So when you hear talk that this bill
proposes to give vital information
away to the peoples of the world, to
foreigners, to enemies as well as
friends, just tell those people who talk
that way to look at the record. The
bill does no such thing. It scarcely
enlarges the field of the exchange of
information beyond what is presently
authorized by law in one of the
amendments to the McMahon Act
which the Congress adopted 2 or 3
years ago.
Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. JENKINS. The gentleman has
just mentioned the matter having to
do with purification and so on on page
57. I think nearly everybody can
understand that, but on this matter of
reactor development, I wonder if the
gentleman would take about a half
minute to go into detail with respect
to that.
Mr. COLE of New York. There is so
much more involved here that I would
like to have the Members understand
that I hesitate to spend too much time
on a discussion of reactor develop-
ment. Perhaps I am using that as an
excuse rather than as a justifiable
reason. I am not sure that I can give
a full and complete explanation of
what constitutes reactor development.
A reactor, of course, as you know, is
a furnace where this special nuclear
material is combined and compiled and
assembled and where the fission proc-
ess is set up or is generated, which
results in the product of the special
nuclear material. But there are many
varieties or adaptations of that.
Mr. Chairman, to get back to the
matter of dissemination of informa-
tion. Even that cannot be done until
certain steps are taken. There is a
flat prohibition which provides that no
such cooperation shall involve the
communication of restricted data re-
lating to the design or fabrication of
atomic weapons. At no time is it con-
templated that important information
will be disclosed to anybody—friend or
ally—as to the design or fabrication
of the weapons. It is further provided
that this cooperation will not take
place until after the steps and proce-
dures required by section 123 are
followed.
Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. RIVERS. Is there any reason
for not disclosing the name of the one
nation or does that mean only one na-
tion at a time may be involved?
Mr. COLE of New York. No, the
particular nation has no identity. It
may be any nation,
Mr. RIVERS. Only one at a time?
Mr. COLE of New York. Only one
at a time unless he resorts to the au-
thority carried in section 124, which
permits the President to enter into an
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
305
agreement with a group of nations.
Of course he has that authority any-
way, without writing it into this bill.
He can make any proposed interna-
tional treaty that he may want to.
But this is rather an invitation for
the President, if he wants to embark
on the international atomic pool plan
by way of a large pool of nations, to
do that same thing. It may become
a treaty with a group of nations
which would be submitted to the Con-
gress for its approval, and then the
President could take the steps set
forth in section 123.
Mr. COLE of Missouri. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. COLE of Missouri. What about
the United Nations? Would it now be
possible for him to make an agreement
with the United Nations?
Mr. COLE of New York. This bill as
written does not authorize the Presi-
dent to enter into an agreement of
cooperation with the United Nations.
Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. FULTON. But it would autho-
rize the President to enter into an
agreement with an organization, un-
der section 51 of the United Nations
Charter, for mutual defense.
Mr. COLE of New York. I am not
at all familiar with section 51 of the
Charter of the United Nations. But,
anyhow, this bill does not give the
President the authority to enter into
any agreement with the United
Nations, or with any agency of
the United Nations except pur-
suant to the inherent and constitu-
[p. 11656]
be willing to take all the criticisms, or
political brickbats, so to speak, that
angry editors can conjecture and con-
jure. We must be willing to do it if
we have the conviction which is mine
—and I think other Members of this
body share my conviction—that this
bill sells short the economic welfare
and the maximum economic opportu-
nity of generations of unborn Ameri-
can boys and girls. I do not propose
to sell them short. I have never felt,
in my service, that I count as an in-
dividual. I have never felt that this
job could be translated into a human
equation. I have always felt that I
was but a vessel, a vehicle, a medium
through which, or by which, the peo-
ple's business was, in part, to be
transacted.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I yield myself 1 minute in order
to answer a question of the gentleman
from Texas [Mr. DIES],
Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, I am sure
there is an explanation of this, and I
should like to ask the gentleman from
New York [Mr. COLE] to give it, if he
would, at this time.
On page 7 of the bill we find that
"the term 'person' means any foreign
government or nation or any political
subdivision of any such government."
Then on page 17:
The Commission is directed to exercise its
powers in such manner as to assure the con-
tinued conduct of research and development
activities in the field specified below, by private
or public institutions or persons.
Thereafter I note the word "person"
is used frequently throughout the bill.
Was it the intention of the bill that
these powers were to be exercised with
reference to foreign governments?
Mr. COLE of New York. The gen-
tleman has raised a very interesting
point. It would be my personal inter-
pretation that the use of the word
"persons" in section 31, which directed
the Commission to engage in research
through persons, would not include
foreign governments or foreign agen-
cies of any kind. Further, in verifica-
tion of that interpretation, let me call
the gentleman's attention to section
104, which authorizes the Commission
to grant licenses for research activi-
ties. In that section, which imple-
ments section 31, foreign governments
are excluded.
Mr, DIES. In many places in the
bill the same word is used, "person"
-------
306
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
which creates at least a serious doubt
as to what the intention of the com-
mittee is. I know that you seek by
specific language to deal with interna-
tional cooperation, but by defining
clearly that a "person" shall include
any foreign government it would seem
to me that there is a conflict there.
Mr. COLE of New York. That defi-
nition of "persons" is intended to cover
everybody whatsover, individual, cor-
poration, association, government,
agency, in any respect, with the excep-
tion of the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion. The Atomic Energy Commission
is not a person under the definition of
the term "person" as contained in the
act.
The authority that is conferred upon
the Atomic Energy Commission in sec-
tion 31 to engage in research through
public or private institutions or per-
sons must be read in connection with
section 104, which authorizes the Com-
mission to grant licenses and to en-
gage in this activity. Section 104
specifically eliminates the possibility
of a license for research being given
to a foreign corporation, person, or
association.
Mr. DIES. I would think that that
would create a very serious conflict
there, an ambiguity, to say the least.
Mr. COLE of New York. I appreci-
ate the gentleman's bringing this to
our attention. We shall endeavor in
the time available to remove any cloud
that exists.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
yield 10 minutes to the gentleman
from Mississippi [Mr. WRITTEN].
Mr. WRITTEN. Mr. Chairman, in
discussing this bill I daresay I am like
most of the others here. It is much too
lengthy and much too complex for
anyone to say that he thoroughly un-
derstands it. But as we read the
various sections and hear the explana-
tions made by the very fine members
of this joint committee and others who
have studied this subject you cannot
help but realize that the proponents
feel it is all right. If those in charge
of the Nation's affairs limit them-
selves to what our friends here con-
template they will, that might be all
right. But they have not.
I will not attempt to discuss the
dangers under the exchange of atomic-
energy information under the terms of
this bill. Others will discuss that.
But if as a lawyer, or even as a lay-
man, you read this bill, you can see
the sky is almost the limit as to what
can be done under this bill. I need
only to direct your attention to page
79, section 162, which was commented
on by the gentleman from Texas and
myself earlier, which reads as follows:
The President may, in advance, exempt any
specific action of the Commission in a particular
matter from the provisions of law relating to
contracts whenever he determines that such
action is essential in the interest of the common
defense and security.
You will note the words "common
defense and security." That is just
about as broad as it can be. It says
the President may determine. It does
not say President Eisenhower—it
could be the next President, whoever
he may be. That section does not even
say he must put his determination in
writing. It does not say he shall sub-
mit any reasons. It does not say there
shall be any review. Then go further
to the next section in this bill, which
says "that prior contracts—which are
listed in the bill." And what has
heretofore gone on is now confirmed—
period.
Then when you read in the section
on definitions—and I would not at-
tempt to say I understand it; I think
I do understand what the members of
this committee understand, and that
is what the fellow who wrote it under-
stood—but when you vary the defini-
tions of things which are fixed in
your dictionary, the very fact that
they differ from the fixed means that
they are open to interpretation, and
the fellow who wants to do something
can interpret it in his own way, be-
cause it is not tied down as other
things are tied down. So how can you
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
307
say he is wrong or restrained? Cer-
tainly the committee meant to have it
to be somewhat different from the
usual, or you would not have written
it in here, or else the counsel who is
responsible for language intended to
change it. In our section of the coun-
try we have already seen just how far
the authority in this law will be
stretched, when the administration
wants to stretch it. I refer to the
Dixon-Yates contract, which I will
discuss later.
Mr. Chairman, about one-half the
district I represent is served by a
private power company, the Missis-
sippi Power & Light Co., and I live in
that half of the district. My relations
with that company have been friendly
throughout the years. They are doing
a good service. The other half of my
district is served by the Tennessee
Valley Authority. The Tennessee
Valley Authority belongs to the Gov-
ernment, it is the Government. The
Government has invested money which
we had to raise in building up this
power facility down there. But this
Congress in passing that act, and in
every other similar act that I know of,
said that if public moneys are to be
spent in producing power in develop-
ing our natural resources, to make
sure the benefits do not get gobbled up
in between the place where the power
is generated and where the consumer
buys it, the law provides that prefer-
ence shall be given on that power to
public bodies, municipalities, and to
the REA cooperatives, and that such
power shall be made available as eco-
nomically as possible.
Now it is said that this bill does not
contemplate generating any electricity
by the Atomic Energy Administration,
though it might be well if it did au-
thorize that for bargaining reasons at
least. This bill does contemplate and
express the hope and show the antici-
pation that at some future date, we
will be getting energy and power from
atomic energy. But here we do not
find that the results of the hoped for
domestic use of $12 billion, which the
American people have spent on this
program, are being tied down for the
benefit of the people. This bill sets
it up so that by permit it is put into
other hands without the protection
that those who obtain a permit and
produce power must pass such benefits
on to the American people except on
their own terms.
Let me say while I am in the well of
the House, and I want to refer again
to this wide open section in this con-
tract, this matter of the Dixon-Yates
contract, and this is independent of
how you may feel about the TVA and
independent of how you may feel
about public power versus private
power, because I have my views and I
have found since I have been here that
some of you have other views.
Many people feel the administra-
tion is giving undue advantages with-
out proper protections of the public
interest, to private utilities. My
friends, real thought should be given
to whether that is true.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WRITTEN. I yield.
Mr. HINSHAW. It has been an
existing law since the bill was passed
originally, and that provision will still
be in existence.
Mr. WRITTEN. Since I have been
here most of our time has been taken up
[p. 11683]
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. HOLIFIELD: On
page 3, at the bottom, add the following new
subsection:
"1. In achieving the maximum contribution
of atomic energy to the general welfare it is
essential that the United States, through its
own agencies and through other agencies, pub-
lic and private, undertake a comprehensive
program for the production and distribution of
electrical power utilizing atomic energy."
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman,
this amendment just adds one more
purpose to the bill and is in line with
-------
308
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the intent of the bill. It puts upon the
Atomic Energy Commission the duty
through its own agencies and through
other agencies, public and private, to
undertake a comprehensive program
for the production and distribution of
electrical power utilizing atomic en-
ergy. In other words, this leaves the
field open as far as the purpose is
concerned; however, several amend-
ments will be offered to implement the
purposes more clearly than now exist
in the bill.
I hope that the Chairman will have
no objection to accepting the amend-
ment and may I ask if he could accept
this amendment as supplementing the
other purposes in section 3 on page 4?
Mr. COLE of New York. Not at
this moment.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Then I must
proceed.
Mr. Chairman, I will read the
amendment:
1. In achieving the maximum contribution
of atomic energy to the general welfare it is
essential that the United States, through its
own agencies and through other agencies, public
and private, undertake a comprehensive pro-
gram for the production and distribution of
electrical power utilizing atomic energy.
This is one of the purposes of the
bill. Of course, it would have to be
implemented in other sections of the
bill and before it could be put into
effect, any licensing would have to be
done by the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion through private or public agen-
cies. If it was to a private agency,
of course, there would be no concern
as to the fund. In case of licensing
a public body, it would be of no con-
cern to the Congress, because a public
body, if it was on the municipal or
State level, would have to furnish its
own funds. If it were an action taken
on a Federal agency, other provisions
of the bill provide that those agencies
would have to come to the Congress
and obtain authorization and, of
course, obtain the appropriation. It
is the same as any other Federal
agency obtains its appropriations, and
therefore this would not indicate any
final action along those lines. This
would merely put as one of the pur-
poses of the bill the maximum expan-
sion of the atomic energy program to
all public and private bodies in the
United States.
Mr. MEADER. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOLIFIELD. I yield to the
gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. MEADER. Is not the essence
of this amendment to put the Congress
on record as saying that the Federal
Government ought to be in the busi-
ness of developing electrical energy
from atomic energy?
Mr. HOLIFIELD. This would per-
mit the Federal Government to do that.
It would indicate that the purpose of
this act is to not take away from the
Government the right to do that if it
wants to do it.
Mr. MEADER. In other words, it
expresses the philosophy of Govern-
ment-operated power companies if the
power is derived from atomic energy.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. It does not ex-
press it any more than the Federal
Power Act now expresses the same
philosophy. It has been in existence
for 50 years, this philosophy, that what
the Government owns it has the right
to do whatever it wants with it. And
the Government owns atomic fission,
every gram of it, every dollar of it.
It owns it all, and one of the purposes
of this act should be that it should be
utilized on the widest base possible for
the benefit of the people of the Nation
and the welfare of the citizens of the
United States.
Mr. EBERHARTER. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOLIFIEL.D. I yield to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. EBERHARTER. I think it
merely expresses encouragement for
the full development of atomic energy
in every respect through every means.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. The gentleman
is right. It leaves the field completely
open, and the implementation of this
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
309
purpose will occur later by later legis-
lative action.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.
Mr. JONES. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the gentleman
from California [Mr. HOLIFIELD] may
proceed for 1 additional minute.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOLIFIELD. I yield to the
gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. JONES of Missouri. I think it
should be pointed out that the amend-
ments which the gentleman from Cali-
fornia is offering are to be found on
pages 10956 and 10957 of the RECORD
of last Monday.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. That is correct.
And following the recitation of the
amendments there is an explanation
of each amendment.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I am sorry I cannot
accommodate the gentleman by ac-
cepting his amendment, because his
amendment is not nearly as innocent
or innocuous as his statement has
indicated it would be. We might as
well understand that the amendment
the gentleman from California has
just offered is the opening salvo of
several guns that are going to be fired
here this afternoon, all of which are
designed to put the Federal Govern-
ment in the business of generating
electricity through the use of atomic
energy. This proposal the gentleman
has offered declares as a matter of
public policy that it is essential that
the United States, through its own
agencies, undertake a comprehensive
program for the production and dis-
tribution of electric energy. I ask you
if that is a policy that should be ac-
cepted without more sober, mature,
and complete deliberation than is al-
lowed to the House of Representatives
today in consideration of this bill. I
said earlier today that this bill is not a
power bill. It is not a bill to permit
the Atomic Energy Commission to
generate electricity. Ever since the
Commission has been created, and so
far as I have been concerned, as long
as the Atomic Energy Commission
continues to live, its purpose has been
and will be one and one only, and that
will be to produce special nuclear ma-
terial for the defense of the United
States, for the security of the United
States, for making weapons. And at
no time should its primary purpose be
diverted and distorted into a secondary
purpose of generating electricity.
Apparently the conception has de-
veloped in the minds of some persons
in the House that electric energy from
atomic energy will be around the cor-
ner; that it will be in the transmission
lines a year from now. Nothing could
be further from the truth. It will be
many, many, many years before elec-
tric energy is produced from atomic
energy in sufficient quantity to be
commercially feasible.
This bill is simply the opening of the
door as an incentive to American inge-
nuity and enterprise to try to find
ways and means for making that elec-
tric energy possible, as one of the
many possible peacetime uses of
atomic energy. The time has not yet
arrived to consider whether or not we
want to put the Federal Government
in the power business. That day may
well come in 8, 10, 15 years from now
—nobody knows. But the day has not
yet arrived, and so consideration of
that phase of the atomic program
should not require much discussion in
connection with this bill.
Mr. PHILLIPS. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. PHILLIPS. Is not the point
adequately covered, Mr. Chairman, in
the bill as now written? I refer to page
3, lines 17 to 20, where it says "use of
atomic energy under conditions which
-------
310
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
will provide for the common defense
and security and promote the general
welfare"; and also at the top of page
5, where it says "applications of
atomic energy as widely as expanding
technology and considerations of the
common defense and security will
permit"?
Does not the bill already have those
things which properly should be in
this bill?
Mr. COLE of New York. That is a
statement of the purposes of the bill.
[p. 11688]
It is to open up this new field to non-
military applications. That is the
goal.
The amendment of the gentleman
from California [Mr. HOLIFIELD] goes
much further and says that the policy
of this Government is that it must
produce electrical energy from atomic
energy. I am certain that such a step
is not contemplated or authorized by
the Constitution. The time is not ap-
propriate even to consider whether or
not it should be done.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Is it not true that
the other body has adopted an
amendment
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I am not prepared to comment on
that; and I make the point of order—
I might as well do it now—that there
is no place in the consideration of this
bill by the House for references to be
made with respect to what has been
done by another body or what may be
done, or what has been said or what
has been considered by the other body.
I do not like to make that point, but
there is not any sense of beclouding
our consideration of this measure by
what some other group of people may
have done.
The CHAIRMAN. Perhaps the
Chair should read a quotation from
Jefferson's Manual.
It is a breach of order in debate to notice
what has been said on the same subject in the
other House, or the particular votes or majori-
ties on it there; because the opinion of each
House should be left to its own independency,
not to be influenced by the proceedings of the
other; and the quoting them might beget re-
flections leading to a misunderstanding between
the two Houses.
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Chairman,
that would cover expressions concern-
ing actions of the other body?
The CHAIRMAN. It covers any-
thing that occurs in the other body.
The time of the gentleman has
expired.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, although I dislike to
oppose an amendment offered by my
colleague on this side, this is a ques-
tion that this body might just as well
decide at this time as any other, and
I think that the time is proper, be-
cause if we are going to make out of
the Atomic Energy Commission a
power-producing agency then we had
better consider this bill for a long,
long time. I certainly think it will
take more time, as far as I am con-
cerned, for it is a matter that goes far
and wide. It is one that should be
considered seriously before this body
takes such a step.
Mr. Chairman, I ask that this
amendment be voted down.
Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I take this time to
interrogate the chairman of the com-
mittee. He has stated that as far as
he is concerned the purposes of this
legislation and the scope of the ac-
tivity of the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion should be devoted solely to the
national defense of our Nation. May
I ask him whether or not the Atomic
Energy Commission, under the terms
of this bill, is not placed in the posi-
tion of passing upon the production
of power for civilian purposes? As I
understand later sections of this bill,
the Commission is authorized to grant
licenses to commercial companies for
the production of power. That was
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
311
the reason I asked the gentleman from
California [Mr. HINSHAW] earlier in
the day whether it would not have
been wiser to give the authority to the
Federal Power Commission, which now
has the duty under existing law to
determine the impact of production
facilities for power, to pass upon the
question as to whether or not the con-
struction of reactors of this type
should be passed on by the Federal
Power Commission. The fact still re-
mains that in this bill the Atomic En-
ergy Commission is called upon to pass
upon the production of power for
civilian purposes through the con-
struction of reactors. Is that not so,
may I ask the chairman of the
committee?
Mr. COLE of New York. No, I can-
not answer whether it is so or not, but
I can say that the gentleman com-
pletely misinterpreted what I may
have said about the Commission. I
did not say the Commission's sole re-
sponsibility was producing weapons.
What I did say is what is contained
in line 3 on page 2 concerning the pur-
poses of the bill, where it says that
the primary purpose at all times is
the paramount objective of making the
maximum contribution to the common
defense and security. That is the
principal and primary purpose of this
atomic energy program, although, of
course, not the sole purpose. There
are many secondary activities of the
Commission.
Mr. YATES. Does the gentleman
not agree that under the language of
later provisions of this bill the duty is
imposed upon the Commission to deter-
mine whether the public convenience
and necessity require certain commer-
cial institutions to be licensed to con-
struct reactors for the production of
power for civilian purposes?
Mr. COLE of New York. I do not
think there is any imposition upon the
Commission of a duty to grant licenses
based upon public convenience and ne-
cessity. That is regulated by existing
Federal and State authorities. We do
not touch that in any respect.
Mr. YATES. Under what authority,
then, does the Commission grant a
license? Will the applicant for the
construction of a reactor be required
to go to the Federal Power Commis-
sion, or other appropriate regulatory
commissions, before it can start con-
struction of its reactor, if it proposes
to use it for power purposes?
Mr. COLE of New York. I can only
direct the attention of the gentleman
to the provisions of section 271 on
page 102, which states that—
Nothing in this act shall be construed to
affect the authority or regulations of any
Federal, State, or local agency with respect
to the generation, sale, or transmission of
electric power.
Tf the applicant for a license intends
to use that license in such a way that
he would have to apply to the Federal
Power Commission, then he will have
to apply to the Federal Power
Commission.
Mr. YATES. In other words, the
authority that is contained in this act
for any person within the language of
the definition of the act who proposes
to construct a reactor for the produc-
tion of power for civilian purposes is
only a preliminary grant and such a
person must then go to the appropri-
ate Federal or State agency in order
to obtain a certificate of convenience
and necessity in order to carry out the
charter which is granted under the
terms of this act; is that correct?
Mr. COLE of New York. With the
exception of an industry which might
want to obtain a license for using
atomic energy to generate electricity
for its own use. Then it would not
have to go to any regulatory body.
Mr. YATES. That is a construction
for the individual use of a single in-
dustry and one that would not be used
for the general public; is that correct?
Mr. COLE of New York. That is
right.
Mr. YATES. Then the answer to
my question, as I propounded it prior
to your answer, is "Yes; he would have
-------
312
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
to go to the other regulatory agencies."
Mr. COLE of New York. The an-
swer is in the affirmative.
Mr. YATES. Then the next ques-
tion I have is this: Under present con-
ditions, in view of the extremely high
cost necessary in construction of re-
actors of this type, is it not likely that
private companies may not want to
undertake the construction of reactors
for the generation of power for civil-
ian purposes, and it may be necessary
for the Government to construct a
pilot plant to test the usefulness of
such an enterprise? In the case of
Duquesne, to which the gentleman
from North Carolina [Mr. DURHAM]
has referred, the Duquesne Co. reactor
will generate only 60,000 kilowatts.
Mr. DURHAM. That is a very
small amount.
Mr. YATES. I agree that that is a
very small amount, but the fact still
remains if they are going to construct
a reactor for feasible, economic pur-
poses, it would have to be a much
larger generator than that encom-
passed in the Duquesne operation.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from California [Mr. HOLI-
FIELD].
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. HOLIFIELD)
there were—ayes 72, noes 146.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. HOLIFIELD:
Amendment No. 2: On page 4, after line 20,
add the following new subsection e and re-
number sections e and f as f and g, respec-
tively.
"e. A program for Government and non-
Government production and distribution of
electrical power utilizing atomic energy so di-
rected as to achieve the maximum public bene-
fits of atomic energy development and make
the maximum contribution to the national
welfare."
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I
shall take no more time of the House
than is necessary to say that this also
is in the philosophy section of the bill;
this language in the purposes section
[p. 11689]
of the bill states that the program for
Government and non-Government pro-
duction and distribution of our electri-
cal power utilizing atomic energy have
been directed to achieve the maximum
public benefits of atomic energy devel-
opment and make the maximum con-
tribution to the national welfare.
It is the same type of amendment as
the one I offered before. This is in the
philosophy section of the bill. It indi-
cates that the intent of the House
would be for the Government to oper-
ate in this field for the benefit of all
the people rather than for just a
favored few.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I want to indicate only the same
objection that I raised to the earlier
amendment offered by the gentleman
from California applies to this
amendment.
Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Chair-
man, I move to strike out the last word
and rise in support of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I have taken this
time to call attention to the member-
ship of the House and to ask the ques-
tion if we are going to revert to the
philosophy that was followed in this
country for so long when the utilities
enjoyed a monopoly and stole from the
people of this Nation billions of
dollars.
I was in a fight one time against the
utility companies, when they were un-
willing to listen to any reasonable de-
mand. I do not know much about the
Atomic Energy Commission but I do
know a little bit about the philosophy
of the private power utilities of this
country. I led that fight in my home-
town to put in a municipal light plant.
We battled them through the courts
for over 5 years before we got that
plant into being. We offered to com-
promise if they would meet certain
requests that our city had made, but
they opposed and refused every one of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
313
those requests. I said at that time:
"If you do not give us these things
we will vote bonds for a municipal
light plant and I predict that after the
town of Kennett, Mo., votes to install
a municipal light plant, you will go
to the other towns you are now serv-
ing and give them the same things we
have demanded; but you are first
going to have to be shown you are
beat." That prediction materialized.
I also had a part in the fight for the
REA in Missouri. There is not a man
or woman in this House who does not
know that if we had relied on the
monopolistic power utilities of this
Nation, our people in the rural dis-
tricts would not have electric power
today.
I was surprised, amazed, and
greatly disappointed when I heard the
chairman of the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy a minute ago indicate
by his remarks that he wanted to give
to the private power interests of this
country the $12 billion investment
that the taxpayers of this Nation have
already made and not give the REA,
TVA, and the people served by public
power an equal opportunity to use this
thing. I plead with you, if we are
going off on these other amendments
as we have started on the first one,
every person who votes for a thing
like that will be contributing to the
giving away of the resources of this
Nation. It pains me to think that we
sit here without thinking and give
away the resources and try to prevent
the Government, our own people, from
enjoying the resources we have.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. JONES of Missouri. I yield to
the gentleman from California.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. The issue is clear
cut. The chairman of the committee
says that this is not a power bill, but
it is a power bill. It puts the private
utilities in the power business with
atomic fissionable material paid for by
the taxpayers' money. It authorizes
the Commission to give them licenses
to do this very thing. So, regardless
of how many times he gets up on the
floor and says that this is not a power
bill, it is a power bill. The issue is
clear cut.
Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Chair-
man, in opposing the amendment a
moment ago he indicated he was not
willing that this be utilized by other
agencies, including public and private
power. All we want is a fair break to
give the people who are supplying the
public power an opportunity, an equal
opportunity. But if you are going to
give this monopolistic control to the
private utilities, I say it is typical of
the administration that has always
been opposed to the people's interests.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in opposition to the pro forma
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, in the first place,
this bill has nothing whatsoever to do
with the production of electric power.
Power can of course be produced by
an REA or any other unit sponsored
by the Government under the law as it
now stands.
Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Missouri.
Mr. JONES of Missouri. Can the
gentleman tell me why he opposed the
first amendment where it would give
them an equal opportunity?
Mr. HINSHAW. Because the first
amendment provided for putting the
Atomic Energy Commission in the
business of producing electric power.
Mr. JONES of Missouri. Also that
amendment prevented the public
power interests from using this re-
source.
Mr. HINSHAW. It did no such
thing. It has nothing to do with that.
This bill in nowise prevents any other
public agency from going into the pro-
duction of electric power with the use
cf atomic energy as a heat source. As
far as generation is concerned they
use the same generating equipment as
in any steam plant. The heat source
-------
314
LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
is atomic energy. I disagree with the
gentleman and say that so far as his
remarks may have carried any acri-
mony they were totally unjustified.
Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HINSHAW. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. VAN ZANDT. Is it not true
that the reactors awarded by the AEC
are purely experimental?
Mr. HINSHAW. Certainly.
Mr. VAN ZANDT. In connection
with the power these reactors will de-
velop, is it not true the taxpayers' in-
terest is protected when it comes to
the disposition of such power?
Mr. HINSHAW. Why, certainly.
He is protected by other agencies also.
Mr. SIEMINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I rise to ask the dis-
tinguished chairman of this committee
a few questions, if I may. It is my
understanding that the difference in
power available to the average man in
Asia as against that available to the
average person in the West is a ratio
of 30 to 1. In Asia there is less than
one horsepower available per man; in
the West it is around 30. Now, my
question is this: Does this bill, the
way it is phrased now, enable the Gov-
ernment to step in, in the event we
discover that the Soviets and their
satellites are closing the power gap
with atomic plants throughout their
land? What action is the Government
enabled to take to encourage private
industry under this bill to step on the
gas to keep ahead of the increased
power that might be developed in the
Orient? Does this bill foreclose
action?
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, if the gentleman will yield, very
definitely the bill does not foreclose
action. I confess I share the gentle-
man's concern in that respect. I think
it is highly important that this Gov-
ernment proceed as expeditiously and
as rapidly as possible toward proving
the feasibility of atomic energy for
generating electricity to the end that
it may be used not only here at home,
but made available to people through-
out the world who may want to use it
as well.
Mr. SIEMINSKI. It is my observa-
tion that the Soviets are not interested
in free enterprise. It is likely they
will try to close that power gap before
they start war. If they can, they will
most certainly try to capture the mar-
kets of the world through atomic
power and slave labor. I want to be
sure that we have the wherewithal to
stay ahead of them; that we can ad-
vise industry, and, if need be, shell out
the dough to stay ahead.
Mr. COLE of New York. But we do
not give them the dough.
Mr. SIEMINSKI. Well, we do in the
Export-Import Bank, and no one says
that is bad. There we encourage for-
eign trade; we want to be sure that we
are not interpreting this bill as a so-
cialist or restrictive bill, but one that
encourages business and enables in-
dustry to stay abreast of the field.
Mr. COLE of New York. We want
to make it lawful for them to carry
out this mission which now is un-
lawful.
Mr. SIEMINSKI. I thank the gen-
tleman, and, at the proper point, in the
House, I shall ask unanimous consent
to cite now further remarks on the
30:1 ratio as they appeared on page
A5261 in the Appendix of the RECORD,
believing they will assist the progress
of the Congress on this pioneer
measure:
WHAT THEN OF HORSEPOWER AND THE
30:1 RATIO?
(Speech of Hon. ALFRED D. SIEMINSKI, of New
Jersey, in the House of Representatives,
Wednesday, July 21, 1954)
Mr. SIEMINSKI. Mr. Speaker, in Korea, the
Reds learned that firepower overwhelmed man-
power.
[p. 11690]
What now of horsepower? It outpulls man-
power.
What steps are the Reds taking to close the
power gap between their world and ours?
At the moment, for each person in Asia, there
is available, on the average less than one horse-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
315
power. In America, for each person, the aver-
age is around 30 horsepower. Thus, the gap in
horsepower between East and West could be
expressed as 30:1 in favor of the West.
To dominate the world in peace as well as in
war, it would appear that the Reds must first
close the power gap, then pass the West, with a
ratio in their favor.
In what way will the Reds power the East,
before attempting to blanket the West?
A clear answer to that question might well
guide the Congress in its vote on the use of
atomic power. One or two observations might
be helpful.
I am told that there is little waterpower in
the East, that Russia has only four great rivers
and China fewer than that.
Thus, factors of stiategy, tactics, and eco-
nomics lead one to conclude that the Reds will
power their lands with atomic plants.
It took the blood of Korea to reaffirm the
superiority of firepower to manpower.
What treasure will the future require, before
the superioiity of atomic power for peacetime
pursuits is established, if ever?
What then of horsepower and the 30:1 ratio?
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from California [Mr. HOLI-
FIELD] .
[p. 11691]
The Clerk read as follows:
"CHAPTER 4. RESEARCH
"SEC. 31. Research assistance:
"a. The Commission is directed to exercise its
powers in such manner as to insure the con-
tinued conduct of research and development
activities in the fields specified below, by private
or public institutions or persons, and to assist in
the acquisition of an ever-expanding fund of
theoretical and practical knowledge in such
fields. To this end the Commission is authorized
and directed to make arrangements (including
contracts, arrangements, and loans) for the
conduct of research and development activities
relating to—
" (1) nuclear processes;
" (2) the theory and production of atomic
energy, including processes, materials, and
devices related to such production;
" (3) utilization of special nuclear material
and radioactive material for medical, biological,
agricultural, health, or military purposes;
" (4) utilization of special nuclear material
and radioactive material and processes entailed
in the production of such material for all other
purposes, including industrial uses; and
" (5) the protection of health and the pro-
motion of safety during research and production
activities.
"b. The Commission may (1) make arrange-
ments pursuant to this section, without regard
to the provisions of section 3709 of the Revised
Statutes, as amended, upon certification by the
Commission that such action is necessary in the
interest of the common defense and security, or
upon a showing by the Commission that adver-
tising is not reasonably practicable; (2) make
partial and advance payments under such ar-
rangements; and (3) make available for use in
connection therewith such of its equipment and
facilities as it may deem desirable.
"c. The an angements made pursuant to this
section shall contain such provisions (1) to
protect health, (2) to minimize danger to life
or propeity, and (3) to require the reporting
and to permit the inspection of work performed
thereunder, as the Commission may determine.
No such anangement shall contain any provi-
sions or conditions which prevent the dissemina-
tion of scientific or technical information,
except to the extent such dissemination is pro-
hibited by law.
"SEC 32. Reseaich by the Commission: The
Commission is authorized to conduct, through
its own facilities, activities and studies of the
types specified in section 31.
"SEC. 33. Research for others: Where the
Commission finds private facilities or labora-
tories are inadequate to the purpose, it is
authorized to conduct for other persons, through
its own facilities, such of those activities and
studies of the types specified in section 31 as it
deems appropriate to the development of atomic
energy. The Commission is authorized to deter-
mine and make such charges as in its discretion
may be desirable for the conduct of such activi-
ties and studies.
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. PRICE: On page
19, line 14, after the "word "authorized", insert
the following: "and directed."
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman, section
31 of the legislation under considera-
tion provides that the commission is
directed to exercise its powers in such
manner as to insure the continued
conduct of research and development
activities in the fields specified in that
section.
I feel it is absolutely essential to let
contracts under section 31 with groups
outside of the commission and with the
various agencies and organizations. I
feel it is essential for the commission
to do the same thing within its own fa-
cilities. By means of this amendment
we direct instead of merely authorizing
the commission to continue basic re-
-------
316
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
search and development activities in
its own facilities and in its own
laboratories.
We have millions of dollars invested
in atomic research facilities. They ex-
ceed several hundred million dollars, as
a matter of fact. Those are the only
such facilities available in which the
basic scientific and engineering efforts
can be carried on during the next few
years ahead. In view of the large pub-
lic investment in atomic energy thus
far, it is vital to protect that invest-
ment. Almost all important atomic
energy ideas today are public property.
One of the best ways to insure that the
critical ideas in the future continue to
be public property is to make certain
that the Atomic Energy Commission
carries on experimental activities far-
thest out on the horizon of scientific
and engineering exploration.
Unlike some of the other amend-
ments already considered and not
adopted, I sincerely hope that we can
agree to this constructive contribution
and safeguard. I sincerely hope that
the committee itself might be inclined
to accept the amendment. The provi-
sion was contained in the original act.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PRICE. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. HINSHAW. After discussing
this matter, with our Chairman, if it is
understood that research is not to be
limited to Commission facilities but
they may also contract for research,
then the committee could accept the
amendment.
Mr. PRICE. That is correct.
Mr. HINSHAW. We are very much
afraid, unless some word to that effect
is placed in the RECORD, that the com-
mission would be limited to research
in their own facilities. Otherwise,
there is no objection.
Mr. PRICE. It is not intended that
it be limited to research in their own
organization.
Mr. HINSHAW. Very well. Then
we will accept the amendment if it is
agreeable to the gentleman from North
Carolina.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, if
you recall, in discussing this amend-
ment, at the present time the Commis-
sion has contracts in practically every
college in the country. I think the pro-
gram has been very fine and one that
has been accepted by the colleges and
one that has been very beneficial to us
in supplying us with young scientists.
If this in no way affects our college
program, I would be willing to go along
with the amendment.
Mr. PRICE. I am sure that it does
not affect the colleges or any program
outside of the commission facilities and
I certainly do not intend that it should.
Mr. HINSHAW. With that under-
standing, it is perfectly agreeable to
this side of the aisle.
Mr. MURRAY. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, this is the most far-
reaching and most important and most
serious bill that has been considered by
the House at this session. It certainly
should have the full, fair, and adequate
debate. There are many more amend-
ments yet to be offered to this bill. We
are now on page 20, and there are 85
more pages left. I want to say that if
the majority demands that debate be
limited, that a gag rule be enforced, or
that this bill be railroaded through
without fair and adequate considera-
tion, then I intend to ask for an en-
grossed copy of the bill. It is stupid to
try to finish this bill tonight. We
ought to quit in an hour or so and then
come in tomorrow and give this bill full
and fair consideration. It ought to be
considered by the House for at least 3
or 4 days. If a gag rule is proposed, I
deeply resent it.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Illinois [Mr. PRICE].
[p. 11698]
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. PRICE)
there were—ayes 112, noes 4.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
317
So the amendment was agreed to.
# ;;- ;;= # *
[p. 11699]
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. HOLIFIELD: On
page 42, beginning line 16, strike section 102
and insert in lieu thereof the following:
"SEC. 102. Finding of practical value: When-
ever in its opinion any industrial, commercial,
or other nonmilitary use of special nuclear ma-
terial or atomic energy has been sufficiently
developed to be of piactical value, the Commis-
sion shall prepare a report to the President
stating all the facts with respect to such use,
the Commission's estimate of the social, po-
litical, economic, and international effects of
such use, and the Commission's recommenda-
tions for necessary or desirable supplemental
legislation. The President shall then transmit
this report to the Congress together with his
recommendations. No license for any utiliza-
tion or production facility shall be issued by
the Commission pursuant to section 103 until
after (1) the Commission has made a finding
in writing that the facility is of a type suffi-
ciently developed to be of practical value for
industrial or commercial purposes; (2) a report
of the finding has been filed with the Congress;
and (3) a period of 90 days in which the Con-
gress was in session has elapsed after the report
has been so filed. In computing such period of
90 days, there shall be excluded the days on
which either House is not in session because
of an adjournment of more than 3 days."
On page 42, in line 23, after the word "Com-
mission", insert the following; "and report to
the Congress."
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, as
the chairman of our committee has told
the Committee of the Whole House, at
the present time there is no practical-
value element in any of the reactors
which are being built by the Govern-
ment. We look forward to the time, as
he has said today, when there will be
economical power produced in these
reactors. This is an amendment which
is drawn from a similar amendment in
the McMahon Act which gives to the
Congress the right to know when a
finding of practical value has been
made of a type of reactor which will be
of practical value in the production of
electrical energy that that fact shall be
certified to by the Commission and laid
before the Congress in 90 days. The
President shall be informed and shall
transmit a report to the Congress for
a period of 90 days, and the Commis-
sion will also at that time indicate the
type of legislation which it thinks
should be passed to regulate a reactor
which has been certified to be of prac-
tical value. This is a safeguard so
that the Congress will know when that
time arrives that there is a problem
and that the Congress shall have the
right to look at the problem before we
go full-fledged into what might be a
development which will have a tremen-
dous impact upon investments now in
existence, upon coal mining areas and
oil producing areas and gas producing
areas and other economic factors
which will be affected when that time
does arrive. I hope the committee will
accept this amendment.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I feel compelled to resist the
amendment offered by the gentleman
from California largely because this
amendment was proposed by him to the
joint committee, and was considered by
the joint committee but was not ac-
cepted. It should be understood that
the substance of the gentleman's pro-
posal is in the existing McMahon Act,
and has caused considerable difficulty.
That was proposed back in the dark
ages of the atomic age in 1945 and 1946
when nobody had any conception about
the possible peacetime applications of
atomic energy. It was felt at that time
before anything was to be done in the
peacetime uses of atomic energy, a
study should be made by the Commis-
sion and a report filed to the Congress
to determine what dislocations this
peacetime application might cause to
our economic system and so forth.
Now we have had an experience of 8 or
10 years in this field and we can see it
is going to be a gradual progressive
development, and that it is not going
to be an overnight occurrence that
atomic energy is available on a proven
basis for commercial application. So
the joint committee rejected this pro-
posal. My particular objection to it is
-------
318
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
that the gentleman's amendment would
prohibit the issuance of any commer-
cial license even though a type of reac-
tor has been established as having a
practical effect until after a study and
report has been made and the Presi-
dent has made his recommendations to
the Congress. As an alternative to
that, the joint committee wrote into the
section of the bill relating to the obli-
gation and responsibility of the joint
committee, a duty to have open and
public hearings so far as practical and
possible at the beginning of each ses-
sion of the Congress for the first 60
days at which there could be public dis-
cussion of progress in this field. That
was designed to take the place of this
study and report which is recom-
mended by the gentleman from Cali-
fornia. So I urge that the amendment
be rejected.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from California [Mr. HOLI-
FIELD].
The amendment was rejected.
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. MARSHALL: On
page 43, line 16, renumber condition "(3)"
as "(4)" and insert a new "(3)" to read:
"(3) who agree, if the license is for facili-
ties for the utilization of special nuclear
material for the generation of electric energy
for sale to claim no value for such facilities for
ratemaking purposes in excess of the net invest-
ment in such facilities as denned in the Federal
Power Act.'*
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Chairman,
this is a comparatively simple amend-
ment. All I am trying to do by this
amendment is to provide that in the
setting of rates credit shall be given
only to the investment. There has
been a tendency on the part of some to
pad some of the rates. They have been
putting in what we might term "extra
curricular things" like travel, enter-
taining, some advertising, and other
excess items in the establishment of
rates. I am attempting to tie this
down in the rate establishment that
only those charges can be made in
establishing those rates that are re-
lated to the direct investment itself.
I hope that the committee in review-
ing the amendment that I have offered
will see fit to accept it.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MARSHALL. I yield to the
gentleman from California.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Is it not true
that this substantive language is in the
Federal Power Act now and relates to
any private power company that builds
on a Federal dam site? It protects the
purchasers of that energy from padded
costs in the capital plan investment
and, therefore, makes them put their
actual costs in when it comes to setting
the rates which they can charge for
their energy?
Mr, MARSHALL. The gentleman
is absolutely correct,
Mr. HOLIFIELD. This would do
the same thing for people who build
reactors. If it goes in intrastate com-
merce, due to the fact they are using
Federal material in their reactors, this
would give the same protection; it
would allow the rate which is allowed
by the local State commission, but .it
would only allow it on the actual capi-
tal-plan investment and not allow
padded costs to enter into the ratemak-
ing structure?
Mr. MARSHALL. The gentleman
has spoken so fluently on behalf of my
amendment that he has convinced me
of its worth.
One of the things that has been of
considerable trouble to me in talking
to people in my district has been cer-
tain charges that have come about be-
cause of the cost-plus contracts and 5
percent's. That is what prompted me
to introduce this type of amendment to
protect the interests of the people of
the country in the establishment of
rates, tie it down so that some of the
incentives that might be open will be
[p. 11713]
removed, in order that we could have a
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
319
more equitable rate established, sdme-
thing that would be fair and, certainly,
something that I think would be of
value to all the people of the United
States.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Is it also true
that six States have no public power
commission; therefore, if a reactor us-
ing Federally owned fissionable mate-
rial were built in those particular
States, the builders of that reactor
could charge the limit without any
restriction at all by a State commission
on the rates they could charge. This
would indicate a Federal interest in
seeing that the property of the Federal
Government was not used to obtain
extortionate profits.
Mr. MARSHALL. The gentleman
again is correct. I urge the adoption
of the amendment.
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in opposition to the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Minne-
sota [Mr. MARSHALL].
Mr. Chairman, I call the attention of
the Members to the fact that this
amendment would, in my opinion, go
far in regulating your State utility
bodies. If you want to accept it on
that basis and have the Government
interfere in your own State's business,
all right, good and well. That is ex-
actly what the amendment does. I do
not see where we have much to do with
the rates in the States. Let them fix
their own rates where they have public-
utility bodies. Those States that have
not public-utility bodies should have
them. In my State we write into the
law certain things that the utility
bodies can take into consideration in
making rates. That is what this
amendment does.
Mr. RAYBURN. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Texas.
Mr. RAYBURN. One of the big-
gest States in the Union, my own State
of Texas, has no utilities commission.
It has a railroad commission that regu-
lates the railroads and oil companies
only and that is all we have in our
State.
Mr. DURHAM. I am not particu-
larly objecting to it. I am just calling
the attention of the Members to it.
Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Indiana.
Mr. HALLECK. We have had a con-
troversy raging here in the last few
years about regulations in respect to
the gathering and production of natu-
ral gas. Now, I have taken the posi-
tion that is a matter that needed to be
controlled within the State. I am
wondering if this amendment is in the
direction of that thing which many of
us have fought through the years?
Mr. DURHAM. I think we had one
about oil offshore, too, as I recall it, did
we not?
Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Illinois.
Mr. YATES. Is it not true that the
sale of this energy in interstate com-
merce will be under the ratemaking
jurisdiction of the Federal Power Com-
mission, and to that extent certainly
the amendment should be acceptable
because it eliminates any possibility of
speculation in fixing a rate base for the
computation of costs? The rate base
will be calculated exclusively upon the
investment in the reactor and in the
power facilities. There will be no
question about reproduction costs,
about the speculation that comes in
connection with it, and I think it is a
worth-while amendment and should be
accepted.
Mr. DURHAM. I am just one of
those people that does not want the
Federal Government messing with
State agencies.
Mr. YATES. Yes. But the Federal
Power Commission does not mess in
the gentleman's State, does it?
Mr. DURHAM. No. We have a
utilities commission.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman,
-------
320
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield to the gen-
tleman from California.
Mr. HINSHAW. Is this not sort
of an odd way to amend the Fed-
eral Power Act?
Mr. DURHAM. Yes.
Mr. HINSHAW. Of course it is.
Mr. YATES. In what way is this an
amendment to the Federal Power Act?
The gentleman from California a few
hours ago told me that the regulatory
fees of these reactors would be under
the jurisdiction of the Federal Power
Commission. Therefore, in what sense
is this an additional amendment to the
Federal Power Act?
Mr. HINSHAW. I did not say that.
I said the jurisdiction rested in the
State, unless it is interstate transmis-
sion of electric power, and the inter-
state transmission provides for the
Federal Power Commission to set the
rate, the value of the property, and all
that sort of thing. If it is purely in-
trastate transmission of power and sale
of power, then it is entirely within the
regulation of the State.
Mr. YATES. What would the gen-
tleman propose with respect to the
interstate transmission of electric
power? Would not this amendment be
good for that purpose?
Mr. HINSHAW. No.
Mr. YATES. Why not?
Mr. HINSHAW. I do not think it is
necessary.
Mr. YATES. Well, the gentleman
himself knows that the original cost of
a reactor will mount with the passage
of time and that the rates will go up
correspondingly.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from North Carolina has
expired.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. MAR-
SHALL] .
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. MAR-
SHALL) there were—ayes 54, nays 141.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. METCALF. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. METCALF: On
page 44, line 3, add the proviso as follows:
"Provided, That not less than 2 years' notice
in writing from the Commission the United
States shall have the right upon and after the
expiration of any license to take over and there-
after to maintain and operate any facility or
facilities for the utilization of special nuclear
material for the generation of electric energy
on payment of the net investment of the license
in such facilities, with severance damages, if
any, in general accordance with the terms of
section 14 of the Federal Power Act: And pro-
vided further. That, if the United States does
not exercise its right to take over the facility
or facilities on the expiration of any license,
States, municipalities, and cooperatives shall
have a prior right of acquisition on the same
terms in connection with the issuance of a new
license for such facility or facilities."
Mr. METCALF. Mr. Chairman,
section 103 is the licensing section of
the act. It provides for the various
licenses to private enterprise to de-
velop the atomic reactor for generation
of electric energy and other purposes.
We have heard a good deal today
about the fact that there is no need at
this time for power regulation. We
have heard a good deal about the fact
that it may be 5 or 10 years before we
need any legislation for power
regulation.
The amendment I have submitted is
the recapture clause of the Federal
Power Act which provides that when a
private utility is licensed to build a
dam in a navigable stream, at the end
of the licensing period the United
States may recapture that dam; or, if
the United States does not want the
dam, then a State or municipality or
public-utility district may take over
the license and operate it. It is as
simple as that. It is the same provi-
sion that we have in the Federal Power
Act.
The whole proposition here, as has
been outlined by the gentlemen on my
left is this. They say that we are
today at the point where we were in the
development of hydroelectric power in
1906. We are faced with this business
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
321
of starting1 to give it away little by
little. All right—we are giving it
away little by little, maybe we are giv-
ing all of it away. But let us not
throw away the key. Let us have one
little string attached to it so that 40
years from now or 30 years from now
or whenever the licensing: period ex-
pires, if the United States wants that
facility, or if some public agency or
cooperative or municipality wants that
facility, upon the payment of just com-
pensation, including severance dam-
ages to the utility or the agency that is
being licensed, the United States Gov-
ernment or one of these public agencies
may take it over.
We are not making the decision
today. We would not be making it
even 10 years from now. We would be
making it at the end of the licensing
period which would be up to 40 years.
We are reserving the right to make it
by including a recapture clause in our
contracts and licenses.
Forty years from now, if the Gov-
ernment wants these facilities, let us
give the Government the chance to get
them back. That is all I am asking by
this amendment. It is already the law
in the licensing section of the Federal
Power Act and should be adopted as
the law for licensing domestic commer-
cial development of the atomic
program.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I rise in opposition to the
amendment, but before expressing my
[p. 11714]
opposition, I feel I should compliment
the proponents of public power for
their persistence and their determina-
tion. This is one of the score of
amendments which I mentioned 3
hours ago. It is proposed and designed
to put the Atomic Energy Commission
in the power business, or to make
application of certain phases of the
Federal power law applicable to atomic
energy. It is an amendment that
should not be approved.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is
upon the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Montana [Mr. MET-
CALF].
The amendment was rejected.
The Clerk read as follows:
"CHAPTER 11, INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
"SEC. 121. Effect of international arrange-
ments: Any provision of this act or any action
of the Commission to the extent and during the
time that it conflicts with the provisions of any
international arrangement made after the date
of enactment of this act shall be deemed to be
of no force or effect.
"SEC. 122. Policies contained in international
arrangements: In the performance of its func-
tions under this act, the Commission shall give
maximum effect to the policies contained in any
international arrangement made after the date
of enactment of this act.
"SEC. 123. Cooperation with other nations:
No cooperation with any nation or regional
defense organization pursuant to sections
54, 57, 64, 82, 103, 104, or 144 shall be under-
taken until—
"a. the Commission or, in the case of those
agreements for cooperation arranged pursuant
to subsection 144 b., the Department of Defense
has approved the proposed agreement for co-
operation, which proposed agreement shall in-
clude (1) the terms, conditions, duration,
nature, and scope of the cooperation; (2) a
guaranty by the cooperating party that security
safeguards and standards as set forth in
agreement for cooperation will be maintained;
(3) a guaranty by the cooperating party that
any material to be transferred pursuant to such
agreement will not be used for atomic weapons,
or for research on or development of atomic
weapons, or for any other military purpose; and
(4) a guaranty by the cooperating party that
any material or any restricted data to be trans-
ferred pursuant to the agreement for coopera-
tion will not be transferred to unauthorized
persons or beyond the jurisdiction of the co-
operating party, except as specified in the
agreement for cooperation;
"b. the President has approved and author-
ized the execution of the proposed agreement for
cooperation, and has made a determination in
writing that the performance of the proposed
agreement will promote and will not constitute
an unreasonable risk to the common defense and
security; and
"c. the proposed agreement for cooperation,
together with the approval and the determina-
tion of the President, has been submitted to the
Joint Committee and a period of 30 days has
elapsed while Congress is in session (in com-
puting such 30 days, there shall be excluded the
days on which either House is not in session be-
cause of an adjournment of more than 3 days).
"SEC. 124. International atomic pool: The
President is authorized to enter into an inter-
national airangement with a group of nations
-------
322
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
providing for international cooperation in the
nonmilitary applications of atomic energy and
he may thereafter cooperate with that group of
nations pursuant to sections 54, 57, 64, 82, 103,
104, or 144 a.: Provided, however, That the co-
operation is undertaken pursuant to an agree-
ment for cooperation entered into in accord-
ance with section 123.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I
have three amendments to offer, and in
order to facilitate the action of the
House, because these amendments all
have to do with the same subject, I ask
unanimous consent that these three
amendments be considered en bloc.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objec-
tion to the request of the gentleman
from California?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendments offered by Mr. HOLIFIELD :
On page 52, in line 12, strike the word "ap-
proved" and insert in lieu thereof the following:
"submitted to the President."
On page 52, in line 22, after the word "pur-
pose" and before the semicolon insert the fol-
lowing: "except where the President determines
that such uses will bring reciprocal benefits and
be otherwise advantageous to the United
States."
On page 53, in line 16, before the period,
insert the following: "after which period of
time the agreement shall take effect."
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman,
these three amendments, I think, cor-
rect this section and remove a very
strange situation.
In the first case, I call the attention
of the House to the fact that in line 10
the Commission can veto an agreement
by the President. This amendment, in
place of having the Commission and
the Department of Defense approve
a cooperation agreement by the Presi-
dent, would have them submit to the
President their recommendations. I
think that is the constitutional way it
would be, anyway. I doubt very much
if they could disapprove a cooperation
agreement by the President. Anyway,
I do not think this body wants to put
the Atomic Energy Commission in the
position where it can veto a coopera-
tion agreement with other nations
which has been entered into by the
President.
That is what the first amendment
will do.
The second amendment, on page 52,
line 22, after the language "a guar-
anty by the cooperating party that any
material to be transferred pursuant to
such agreement will not be used for
atomic weapons, or for research on or
development of atomic weapons, or for
any other military purpose," insert the
words "except where the President
determines that such uses will bring
reciprocal benefits and be otherwise
advantageous to the United States."
This provides that if we would give
England, for instance, some material
to use in their research and develop-
ment reactors, and they had already
progressed in the development of a
certain type of weapon, the President
could make an arrangement whereby
we would have access to that weapon
provided the President thought it was
all right for them to use this in re-
search and development of the weapon.
In other words, it allows the President
to have a hand in making a trade with
a nation like England, which has, inci-
dentally, some very fine scientists,
some very fine reactors, and some very
fine scientific laboratories. It would
leave it to the President in his discre-
tion if he could make a trade which
would be advantageous to the United
States.
Then on page 53 it provides that
after an agreement has been before
the joint committee of the Congress for
30 days that the agreement shall take
effect. It just completes that section
of the bill and does what, I think, the
committee wants it to do. I will ask
the chairman of the committee at this
time if he understands the import of
my amendments, and if he has any
objections to them.
Mr. COLE of New York. I confess
to the gentleman that I did not see
the gentleman's amendments until this
very moment.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. I left those
amendments with the staff at least a
week ago—all of these amendments.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
323
Mr. COLE of New York. So I sus-
pect these are amendments suggested
by the gentleman at the last meeting of
the joint committee, which the commit-
tee did not consider. I can see no
objection to 1 or 2 of the gentleman's
proposals, but I do see serious objec-
tion to one of the proposals.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Which one is
that, please?
Mr. COLE of New York. That is
the one which would place an exception
upon a condition which is required to
be contained in these agreements.
That condition is carried on page 52,
line 18, under item (3) a guaranty by
the cooperating party that any mate-
rial to be transferred pursuant to such
agreement will not be used for atomic
weapons or for research on or develop-
ment of atomic weapons or for any
other military purpose.
The gentleman would make an ex-
ception of that in case the President
determines that such use will bring
reciprocal benefits or might be other-
wise advantageous to the United
States.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. That is right.
This would frankly put our reliance on
the President that if he can make a
trade or if he saw a trade which could
be made with scientists of Great Brit-
ain to get some advantageous knowl-
edge, and the gentleman knows as well
as I do that they have knowledge which
we do not have, he could make a deal
with them on that basis.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Chair-
man, I move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I would call the at-
tention of the gentleman to the fact
that in this particular clause to be
required in the contracts, we are not
dealing with information—we are talk-
ing about special nuclear material.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. That is right.
Mr. COLE of New York. It has been
the concept of the committee all along
that in this effort to cooperate with
other nations in the military field, it
should be only with respect to knowl-
edge pertaining to the application or
utilization of military weapons, and
that the material itself should never
be used by a foreign country for a
weapon or for use in a research reactor
to learn lessons pertaining to military
weapons. I fear the gentleman's
amendment might be an invitation and
an encouragement to some future ad-
ministration or Government or respon-
sible person to make an exception.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. And possibly the
present President.
[p. 11715]
Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, the
purpose of this amendment is to enable
the Atomic Energy Commission to con-
tinue to function as it was originally
intended, and not to have to engage in
an activity entirely outside of the field
for which it was created.
The Atomic Energy Commission is
not in the electric-power-producing
business. It is in the power-consum-
ing business, and should not be re-
quired by order of the President to be
a power broker for the Tennessee Val-
ley Authority or anybody else.
The Atomic Energy Commission has
no more business providing electric
power for Memphis than for New
York, Chicago, or any other city. It
has no business buying any electric
power that it does not need in its own
facilities.
The distance is about one-half as far
from Oak Ridge, Tenn., to Charlotte,
N.C., as it is to Memphis.
This amendment will stop execution
of the proposed contract between the
Atomic Energy Commission, Southern
Corp. and MidSouth Utilities for power
for the Tennessee Valley Authority. It
will protect the Atomic Energy Com-
mission from any further similar in-
volvements without interfering with
the authority of that agency to meet its
own bona fide power needs.
The amendment does this by requir-
ing that the AEG limit its long-term
power contracts to contracts for power
to be delivered directly to the AEC
plants at Paducah, Oak Ridge, or
-------
324
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Portsmouth. The Dixon-Yates power
would not be so delivered, but would be
fed into the Tennessee Valley Author-
ity system as replacement power about
200 miles from Paducah.
Three of the five members of the
Atomic Energy Commission opposed
the proposed Dixon-Yates contract.
The embarrassing deal was imposed
upon them by the Budget Bureau. The
majority of the members who voted on
the matter have testified before the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
that they considered the deal unbusi-
nesslike and improper. They will be
taken out of the unfortunate position
that this improper executive depart-
ment order to two independent agencies
has placed them. There is no more au-
thority for the President to give orders
to the AEC and the Tennessee Valley
Authority than for him to order the
Interstate Commerce Commission to
grant a freight-rate increase, or the
Federal Power Commission or any
other independent agency to take ac-
tion contrary to the best judgment of
the Commission.
The President has been badly ad-
vised by some of his associates who are
intent, as many have charged, on re-
placing the valuable yardstick provided
by TVA for the cost of power to the
consumers.
The adoption of this simple amend-
ment will end the affair without deny-
ing the AEC any proper authority it
needs or interfering with its ability to
maintain its operations.
I have followed and contributed to
the many hours of debate on this
matter in the House and the Senate.
Despite a great maze of conflicting
statistics to prove and disprove the
financial soundness of the proposed
deal, its real nature is quite clear.
This Dixon-Yates deal was origi-
nated in the Budget Bureau Office last
December. Officials of the AEC have
testified that they were called over
there and asked to start looking for
replacement power for TVA.
Admiral Strauss told the joint com-
mittee that the AEC then called in the
Mid-South and Southern Co. which
he described as the two companies
that "surround" the TVA on the west.
Admiral Strauss' use of the word
"surround" was a very significant
thing. The power companies have been
talking about surrounding and quar-
antining the TVA yardstick for years.
Admiral Strauss must have been fa-
miliar with their strategy. He did not
say that the companies "adjoin" TVA,
or "border" TVA. He used a military
term which connotes battle strategy
and had been used on the power com-
pany side.
The Dixon-Yates deal was planned
in the Budget Bureau Office, placed in
the President's budget message and has
developed from there. It is an unfor-
tunate effort to use the Atomic Energy
Commission, with its enormous re-
sponsibilities for the security of this
Nation and the free world, to do a
chore for the private power companies.
It is a tragedy that the attention of
this great agency had to be diverted
from its constructive work to this un-
fortunate deal. It is unfortunate that
the morale of employees who believed
they were developing the greatest
source of energy in the history of man-
kind, had to be disrupted by this effort
to pervert the agency to carrying water
for the private power companies.
I very deeply and sincerely regret
that this matter developed to the point
that the Presidential instructions were
given to two independent agencies.
True friends of the President would
have advised him of the real extent of
his authorities. But the unfortunate
incident occurred. We can put an end
to it. We can stop it before it becomes
an historic celebrated cause that goes
down in history as characterizing an
era, or an administration.
I therefore urge that we adopt the
amendment and close this whole unfor-
tunate matter.
Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, the hour is late, but I
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
325
would like to say that in all my experi-
ence in the House of Representatives,
I have never attended a debate and dis-
cussion on an important matter where
such a large attendance has been main-
tained as we have gone along, and
where the debate has been on such a
high plane. Amendments have been
offered and discussed, and they have
been understood. Some have been ap-
proved and some have been voted
down. I think what we are doing here
in the way of action on this bill should
commend the House of Representatives
to the favorable consideration of the
people of America who sent us here.
Of course, there have been some evi-
dences of sharpness, but I trust that
this will not continue to be manifested
and that tomorrow we will continue to
be good friends.
Mr. Chairman, I have supported the
TVA in my time here. The TVA got
under way before I came to the Con-
gress. But during the nearly 20 years
I have been here I have voted for hun-
dreds of millions of dollars of appro-
priations for the TVA. I must say
that sometimes I had serious misgiv-
ings as to just exactly what I might be
doing to other sections of the country
that are required to compete in this
great market that is America with the
area of the TVA where undoubtedly
the boast of the people in that section
of the country about their cheap rates
has much to be said for it.
Mr. Chairman, I am fond of my
friends in Tennessee who are here in
the House as well as my friends in
Tennessee who are not here, but I do
want to say this to you. I think the
rest of us have been mighty generous
with you. We have given you a lot of
money and you have developed down
there a great project. It is true, it
starti d out as a water resource devel-
opme I. But after that, on occasion,
without my support, we have seen it go
from a water resource development to
a steam plant construction project. I
have sometimes thought that perhaps
you might be coming up on the Wabash
River, if you extended the periphery
of that project a little further. Of
course, we could set up a little TVA on
the Wabash. We would not need very
much power up there, but then we
could start firming up the power with
steam plants. And then we would vote
for a lot of power. We could say we
wanted a lot more. Let me tell you
folks in Tennessee not to ride a good
horse too hard because we want to go
along with the TVA. I have heard
some harsh things said about the Presi-
dent in some statements that have been
made.
I am afraid that your real concern is
not that the AEC is going into the elec-
tricity business. I am afraid that your
real concern is that possibly if this ar-
rangement can be worked out, and it is
a highly satisfactory arrangement, that
it may jeopardize in some measure your
demands for more and more steam
plants. The AEC buys power from
other private operations and uses that
power.
*****
[p. 11731]
The result of the vote was announced
as above recorded.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the passage of the bill.
Mr. COLE of New York. On that,
Mr. Speaker, I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken; and there
were—yeas 231 nays 154, answered
"present" 2, not voting 45, as follows:
[p. 12025]
-------
9526—EPA
326
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
l.lb(5)(b) July 13-27: Debated, amended, passed Senate, pp. 10368-
10370, 10484-10485, 10563-10565, 10800-10801, 10804-10806, 10837-
10842, 11527, 11553-11554, 11568, 11826, 12132-12133, 12174, 12242
REVISION OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY
ACT OF 1946
The Senate resumed the considera-
tion of the bill (S. 3690) to amend the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as
amended, and for other purposes.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, S. 3690, and its companion bill,
H. R. 9757, represents the first major
revision of the Atomic Energy Act of
1946. Heretofore amendments in the
nature of corrections or improvements
in the original legislation have been
adopted, but as time has gone on the
development of the atomic-energy pro-
gram has been such that, in the opinion
of the joint committee and of the
Atomic Energy Commission and of
public and private groups generally,
revision of the act of 1946 is desirable
and in fact essential in the national
interest. Indeed, the original act, as
passed in 1946, contemplated that such
changes from time to time would be
indicated as we learned more about the
program and as the practical uses for
atomic energy became increasingly
apparent.
The Atomic Energy Act of 1946 was
passed after months of study of the
problem by a special Senate committee
established under Senate Resolution
179 of the 79th Congress, second ses-
sion. At that time it was impossible to
evaluate the possibilities of the utiliza-
tion of atomic energy because of the
novelty of the development and the
lack of any experience in peacetime
uses.
Due to the fact that in 1946 the
proven practical use was almost en-
tirely in the field of weapons, although
the envisioned peacetime uses seemed
limitless, it was considered necessary
to establish, for the time being, a strict
Government monopoly and control over
the use and application of atomic
knowledge. At that time the United
States had exclusive possession of all
of the data that had been developed.
Other nations, notably Great Britain
and Canada, had through their scien-
tists made substantial contribution to
the development of this program, but
they did not possess all of the informa-
tion. Also at that time we were the
exclusive possessors of atomic weapons,
and we undertook not only a steward-
ship of the weapons, but also of the in-
formation on their production and
development as a force which could
maintain peace and prevent, for as long
a time as possible, any other nation
with predatory intentions from secur-
ing the know-how and threatening the
security of the world.
In the original act, as pointed out
above, it was contemplated our objec-
tives would eventually be to open up as
rapidly as possible the opportunities
for private initiative to develop peace-
time phases of this science, and that as
rapidly as possible the Government
monopoly, except in the weapon field,
would be abandoned and free enter-
prise in this country and abroad would
be given the opportunity to attack the
problems of peacetime development.
We did not retain our exclusive
knowledge in atomic energy for very
long. At no time did we assume that
no other nation would ever succeed in
making atomic weapons or in develop-
ing atomic knowledge independently,
but we learned all too soon that trai-
tors and spies had disclosed much of
our fundamental information to the
Kremlin which enabled Russian scien-
tists, with the essential cooperation of
German scientists who had been taken
to Russia after World War II, to make
atomic weapons several years earlier
than under their own independent
efforts.
In addition, British scientists and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
327
science, having contributed substan-
tially to our own development program,
were able to go forward with their own
program and make atomic weapons.
This, of course, is no surprise because
of the recognized high degree of com-
petence and development of British
scientists and British science. Canada,
while apparently electing not to ac-
centuate the weapon phase of atomic
energy, nevertheless has done impor-
tant work in research and development
pointed toward peacetime applications.
So that I may not be misunderstood,
I want to emphasize that while the
United States devoted vast amounts of
money and effort toward the develop-
ment of weapons, we have devoted a
very substantial portion of our effort
toward research and the development
of peacetime uses in the fields of biol-
ogy and medicine and industrial ap-
plications; in fact, many times the
effort in these fields of all other coun-
tries of the world put together. So,
again, I want to make it clear that our
military research and development has
not excluded the research and develop-
ment in the humanitarian and economic
fields.
We still possess vast superiority in
weapon power, in spite of the fact that
other nations can make atomic weap-
ons. By the same token there is no
doubt in my mind when I say that we
also are more advanced than any other
nation in the exploration and knowl-
edge of the peacetime possibilities of
atomic use.
So far as weapons are concerned, 8
years ago, they were considered to be
only strategic weapons, to be used at
long range and against limited stra-
tegic targets. Today, the concept has
altered substantially and while the
strategic use is still one of the most
important, the practical tactical use of
atomic weapons in support of the oper-
ation of ground forces is an important
part of our military plan. Indeed, to-
day we have atomic weapons of vary-
ing degrees of power and effect in our
arsenal, which are available for use
both tactically and strategically, and
we have developed the means for their
delivery.
Also 8 years ago the prospects of
useful atomic power for the production
of electricity in all of its varied uses
seemed to be very remote indeed. The
problems of military security and the
vast expense involved in experimenta-
tion then were practical deterrents for
private investment. Today, however,
the use of atomic power in the economy
of this country and in other countries
is much more clearly envisioned.
While competitive power probably will
not be a reality for a number of years,
even with the advanced knowledge
which we now possess, nevertheless, we
believe that the time has come when the
way to reduced costs has probably been
pointed out sufficiently to justify pri-
vate investment and experimentation
with reasonable chances—in fact, I
think I may be safe in saying with
practical certainty—that the genius of
private enterprise and free competition
can develop economically sound com-
petitive power plants much sooner than
was earlier considered possible.
The Joint Committee on Atomic En-
ergy has, as directed in the original act,
maintained constant studies of the en-
tire program. This committee has
unique powers and authority for ac-
cess to information and has assumed
a great responsibility to the other
Members of the Congress and to the
American people. This responsibility
has been accentuated because of the
essential secrecy involved in the pro-
gram. It has been my privilege, along
with the junior Senator from Colo-
rado [Mr. MILLIKIN], the senior Sen-
ator from Colorado [Mr. JOHNSON],
and the Senator from Georgia [Mr.
RUSSELL], to serve on this committee,
and on the special committee which re-
ported the original act, at all times
since late 1945. Representatives COLE
of New York, DURHAM, HINSHAW,
HOLIPIELD, VAN ZANDT, and PRICE
have likewise served continuously on
the joint committee since its creation.
-------
328
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
The other members of the joint com-
mittee have served for substantial
periods. I would be remiss in my state-
ment to the Congress if I did not say
that this committee has been free from
partisan political motivation in the dis-
charge of its responsibilities, and while
the partisan membership has altered
slightly from time to time, neverthe-
less, I can envision no situation where
unpartisanship and nonpartisanship
have been more in evidence than in the
8 years' history of the joint committee's
operations.
In this bill, S. 3690, and its compan-
ion bill, H. R. 9757, there are at the
present time certain areas of disagree-
ment which are set forth in the dis-
senting views of various members of
the committee. It no doubt is a prac-
tical impossibility to get complete
agreement on every sentence, para-
graph, and section of a bill of such
complexity as the Atomic Energy Act,
but I assure my colleagues that any
views of individual members are pre-
sented with the utmost impartiality so
far as any partisan influences may be
concerned, and they express their own
views as they see them in the broad
public interest.
With respect to the names of Mem-
bers of Congress who have served con-
tinuously on the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy, to which I made refer-
ence a moment ago, I wish to say that
while the distinguished senior Senator
from California [Mr. KNOWLAND] did
not enter the Senate until 2 or 3 months
after the committee began to function,
he has, nevertheless, served continu-
ously on the committee since he entered
the Senate, and so, for all practical
purposes, should be included in the list
of Members who have continuously
served on the joint committee.
[p. 10368]
Under all the circumstances and as a
result of the years of experience and
developing of information which has
come to the joint committee, the com-
mittee concluded last year that the time
had come when a comprehensive re-
vision of the basic Atomic Energy Act
should be undertaken. Accordingly
hearings were held throughout the lat-
ter part of last year and for over 3
months of this year. For many weeks
past the committee has taken the re-
sults of these hearings and its accumu-
lated information, and has worked
long and diligently in attempting to
perfect S. 3690 and H. R. 9757, the bill
which is before us today.
The basic aim of S. 3690 endeavors to
bring the Atomic Energy Act of 1946
into harmony with the realities of 1954.
It endeavors to keep our legislative
controls over atomic energy in step
with the changing problems our Nation
faces in this field—problems not only
in the realm of science and technology
but in the realm of economics and in-
ternational political relations as well.
It protects our vital military secrets
but it proposes to open the opportuni-
ties for peacetime uses to our own peo-
ple as well as to others.
The members of the joint committee
have not been alone in believing that a
revision of the organic law is now de-
sirable. On February 17, President
Eisenhower submitted to the Con-
gress a series of recommendations for
amending the Atomic Energy Act of
1946. His message said that the
changes proposed by the executive
branch had the "purpose of strengthen-
ing the defense and economy of the
United States and of the free world."
Toward this end, the President sought
to accomplish the following:
First, widened cooperation with our allies in
certain atomic energy matters;
Second, improved procedures for the control
and dissemination of atomic energy informa-
tion; and
Third, encouragement of broadened partici-
pation in the development of peacetime uses of
atomic energy in the United States.
The bill now before the Senate will
achieve these three objectives set forth
in the President's message. In addi-
tion, the bill is designed to effect an
overall modernization of the organic
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
329
law, changing it wherever the members
of the joint committee—who have been
in daily touch with our atomic program
since 1947—have concluded that revi-
sions would advantage our Nation.
In response to the first recommenda-
tion in the President's message—in-
creased cooperation with our allies in
certain atomic matters—the bill per-
mits such cooperation in both the
peacetime and military fields, under
carefully stipulated safeguards. On
the peacetime side, it authorizes the
negotiation of bilateral agreements for
cooperation. Under such agreements,
the Commission may transfer and ex-
change restricted data dealing with
nonmilitary uses of atomic energy
with other nations. The Commission
may likewise transfer atomic materials
in quantities needed for peacetime uses
to another nation which is party to
such an agreement for cooperation.
Furthermore, this legislation author-
izes the President to enter into inter-
national arrangements with a group of
nations toward the end of atomic co-
operation in the peacetime field, and
subsequently to cooperate with such a
group of nations pursuant to agree-
ments for cooperation. In this manner,
the bill would permit our Government
to join in a peacetime international
atomic pool plan, such as the President
described in his United Nations speech
last December 8.
In the area of military applications,
the legislation permits the Department
of Defense to give another nation, or a
regional defense organization to which
we are a party, sharply circumscribed
restricted data concerning the tactical
employment of atomic weapons. The
legislation would thereby permit more
realistic defense planning among the
NATO forces. This bill does not au-
thorize any exchange of information
which would reveal important data on
the design or fabrication of the nuclear
part of atomic weapons, nor does it per-
mit the disclosure of detailed engineer-
ing information on other sensitive
parts of our weapons.
I believe it is accurate to say that no
portion of S. 3690 has received—and
rightly so—closer committee attention
than thoss sections dealing with in-
ternational cooperation. Experience
teaches that whenever some particular
safeguard against the disclosure of
classified information to another na-
tion proves unnecessary, it can always
be relaxed. Contrariwise, the act of
surrendering exclusive control of some
item of information is final, and we
cannot call back these data, even if we
would subsequently wish to. As a re-
sult the joint committee has been cau-
tious in the extreme in its approach to
this portion of the bill, and it has
recommended carefully delineated
changes only in those instances where
the need and desirability for increased
international cooperation have ap-
peared clear and demonstrable.
In response to the second recommen-
dation of the President—improved
procedures for the control and dis-
semination of atomic information—S.
3690 incorporates a series of revisions
which, I believe, will increase the total
effectiveness of our program for safe-
guarding sensitive atomic data.
Presently, all personnel of the
Atomic Energy Commission or its con-
tractors who have access to restricted
data are given the same background
check as to their character, associa-
tions, and loyalty—whether such em-
ployees have access to large quantities
of extremely sensitive information, or
whether they require access to only a
small quantity of relatively insensitive
data. S. 3690 would permit the Atomic
Energy Commission to relate the scope
of background investigations to the
amount and sensitivity of the data
which an employee would receive while
on the job—thus allowing our investi-
gative agencies to concentrate their
efforts on the areas where extremely
painstaking checks are most vital.
Presently also, much restricted data
relates to the military utilization of
atomic weapons. Notwithstanding
this, the Atomic Energy Commission is
-------
330
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
responsible for the control of all re-
stricted data. S. 3690 gives the De-
partment of Defense a larger share of
responsibility in both safeguarding and
declassifying data which relates pri-
marily to the military utilization of
atomic weapons.
It is my conviction that the informa-
tion-control procedures recommended
in S. 3690 do not represent an actual
weakening of our security system. I
believe, in fact, that the very opposite
is true. By revising these procedures
in the light of 8 years of experience, S.
3690 should afford our Nation more ef-
fective guaranties against the disclo-
sure of sensitive data than it now
possesses.
In response to the third recommenda-
tion of the President—encouraging
broadened participation in the domestic
development of peacetime atomic en-
ergy—the pending bill authorizes pri-
vate persons to possess and use special
nuclear materials, and to own and op-
erate atomic reactors capable of pro-
ducing or utilizing such materials.
Title to such materials, however, would
be retained by the United States
Government.
Overall, the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion and its contractors have already
done a good job in pressing toward eco-
nomical atomic power. Indeed, it is
only because of their impressive
achievements that we can now look
forward to such power in the relatively
near future. But as the Atomic En-
ergy Commission has itself maintained,
research and development carried on
purely under governmental auspices
will no longer suffice to enable us to
achieve practical peacetime power at
the earliest possible date. Optimum
progress now requires that govern-
mental research and development,
using the public's money, be supple-
mented by private research and devel-
opment, using private money. S. 3690
would encourage such increased pri-
vate participation in the atomic power
field.
Realizing that relatively few com-
panies may participate in this effort
during the next few years, the joint
committee has exhaustively explored
the question of how to guard against
the dangers of restrictive patent prac-
tices. The majority of the committee
has recommended that, in the case of
all such patents which are applied for
during the next 5 years, the holders of
patents or inventions primarily re-
lated to peacetime uses of atomic en-
ergy be required to license such patents
to others in return for just compensa-
tion.
In making its recommendations on
the subject of peacetime power devel-
opment, the joint committee has been
keenly aware of its responsibility to
write legislation which will benefit all
the American people, and which will
not permit one group of Americans to
benefit unduly at the expense of the
rest of our national community. I sin-
cerely believe that the proposed legis-
lation will accomplish that purpose.
Taken in its entirety, S. 3690 is a
complicated and highly technical bill.
It is complex because the problems we
face in atomic energy are complex.
Notwithstanding that fact, the basic
philosophy which motivated the joint
[p. 10369]
committee in its consideration of the
proposed legislation is straightfor-
ward and easy to describe. Our guid-
ing principle has been this: Which
type of legislation will best promote
the security and the well-being of our
Republic? We do not expect every
Member of the Senate to agree with
every single provision of the pending
bill. During the course of our delibera-
tions on the bill, I believe that every
member of the joint committee at one
time yielded on some specific point or
another. Yet none of us has com-
promised on fundamentals, and I think
the fact that the committee has come
into substantial accord on the essen-
tials of the proposed legislation speaks
well for it.
S. 3690 does not pretend to represent
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
331
the final answer to the unfolding prob-
lems of atomic energy. Just as I be-
lieve the original Atomic Energy Act is
now in need of revision, so also would
the proposed legislation now before the
Senate require subsequent revision
from time to time.
I cannot close my remarks without
repeating the warning contained in the
report accompanying S. 3690. No leg-
islation, no matter how carefully
drafted, can itself guarantee our
Nation a flourishing atomic-energy
program. There is no legislative sub-
stitute for wise administration of our
atomic enterprise, for continuing sup-
port of the objectives of our program
in the Congress, and for an enlightened
public opinion in atomic matters.
Up to now, the elementary require-
ments of survival have forced our
Nation to concentrate on military ap-
plications of the atom. We must still
give top priority to strengthening our
atomic arsenal. Yet the time is now
at hand when we can prudently afford
to increase our work on beneficent ap-
plications of the atom, thereby bring-
ing closer the day when our countrymen
and like-minded peoples throughout the
world can realize the true promise of
atomic energy.
I know it is the deepest hope of every
Member of this body that the time will
come—even though perhaps only our
children, or their children, will live to
see it—in which the awesome force of
the split atom can and will be used
solely to elevate the dignity of man.
Mr. President, I further call the at-
tention of the Senate to the fact that
on last Friday the two volumes of the
hearings of the Joint Committee on this
subject were delivered to the Senate,
and copies were made available to each
Member of the Senate, together with
the report of the joint committee on
the bill and the dissenting views of
about, I think, four Members on var-
ious portions of the bill. That report
is on the desks of the Members of the
Senate. Both the hearings and the re-
port contain a great deal of informa-
tion, which may answer many questions
which may be in the minds of Senators.
As the debate proceeds, I hope that
either I or other Members of the Joint
Committee who may be present may be
able to give the answers to any ques-
tions which may occur to Senators con-
cerning the various provisions of the
bill.
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
UPTON in the chair). The Senator from
Arizona is recognized.
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President,
for the past several days I have listened
to a great deal of debate on the floor
of the Senate, and have had called to
my attention several news articles and
editorials in connection with the Presi-
dent's recent action in instructing the
Atomic Energy Commission to contract
with a group of privately financed elec-
tric companies for some 630,000 kilo-
watts of capacity.
I do not pose as an expert on electric
power system operations, nor have I
been a close student of the Tennessee
Valley Authority. I shall not take up
the time of the Senate by arguing the
relative merits of a contract with either
the privately financed utilities or TVA
for atomic energy power requirements,
and I shall not attempt to analyze
TVA's future power requirements. At
the same time, however, I am not at all
sure that those criticizing the Presi-
dent's action are power experts, either,
or that they have any first-hand knowl-
edge of TVA's future requirements.
There is one thing of which I am cer-
tain, though: The critics have made
many statements which I cannot accept
either as a businessman or as a Mem-
ber of the United States Senate inter-
ested in a sound administration
program.
At the outset, my mind goes back to
the election campaign of 1952, at which
time I told the people of my State of
Arizona that the question of States'
rights and private enterprise versus
Federal supremacy was one which was
-------
332
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
ultimately going to have to be resolved
by the citizens of this country in order
that we might ascertain the future
pattern of our National Government.
I do not believe that this issue is going
to be the all-important one in the cam-
paign of 1954, and I do not think that
it will necessarily be the overriding
question in the campaign of 1956. Yet,
sooner or later, Mr. President, this is-
sue is going to rise to its singular sig-
nificance, and the choice that is made
by the American people will determine
the future course of the great republi-
canJform of government which is ours.
At this point my mind goes back also
to several months ago, when this body
was considering proposed changes in
the National-Labor-Management Re-
lations Act. At that time, in speaking
here on the floor for a States rights
amendment to that law, I pointed out,
in effect, that the question of these
rights was of infinitely greater signi-
ficance than—and far transcendent to
—any considerations of the Taft-Hart-
ley law, as such.
I think, Mr. President, that, in this
present connection, the question of the
rights of free enterprise can also be
measured in a far broader sense than
as it is applied to the matter of public
versus private power alone. This ad-
ministration was elected on a pledge to
return to the States the rights which,
over 20 years of the New Deal and Fair
Deal administrations, were taken from
them by the grasping tentacles of an
all-powerful Federal Government.
This present administration's policy
relative to Federal power is to work
with the local interests and to assist
them in every way to meet their needs.
It is a policy of partnership and co-
operation.
Here, Mr. President, I am tempted to
digress once more, and to suggest that
the whole problem of power is one
which is literally "as big as all out-
doors," for it goes quite beyond the
material, man-made aspects of our
civilization, and concerns the qualities
of the universe which are God-given,
and which, therefore, must be treated
with the reverence which is always ac-
corded the Almighty.
Yet, there are those who argue that
because electric power is God-given, it
should be as free, as water and air are
free. Those who say that, do so just
because we cannot see electric power
and handle it and go down to the store
and buy it in a package; but they fail
to realize that, despite its essentially
celestial origin, it becomes, when it
reaches the practical life of a nation,
a manufactured product, just as much
as a can of beans on a shelf in a grocery
store. Electric power is manufactured
in a plant designed for that purpose,
and with equipment which is con-
structed and created by private enter-
prise ; and the power is delivered to the
consumer over copper wire, instead of
in a delivery van.
In the handling of any Divine qual-
ity, however, even the hand of man is
stayed by the recognition of the fact
that we cannot treat lightly or with
subversive intent the bountiful bless-
ings which God has bestowed upon us.
We cannot act toward them with mo-
tives and by means which are antago-
nistic to the methods and purposes of
God.
In accordance with this interpreta-
tion, therefore, it is unquestionably the
responsibility of the local people, the
individual citizens, the separate hu-
man beings whom God has created, to
provide this adequate power, and not
the manmade monstrosity of an all-su-
preme Federal Government. The Fed-
eral Government is at the very best a
necessary evil designed to stabilize the
goodness in man, and this explains
Thomas Jefferson's remark that "the
best government is the least govern-
ment." Indeed, all through the course
of our history the American people
have been guided by this principle, as
enunciated by Abraham Lincoln—
namely, that the Federal Government
should not attempt to do anything for
the individual citizens or for the States
which the individual citizens and the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
333
States can best do for themselves.
This is the principle which has been
set forth by this Republican adminis-
tration. This is the principle which
was spelled out time and time again by
President Eisenhower and other Re-
publican candidates. It is the principle
by which this administration must
stand, if it is to remain true to its own
convictions and if it is to keep faith
with the American people.
Mr. GORE. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Arizona yield?
Mr. GOLDWATER. I am glad to
yield.
[p. 10370]
Mr. ANDERSON. I again thank
the Senator, but I point out to him that
the production of special nuclear mate-
rial has very little relation to the man-
ufacture of an atomic bomb. I think
the Senator and I know where atomic
bombs are manufactured. He and I
know that in the place where they are
manufactured no special nuclear ma-
terial is produced.
Mr. President, if I may pass on to
section 102, it reads:
Whenever the Commission has made a finding
in writing that any type of utilization or pro-
duction facility has been sufficiently developed
to be of practical value for industrial or com-
mercial purposes, the Commission may there-
after issue licenses for such type of facility
pursuant to section 103.
The language of the provision
sounded all right, and probably is all
right, but it does suggest that, once the
Commission makes its findings, it can
issue licenses to produce nuclear
power. What is to stop the granting
of dozens of licenses thereafter? The
minimum requirement should be that
the Commission should hold hearings
and let the public know what the Com-
mission plans to do.
I do not say this should not have been
considered earlier, but it was called to
my attention when I received in the
mail for release in the morning news-
papers for Tuesday, July 13, an an-
nouncement by the Atomic Energy
Commission that "AEG and North
American Aviation will share the cost
of sodium graphite reactor experi-
ment." It says:
The first sodium-graphite reactor in the
United States will be developed and constructed
in a project sponsored jointly by the Atomic
Energy Commission. * * * The project, a new
step toward the development of atomic nuclear
power, will cost about $10 million.
I do not see how the public knew this
contract was going to be awarded, be-
cause I do not think any member of the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
knew it was going to be awarded. If
there is no chance that the members of
the joint committee will hear about
such contracts, I do not see how the
public will hear about them.
This is an important field. It seems
to me the reactor is a little small. It
may be that it is exactly the right size,
but it appears to me we ought to have
the fullest possible publicity in connec-
tion with the granting of the licenses.
While I am not trying to quarrel
with the provision of the section, I be-
[p. 10484]
lieve it would be wise, so far as it could
be done, to make provision so that the
greatest possible amount of public
good may result from the granting of
the licenses. If enough provisions to
safeguard that objective have been
written into the bill, I am satisfied. If
not, I think we ought to try our best
to write sufficient provisions into the
bill.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?
Mr. ANDERSON. I yield.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I call the
Senator's attention to the fact that
section 102 refers to the granting of
licenses, whereas the illustration of
the contract with North American to
which the Senator has just referred is
a matter of contract.
Mr. ANDERSON. I concede that.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. In the mat-
ter of licenses, I call the Senator's
-------
334
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
attention to chapter 16 of the bill,
which sets forth the provisions for
consideration of the licenses according
to standards of equity and fairness.
Under the Administrative Procedures
Act, notice is provided for. I believe
that if all the provisions are consid-
ered together, very ample protection is
provided against any secret or precipi-
tate deals.
Mr. ANDERSON. I appreciate the
suggestion of the able Senator from
Iowa; but now he has mentioned chap-
ter 16, which provides for judicial re-
view and administrative procedure.
Section 181 reads in part as follows:
SEC. 181. General: The provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act shall apply to
"agency action" of the Commission, as that
term is denned in the Administrative Proce-
dure Act.
And so forth. I read that, and I
thought it meant that the provisions of
the Administrative Procedure Act in
relation to hearings automatically be-
come effective in connection with the
granting of licenses by the Commission.
But, unfortunately, the Administra-
tive Procedure Act, when we read it—
and again I say I read it as a layman,
not as a lawyer—does not require a
hearing unless the basic legislation re-
quires a hearing. If the basic legisla-
tion does require a hearing, a hearing
is required by the Administrative Pro-
cedure Act. But in this case the basic
legislation does not require a hearing,
so the reference to the Administrative
Procedure Act seems to me to be an
idle one.
I merely am trying to say that I be-
lieve these things should be carefully
considered.
Mr. GORE. Mr. President, will the
Senator from New Mexico yield?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr.
BARRETT in the chair). Does the Sena-
tor from New Mexico yield to the Sena-
tor from Tennessee?
Mr. ANDERSON. I yield.
Mr. GORE. In whom is the discre-
tionary authority vested?
Mr. ANDERSON. In the Commis-
sion, I believe. As I have said, it may
be that I have misread the bill; it may
be that the bill requires a hearing. But
because I feel so strongly that nuclear
energy is probably the most important
thing we are dealing with in our indus-
trial life today, I wish to be sure that
the Commission has to do its business
out of doors, so to speak, where every-
one can see it.
Although I have no doubt about the
ability or integrity of the members of
the Commission, I simply wish to be
sure they have to move where every-
one can see every step they take; and if
they are to grant a license in this very
important field, where monopoly could
so easily be possible, I think a hearing
should be required and a formal record
should be made regarding all aspects,
including the public aspects.
Mr. GORE. Mr. President, will the
Senator from New Mexico yield further
to me?
Mr. ANDERSON. I yield.
Mr. GORE. What protection does
the bill provide, to preserve the integ-
rity and independence of the Commis-
sion? If the Commission reaches a for-
mal decision which it considers to be in
the public interest, is the committee
satisfied that the Commission could not
be overruled by means of a telephone
call from a member of the White House
staff or from some other source; or
does the Senator from New Mexico
think that under certain precedents re-
cently established, the Commission
might be in danger of being overruled
on the matters upon which it reached
a decision in public, as the Senator
from New Mexico has suggested?
Mr. ANDERSON. Of course, the
Senator from Tennessee is now refer-
ring to the Dixon-Yates contract and
the related matter.
Mr. GORE. I do not wish to hurry
the distinguished Senator from New
Mexico into a discussion of that sub-
ject; I know he will reach it in due
time. But inasmuch as so much power
is vested in the Commission, and inas-
much as the able Senator from New
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
335
Mexico has placed such great store
upon the decisions of the Commission
and upon the manner in which the
Commission will reach its decisions, I
believe it pertinent to inquire what
protection the bill throws around the
Commission, in which so much discre-
tionary authority is vested.
Mr. ANDERSON. I should like to
say to the Senator from Tennessee that
I thought the Commission was a com-
pletely independent body. The mem-
bers are nominated by the President
and are confirmed by the Senate, after
a hearing regarding their qualifications
and ability to perform their responsi-
bilities; and the members have com-
plete authority to transact the business
of the Commission.
I am somewhat disturbed by the
Dixon-Yates contract, but I hope it will
not constitute a precedent in regard to
what may happen in the future.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator from New Mex-
ico yield to me?
Mr. ANDERSON. I yield.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I wonder
whether the Senator from New Mexico
does not fee] that sufficient protection
is afforded in section 181 and in section
182-b. In that connection, I should
like to have the Senator from New-
Mexico refer to section 182—a, on page
85, beginning in line 9, from which I
now read, as follows:
Upon application, the Commission shall grant
a hearing to any party mate! Sally interested in
any "agency action."
So any party who was materially in-
terested would automatically be af-
forded a hearing, upon application for
one.
Then, in section 182-b this provision
is found:
b. The Commission shall not issue any license
for a utilization or production facility for the
generation of commercial power under section
103, until it has given notice in writing to such
regulatory agency as may have jurisdiction over
the rates and services of the proposed activity,
and until it has published notice of such applica-
tion once each week for 4 consecutive weeks in
the Federal Register, and until 4 weeks after
the last notice.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President, I
may say to the Senator from Iowa that
when in committee we discussed this
language, I thought it was sufficient. I
still think it ought to be sufficient. But
I do not find myself able to tie the Ad-
ministrative Procedure Act to this re-
quirement of the bill.
To return to section 181 and the
portion on page 85 reading—
Upon application, the Commission shall grant
a hearing to any party materially interested in
any "agency action"—
Let me say I think it is important to
tell who may be interested, and there-
fore the widest publicity is necessary.
For example, if the Commission were
going to grant a franchise to enable
someone to establish a new plant inside
the Chicago area, there might be many
persons who would be interested, but
they would not know that the matter
was under consideration. I am trying
to say that the people who are inter-
ested will not be reached unless ti.ey
are given notice. I say again to the
Senator from Iowa that nothing in
the section may need changing. I am
merely stating that, upon a second
reading, some doubts arise, and I won-
der what the section actually provides.
* •:• # * #
[p. 10485]
Mr. PA STORE. I hope we shall not
pursue the Dixon-Yates colloquy any
further. In conclusion in that connec-
tion, lest I be misunderstood, I answer
the question only in hypothetical fash-
ion. In my own personal experience I
have never found five more patriotic,
devoted, able, conscientious individuals
than the present 5 members of the
Atomic Energy Commission. I do not
know enough about the facts to justify
my standing here today and indicating
any person. I have found the members
of the Atomic Energy Commission to
be very honorable men. Possibly they
have disagreed with others. They have
a right to their viewpoint, as I have a
-------
336
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
right to mine. When we disagree we
stand up as honorable men and say so.
We state our position and are counted.
I wish to leave the RECORD on this
subject with the final statement that,
so far as I am concerned, we are in-
debted to the five men who presently
serve on the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion. I think they are patriotic, de-
voted Americans.
Mr. GORE. I concur in that state-
ment.
Mr. PASTORE. I now return to my
manuscript.
We, therefore, face this choice: Shall
we ask the American taxpayer to as-
sume the entire burden of financing
power research and development dur-
ing the pioneering years ahead, or
shall we attempt to create a legislative
environment in which private industry
will be willing to take up a share of
these development costs?
Speaking for myself, I find no diffi-
culty in answering these questions. To
me, the equitable solution lies in in-
viting private industry into atomic-
power development today in return
for the possibility of fair rewards
tomorrow.
Whether or not this bill becomes the
law of the land at the present time, I
would, myself, regard it as highly un-
likely that the task of developing
atomic power will remain a govern-
mental monopoly for an indefinite pe-
riod to come. This being the case, I
want free enterprise, under properly
controlled conditions, to assume its fair
share of atomic developmental costs to-
day. I respectfully suggest that now
is the time. I do not wish to deny
private participation in this field until
such time as profits are assured. In
fact, it is precisely because of my
solicitude for the taxpayers' dollars, it
is precisely because of my determina-
tion that there should be no atomic
giveaway, that I now urge the Senate
to permit private participation in
atomic power under the terms outlined
in the bill.
It is probably the case that, during
the immediate future, relatively few
companies would accept the invitation
offered by this legislation. Accord-
ingly we face the danger of restrictive
patent practices. However, the legis-
lation addresses itself to this possi-
bility, as I shall discuss fully during
the course of my remarks.
Having described the broad purpose
of the proposed legislation, I should
now like to direct attention to certain
provisions of the bill which I feel need
to be particularized. The bill, in its
declaration, states that "the develop-
ment, use, and control of atomic en-
ergy shall be directed so as to promote
world peace, improve the general wel-
fare, increase the standard of living,
and strengthen free competition in
private enterprise."
This declaration, in and of itself, is
not enough. Affirmative controls must
appear within the purview of the bill.
Therefore, section 105 provides that
nothing contained in the act, including
the provisions which vest title to all
special nuclear material in the United
States, shall relieve anyone from the
operation of the antitrust laws. The
Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, and the
Federal Trade Commission Act are
specifically enumerated. Under this
provision any future industry created
under the terms of the bill would be
subject to these laws on an equal basis
with the other industries of the United
States.
Indeed this section goes a step fur-
ther. Since it would be inconsistent
and dangerous for the Atomic Energy
Commission to grant a license permit-
ting certain atomic industrial activity
only to have the Justice Department
bring a subsequent action against that
industry under the antitrust statutes,
it is provided under sectfon 105-b that
precedent to the issuance of any indus-
trial license the Atomic Energy Com-
mission must notify the Attorney
General of the proposed license and
supply the pertinent surrounding facts
of the license application and issuance.
Before the expiration of 90 days, the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
337
Attorney General is required to advise
the Atomic Energy Commission if the
proposed issuance would create a situa-
tion inconsistent with the antitrust
laws. Obviously, the mere giving of
such advice would not estop or bar a
later action by the Attorney General
if monopolistic practice or restraint of
trade were later to arise.
But in fact, what this provision does
do is to lock the barn door before the
horse is stolen, and I might add that
these procedures are identical with
those contained in the Federal Prop-
erty and Administration Services Act.
And for the assurance of the members
of this body, I can say that the Justice
Department has testified before the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
that arrangements such as these are
adequate and workable.
Turning now to the subject of com-
pulsory licensing of patents, as pro-
vided in section 152 of the bill:
Originally the bill made no exception
as to our usual concept of patent
rights. But after considerable debate
it was deemed advisable by a vast
majority of the members of the Com-
mittee that a system of compulsory
licensing of patents should be inserted
in the law in order to avoid the possi-
bility that the purposes of the program
might be defeated if any patent holder
was determined to exclude others from
using his idea. For that reason, we
have written into the law a procedure
by which we prevent the few from
achieving a restrictive patent position
in this new field.
There are two compulsory licensing
mechanisms relating to patents under
the provisions of this section:
First. The Atomic Energy Commis-
sion can cause any atomic patent to be
declared affected with the public in-
terest and made subject thereafter to
compulsory licensing by legitimate
users.
Second. Even if the Atomic Energy
Commission fails to make such a decla-
ration, any lawful applicant can, on his
own initiative, petition the Atomic En-
ergy Commission for a compulsory li-
cense to the patent right of another
patentee.
This compulsory provision is not de-
signed solely to circumvent the prefer-
ence of the prior contractor. It was
conceived out of the knowledge that
this proposed atomic industry is new
and the national interest demands its
rapid growth. Such growth requires
the participation of as many individ-
uals and corporations as possible, and
the opportunity for a patent license is
[p. 10563]
added incentive to cause a multiplicity
of endeavor.
This compulsory licensing provision
affects every patent applied for or is.-
sued before September 1, 1959, and
lasts for the life of that patent.
Now turning to the subject of li-
censing of private activities in the
atomic industry, here again such ac-
tivities are regulated through two
mechanisms:
First. All title to special nuclear
material—the industrial fuel—will be
vested in the United States Govern-
ment, and the industrial participant
will be licensed to use it.
Second. Through a system of li-
censing, production and utilization
facilities will be permitted to operate.
Sections 53, 63, 103, and 104 provide
the adequate safeguards. These sec-
tions recite the statutory conditions
which must be met before licenses will
issue and which must be maintained
during the life of the license. Some of
these conditions are:
First. Facilities may be used only
in the interest of common defense and
security;
Second. Facilities must be used so
as to protect the health and safety of
the public and not damage personal
property;
Third. Special nuclear material is
available only on such terms that no
user or possessor can construct an
atomic weapon;
Fourth. No license is alienable ex-
-------
338
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
cept with the express consent of the
Commission.
In order to insure compliance with
all of the provisions in the act, and for
protecting the public and the national
interest, the Commission is authorized
to require licensees to keep records and
to make reports to the Commission.
AEC is authorized to make inspection
of a licensee's activities. As a matter
of fact, a very important statutory
program instituted by this bill is the
establishment of an Inspection Divi-
sion within the Commission as an aid
in seeing that all obligations of a li-
censee under this act are fulfilled.
I should now like to turn to the sec-
tions of the bill which are of vital im-
portance to our very existence and,
indeed, to the continuation of civiliza-
tion as we know it.
I refer to those portions of the bill
that have to do with atomic coopera-
tion with other nations, both in the
peacetime and in the military fields.
On February 17 of this year, Presi-
dent Eisenhower sent a message to the
Congress outlining cooperation with
other nations in the field of atomic
energy. The President states, in order
of importance, the following: "First,
increasing cooperation with our allies
in certain atomic energy matters."
I commend the President for his rec-
ognition of the fact that this is the day
of jets, rapid communication, atomic
bombs, and now the devastatingly de-
structive hydrogen bomb. I commend
him also for his recognition of the
priority which we must give the matter
of cooperation with our friends across
the seas.
I shall attempt to outline the prob-
lems of the bill, as it concerns interna-
tional cooperation, in three phases:
First. Does this bill enable our
Government to deal cooperatively and
bilaterally with other nations in peace-
time atomic energy fields?
Second. Does this bill enable our
military to exchange with NATO, and
regional defense organizations, the in-
formation concerning atomic weapons
that is needed in our defense plans?
Third. Does this bill implement the
President's proposal of December 8,
for establishing an international
atomic pool?
On the first question, I should like to
point out that we are not alone in this
world in possessing atomic energy.
Neither are we alone in developing
peacetime atomic power. Twenty other
countries now have aggressive atomic
programs in being.
Let us examine what is perhaps the
most dramatic appeal of atomic en-
ergy to the people of the world. I refer
to the possibility of producing power
from the nonfossil fuel, uranium. We
all know that electrical power is essen-
tial to modern industry, both here and
abroad. Indeed, I might point out that
the Atomic Energy Commission, in
testifying before the Joint Committee,
stated that the expansion of power-
generating capacity to meet the de-
mands for electric power is mounting
rapidly—in fact, even more rapidly in
other countries than in the United
States.
The Atomic Energy Commission also
testified that Italy, Portugal, Greece,
Norway, Sweden, Finland, Algeria,
and Pakistan, can meet less than one-
half their present demand for power
from the fuel sources within their own
boundaries. Hydroelectric power is
also limited in many areas, and so
these power-poor nations of the world,
faced with the demands of industrial-
ization, can look now only to the field
of atomic energy for the power vital to
their well-being.
These nations know that our country
has spent vast sums on the atom, and
that this investment has served to pro-
tect all the free nations in their strug-
gle against atheistic communism. But
they also recognize that, concurrent
with this atomic military strength, the
United States has developed technolog-
ical and scientific information which
form the basis for the generation of
nuclear power. They, therefore, look
to us, the most powerful nation in
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
339
western civilization, to extend a help-
ing hand.
These considerations entered into the
committee's decision to create means
whereby the United States could assist
its friends in the development of peace-
time power, but they were not the only
considerations. The United States has
for the last 10 years received major
portions of its uranium from overseas
sources. This country owes a deep and
abiding debt of gratitude to these na-
tions, all of whom recognize that ura-
nium was vital to the protection of
freedom in the world. We have an
obligation to these nations—and par-
ticularly, to Belgium—that we should
begin now sending back information
and techniques which we have devel-
oped and which will help them develop
nuclear power in their countries.
In the main, the international provi-
sions of the bill, permitting bilateral
cooperation with other nations in the
peacetime development of atomic en-
ergy, are adequate and do permit us to
meet our legal and moral obligations.
Both the Atomic Energy Commission
and the Department of State have
testified to this fact, and I endorse
these provisions of the bill. In writing
the provision that enable this needed
cooperation—that is, section 144a—
the committee approached the problem
with judicious caution but with recog-
nition at the same time that flexibility
of action must be afforded those who
will implement the cooperation, The
section dealing with cooperation on
peacetime uses of atomic energy spe-
cifically limits the kinds of information
that may be communicated to another
nation. The section is limited to in-
formation concerning—
First. Refining, purification, and
subsequent treatment of source ma-
terial ;
Second. Reactor development;
Third. Production of special nuclear
material;
Fourth. Health and safety;
Fifth. Industrial and other appli-
cations of atomic energy for peaceful
purposes; and
Sixth. Research and development
relating to the foregoing. But the sec-
tion adds this provision:
No such coopeiation shall involve communica-
tion of restricted data relating to the design or
fabrication of atomic weapons.
Further, any information communi-
cated to another nation must be trans-
mitted pursuant to an agreement for
cooperation entered into in accordance
with section 123 of the bill. The con-
ditions surrounding any agreement for
cooperation include:
First. The terms, conditions, dura-
tion, nature, and scope of the coopera-
tion;
Second. A guaranty by the cooper-
ating party that security safeguards
and standards as set forth in the
agreement for cooperation will be
maintained;
Third. A guaranty by the cooperat-
ing party that any material to be
transferred pursuant to any such
agreement will not be used for atomic
weapons, or for research on or develop-
ment of atomic weapons, or for any
other military purpose; and
Fourth. A guaranty by the cooper-
ating party that any material or any
restricted data to be transferred pur-
suant to the agreement for cooperation
will not be transferred to unauthorized
persons or beyond the jurisdiction of
the cooperating party, except as speci-
fied in the agreement.
The procedure that any such agree-
ment for cooperation must take is:
First. It must be approved by the
Commission, or, in the case of the
transfer of restricted data for the
development of military plans pursu-
ant to section 144b., the Department of
Defense.
Second. The President must ap-
prove the agreement for cooperation.
He must also make a determination in
[p. 10564]
writing that the performance of the
agreement for cooperation will pro-
mote and will not constitute an unrea-
-------
340
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
sonable risk to the common defense and
security.
Third. The proposed agreement for
cooperation, together with the Presi-
dential approval and determination
must lie before the Joint Committee
for 30 days while Congress is in
session.
Insofar as bilateral agreements with
another nation are concerned—and I
am limiting this observation to bilat-
eral agreements—the provisions of this
section provide adequate safeguards to
the security and cooperation in the
peacetime fields for the benefit of our
allies. Later I shall discuss the sub-
ject of dealing with a group of nations.
On the question of the second prob-
lem with which this bill deals in the
international area. Does it enable
our military to exchange with NATO
and regional defense organizations to
which we are a party information con-
cerning atomic weapons that is needed
in our defense plans? My answer is in
the affirmative.
The bill before us will permit the
Department of Defense, under compre-
hensive and rigorous security safe-
guards, to transfer to a regional
defense organization of which we are a
member, such as NATO, or to another
nation, restricted data involved in the
tactical use of atomic weapons. The
information which is permitted to be
exchanged must be necessary to the de-
velopment of defense plans, the train-
ing of personnel in the employment of
and defense against atomic weapons,
and the evaluation of the capabilities
of potential enemies in the employment
of atomic weapons against us. I
should like briefly to point out why
this exchange of information on weap-
ons is necessary. Let me direct atten-
tion to the report of the joint
committee, on page 2, where it
declared:
When the organic law was enacted, atomic
bombs were regarded by most as strategic
weapons. Tactical applications of the military
atom were but dimly perceived. Still less was
it recognized that the time would soon come
when tactical atomic weapons could profoundly,
perhaps even decisively, affect the operations of
the ground forces defending Western Europe.
With our Nation the sole possessor of atomic
weapons, and with these weapons husbanded
for a strategic counterblow against an aggres-
sor, there was no need for acquainting friendly
nations with information concerning the effects
and military employment of tactical atomic
weapons. Today, however, we are engaged with
our allies in a common endeavor, involving
common planning and combined forces, to dam
the tide of Red military power and prevent it
from engulfing free Europe.
America's preponderance in atomic weapons
can offset the numerical superiority of the Com-
munist forces, and serve emphatic notice on the
Soviet dictators that any attempt to occupy free
Europe or to push further anywhere into the
free world, would be foredoomed to failure. Yet,
so long as our law prohibits us fiom giving our
partners in these joint efforts for common
defense such atomic information as is required
for realistic military planning, our own national
secuiity suffers.
There, in a nutshell, is the reason
why we must cooperate in the field of
military application with our allies.
The joint committee did not approach
this subject with casualness. Much
time, both in public and executive hear-
ings, was devoted to the defense of the
necessity for such exchange. After
hearing the testimony of the Undersec-
retary of Defense, of the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Rad-
ford, and of other high military offi-
cials, the Committee decided that it
would be vital to hear firsthand the
remarks of General Gruenther.
Through his able and distinguished
representative and deputy, General
Schuyler, the committee was informed
fully of the defense planning for Eu-
rope which General Gruenther is so
ably conducting. Let me quote briefly
from the remarks of General Schuyler,
and if I ever commended anything of
importance to the attention of the
Members of the Senate, I recommend
and commend the statement made by
General Schuyler, from which I now
quote:
We consider that, in any future major con-
flict, nuclear weapons will be used both in the
strategic and in the tactical role. The advent of
these weapons provides both sides with tremen-
dous destructive power on D-day. Hence, no
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
341
longer, as has been the case in most wars of the
past, can we expect a short breathing space
after the initial aggression, while both sides
complete their full war mobilization. In fact
the aggressor's opening atomic campaign con-
ceivably might, if not adequately countered, it-
self prove to be decisive in a matter of days.
The very existence of a large atomic threal
against us obliges us to plan, ourselves, on
utilizing atomic weapons and requires that we
adapt our military machine to these conditions.
During the first 2 years of NATO, our plans
for the defense of Western Europe were based
largely upon the use of conventional weapons.
We made every effort to obtain from the various
NATO nations the level of forces which we felt
would be requisite to an adequate conventional
defense. As you know, existing circumstances
have made it impossible for those countries,
including the United States, to meet the laige
force requirements which this approach called
for.
General Schuyler clearly pointed
out the role of atomic weapons in the
defense of the free world.
It must be clear to all of us that nu-
clear weapons will, and should, be used
in the defense of Western Europe in a
future major war. The alternatives
would be: Either not to defend West-
ern Europe at all, or to accept the
great risk of sacrificing a large portion
of our admittedly insufficient conven-
tional forces in what might well be
a futile attempt to prevent the over-
running of our NATO allies and the
destruction of Western European
civilization.
Since we expect nuclear weapons to
be used by both sides in Europe in any
future war we need to make additional
progress in the matter of closely inte-
grating the strategy, tactics, and tech-
niques of utilizing atomic weapons in
close support of conventional air-
ground operations.
General Schuyler also pointed out to
the committee:
We at SHAPE are giving this matter oui
earnest attention. As you know, we have had
organized for some time under United States
auspices, courses of instruction for selected
allied personnel who hold key command and
staff jobs in the NATO complex. We have also
prepared, in draft form, ready for issue within
the next few days, a directive covering in some
detail the planning and operational lesponsi-
bihties of all commanders, both ground and air,
for the employment of nuclear weapons. But
thus far, in our school instruction, in our field
training and in our war planning, we are se-
riously impeded by United States policy restric-
tions concerning release of atomic information.
I add this rejoinder: How foolish can
we get?
These compelling reasons presented
by General Schuyler and which repre-
sented the views of the Defense De-
partment, National Security Council,
Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the President
were, to members of the committee,
compelling, and we therefore were
moved to amend the act, so that the
information needed to meet these pur-
poses will be made available to our
allies.
Let me turn now to section 144b of
the bill, which concerns itself with this
matter. This section permits coopera-
tion with a nation or regional defense
organization with respect to restricted
data that is necessary to, first, the de-
velopment of defense plants. Who
could quarrel with that? Second, the
training of personnel in the employ-
ment of and defense against atomic
weapons. Again, who could quarrel
with that? Third, the evaluation of
the capabilities of potential enemies in
the employment of atomic weapons.
Who, in the name of heaven, could
quarrel with that? The section, how-
ever, provides that no important in-
formation concerning the design or
fabrication of important parts of
atomic weapons can be so communi-
cated. There is the safeguard. It
limits such cooperation to the commu-
nication of restricted data in the above
three categories and states that it shall
not include communication of re-
stricted data relating to the design or
fabrication of atomic weapons except
with regard to the external character-
istics, including size, weight, and
shape, yields and effects, and systems
employed in the delivery or use thereof,
t not including—I emphasize this—
any data in these categories unless, in
;he joint judgment of the Atomic
Energy Commission and the Depart-
ment of Defense, such data will not
-------
342
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
reveal important information concern-
ing the design or fabrication of the
nuclear components of an atomic
weapon.
Fundamentally, what are we doing?
We are merely imparting or communi-
cating the data, which we must do, in
order properly to formulate our plans,
to train personnel, and to train our
allies in the means of protection
against aggression against us through
the use of atomic weapons hy an enemy.
Thus, the bill makes permissive the
kind of cooperation which would in-
clude the transfer of that information
which will permit our allies to partici-
pate in planning the defense of the free
world in any atomic attack from Rus-
sia, and to know the effects of any
weapons that will be available for use
by the United States in helping those
other nations join in defending the free
world against any such attack.
[p. 10565]
*****
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I shall have the two drafts in
perhaps 5 minutes. I am happy to
place them in the RECORD verbatim.
There has been no concealment or
attempt to conceal. The drafts were
sent to the committee as tentative rec-
ommendations for approaches to these
two phases of the problem by the
Atomic Energy Commission.
One draft, in the nature of a sepa-
rate bill, had to do with the interna-
tional exchange of information. The
other draft had to do with the develop-
ment of power and the opening of the
present law to experimentation, re-
search, and development by industry,
private and public.
Some substantial revisions of the
Atomic Energy Act have been indi-
cated for some time. The Joint Com-
mittee considered that it was the part
of wisdom to approach a comprehen-
sive review and correction of the
[p. 10800]
Atomic Energy Act, and approached
its work from that standpoint.
The general provisions and the gen-
eral policy and theory contained in the
two drafts sent to the Joint Committee
by the Atomic Energy Commission
have effectively been placed into the
bill which we are considering now. As
I have said, I shall, for the benefit of
the Senator, as quickly as the one I
sent there can get back from the office
of the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy, make available a copy of each
draft, which can be placed in the REC-
ORD at this point, following the Sen-
ator's remarks, or at any other point
desired.
*****
[p.- 10801]
Mr. MORSE. The Senator from
Iowa has demonstrated again the same
spirit of cooperation which he has ex-
tended to the Senator from Oregon in
the 9 years I have been a Member of
the Senate. I should like to say that,
so far as I am concerned, I know the
spirit has been mutual, because I have
sought to cooperate on the same basis
with the Senator from Iowa.
I do not know anything about the
two drafts. I simply wanted to have
them in the RECORD, if they existed, so
that they could speak for themselves,
and we could draw our own inferences
and conclusions in regard to them. I
thank the Senator from Iowa very
much for his cooperation.
BUILT-IN SUBSIDY FOR BIG BUSINESS
Discovering the subsidy offered pri-
vate industry in S. 3690 involves only
a basic understanding of the atomic
energy utilization process and a study
of the provisions of the bill with regard
to the use of special nuclear material
by private commercial operators.
Generation of electric power from
nuclear material follows the basic
process used in manufacturing atomic
weapons, and both operations utilize
the same nuclear fuel. In the manu-
facture of weapons, piles of nuclear
material are burned in an atomic reac-
tor to get plutonium ash. Great heat
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
343
is generated in the reaction process.
Electric power is to be generated by
using that heat in steam plants. In
the military use of atomic energy, the
end product is plutonium ash, and by
the byproduct is electric energy cre-
ated by utilization of heat. Commer-
cial use of atomic energy looks to
power as the end product and pluto-
nium ash as the byproduct. Both oper-
ations create the precious plutonium
ash which is so valuable for use in our
national defense program.
Section 2 (h) of the atomic energy
bill makes the finding that "it is essen-
tial to the common defense and secur-
ity of the United States that title to all
special nuclear material be in the
United States while such material is in
the United States."
The bill proposes that the Federal
Government shall relinquish its exclu-
sive ownership rights in facilities for
production or use of special nuclear
material, but retain ownership of the
material itself.
It necessarily follows that the Fed-
eral Government, which owns any nu-
clear material produced in privately
owned plants, cannot refuse to take
and pay for what is produced. I now
[p. 10804]
quote from the minority report of the
joint committee on S. 3690:
As a consequence, the incidents of private
and public ownership are intermingled in such
a way that not only may vexatious problems
of administration and accounting control arise,
but the private companies licensed for a maxi-
mum period of 40 years to own and operate
production facilities (atomic reactors) legally
can depend on the Government to compensate
them adequately for whatever they produce dur-
ing the lifetime of the license. This constitutes
a built-in subsidy for licensed atomic enterprise
until about the year A. D. 2000.
NO LOSS OF MATERIAL IN POWER PROCESS
Admiral Lewis Strauss, AEC Chair-
man, has stated that fissionable mate-
rial is not perishable. An AEC report
to the joint committee on June 2, 1954,
describes an atomic reactor now being
operated by the Commission which
"will also breed new fissionable mate-
rial, that is, produce as much as it
consumes or more."
The administration atomic energy
bill provides that the Government shall
purchase at a fair price any special
nuclear material that is produced, and
that it shall make a reasonable charge
for any special material which it dis-
tributes to licensees—Sections 52 and
53.
In determining a fair price to be
paid by the Government, the Commis-
sion is directed, in section 56 of the bill,
to "take into consideration the value of
the special material for its intended
use by the United States." The section
also provides that the Commission
"may give such weight to the actual
cost of producing that material as the
Commission finds to be equitable."
Section 53 of the bill lists the factors
to be taken into consideration by the
Commission in determining a reason-
able charge to be collected by the Gov-
ernment for nuclear material. With
respect to commercial licensees, the
Commission is directed to make uni-
form, nondiscriminatory charges for
the use of the material.
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
CRITICIZES BILL
A Federal Power Commission analy-
sis of the proposed legislation at the
request of the joint committee pointed
out the lack of legislative standards in
the bill and the bill's subsidy implica-
tions. Commenting upon the fair price
provision, the analysis stated:
There is not and probably never will be a
free market to provide a standard of what a
fair price would be * * * there is little, if
anything, in the legally established concepts of
utility regulation that can be deemed to pro-
vide meaning for the term "fair price." (Hear-
ings, pt. II, p. 1131.)
As a lawyer, I would say that a fair
price, in my judgment, would be much
less, if there were no restrictions con-
tained in the bill to prevent the Gov-
ernment as such from developing a
Government atomic-energy power
-------
344
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
plant program; in other words, if
there were not given to the private
utilities a monopoly which, in my judg-
ment, the bill gives to them. Then, of
course, the uranium product, or fission-
able product, which would go to the
private utilities under some lease ar-
rangement, would not bring, in my
judgment, nearly as much in value as
it would if there were provided a pub-
lic competitive yardstick under a pro-
gram in which the Government would
also develop electric power from this
process.
When we consider what the Govern-
ment would pay in return for the pluto-
nium ash, we realize we are dealing
with a piece of property which is bound
to be of tremendous value because of
its importance to the defense program.
And again, if there is given to the pri-
vate utilities the monopoly of the man-
ufacturing of that process, we would
have a hard time, in my judgment,
even if the decision were left to the
court, on the basis of judicial stand-
ards of determining value. It is worse
in this case because it is being left to
the Atomic Energy Commission. We
cannot disregard the fact that we
would pay an extremely high price for
the plutonium ash in comparison with
the lease price which would be charged
the utilities for the leasing of the ura-
nium, in the first instance, out of
which, in the long run, would be devel-
oped the plutonium ash.
I think that is a sleeper in the bill,
a catch we must watch out for, and we
must attack from two angles: first,
from the angle of seeing to it that the
bill is amended in such a way that the
Government will be able to do its own
power generating, particularly for
Government use and the use of public
bodies; and, second, in my judgment
we must write into the bill what the
Federal Power Commission says are
some very much needed standards of
valuation, rather than the very general
terms in the bill which are not even
identical when they come to deal with
fixing the value of the uranium, as
compared with fixing the value of the
plutonium ash.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator from Oregon
yield?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Lest a mis-
conception arise, I wish to call the at-
tention of the Senator from Oregon to
the fact that the bill does not give a
monopoly to private industry. Any
public or quasi-public body, utility dis-
trict, municipality, REA, the TVA, and
of such organizations, will have just as
much right to participate in this pro-
gram and to apply for, and receive,
licenses as will any private utility.
The bill so provides.
Mr. MORSE. Let me say that my
good friend, the Senator from Iowa,
was not here earlier this afternoon
when I discussed this phase of the bill.
I shall stand on the record I have made.
I think the language of the bill to
which the Senator from Iowa refers is
very empty, because of certain physical
facts which will confront us for the
next 10 years. No REA's or coopera-
tives or municipalities will, in the
present stage of the development of
atomic power, build a reactor.
What we must take pains to remem-
ber, Mr. President, is that in the build-
ing of the reactors, only so many of
them can be built in the country, and
the number is relatively small, because
if they are built large enough, and if
they are not large enough to begin
with, they will not be economically fea-
sible, either for the benefit of the Gov-
ernment or for a private utility, and
if only a certain number of them are
built across the country, there will
automatically be a monopoly. Fur-
thermore, the electric cooperatives and
municipalities do not now have the
funds that will be needed to build reac-
tors; and if licenses are given to a
private utility combine spotted
throughout the country by building
reactors in certain critical areas, we
might just as well forget about the
cooperatives or the municipalities ever
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
345
building a reactor 15 or 20 years from
now.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator from Oregon
yield?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
follow the Senator's line of reasoning,
because certainly the public or semi-
public groups and cooperatives are as
capable of going into this field in the
same way private capital is willing to
go into it and invest in it. The oppor-
tunity is provided in the bill.
Mr. MORSE. There are scores of
reasons why they will not do it now, at
the present stage of development of
atomic energy. Let us not forget that
a select group of private utilities have
been working on the development of
atomic energy from the beginning.
They have been engaged in the develop-
ment and acquiring the know-how, and
they are aware what the hidden poten-
tialities of atomic energy are; and in
view of the hidden subsidies provided
by this bill, they will be in a fine posi-
tion to grab off, right now, the desir-
able locations for the construction of
reactors, and in that way they will
obtain the subsidies. They will have
the advantages of a virtual monopoly
of patents.
Furthermore, the bill does not con-
tain provision for having any Federal
Government units develop power on a
commercial basis. In the bill Govern-
ment units are limited to the develop-
ment of power as a byproduct; and
when we come to the byproduct-power
section, we see some very interesting
restrictions on what they shall be able
to do with the byproduct power.
A part of the objection I am present-
ing this afternoon to the bill is that the
bill, as drafted, does not give effective
preference to public bodies. That is
why I believe it so essential to write
into the bill a provision giving the
Atomic Energy Commission and Fed-
eral power agencies the authority and
the right to build some plants, so as to
generate some power for the people,
and so as to sell some power under
preference provisions in line with gen-
eral power policy. That should be
done in order to have cheap power gen-
erated for the benefit of the people.
It is important to have included in
the bill a provision setting forth
clearly a public-power yardstick which
will have some meaning to it, by way
of a public-power program, through
the construction of atomic-energy reac-
tors owned by the people, as repre-
sented by their Federal Government.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator from Oregon
yield?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. No doubt
the Senator from Oregon is aware of
what I am about to say, but I should
like to call it to his attention again, at
[p. 10805]
this point, namely, that so far as pub-
lic and semipublic bodies and coopera-
tive bodies are concerned, in respect to
the power field, the TVA has an ex-
tensive study and experimental pro-
gram in connection with this matter;
and the REA's are studying the matter,
and have a program in regard to the
possibilities of atomic-power develop-
ment, through their connection with
Fairbanks-Morse. So the cooperative
groups and the REA's are interested in
it and are exploring it, just as the pri-
vately owned utilities are; and the
TVA has its segment investigating and
looking into and canvassing the possi-
bilities of atomic-power development.
So I believe it is not exclusively—
even at the present time—in the hands
of the private utilities, insofar as ex-
amination and exploration of this field
are concerned.
Again I assure the Senate that I
have no fear that the bill will exclude
the other bodies and groups in the field
of atomic energy, from proper exploi-
tation of it.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I offer a
very simple test to settle the disagree-
ment between the Senator from Iowa
-------
346
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
and myself. The very simple language
we shall vote upon, possibly next week,
contained in the Johnson and Gillette
amendments to the bill, will, if incor-
porated in the bill, remove any doubt
as to whether the power will be devel-
oped, in part, for the benefit of all the
people, through guaranteeing a public-
power yardstick. Let us write into the
bill provisions which will authorize the
Atomic Energy Commission and Fed-
eral power agencies to develop some
Government-owned plants for the gen-
eration of power, as such, to be made
available to the people, as such. That
will constitute a check on monopoly,
and will make it possible for the
Atomic Energy Commission and other
Federal agencies, through that kind of
a Government plant, really to breathe
life and meaning into any public
preference.
If we really wish to check private
monopoly and if we really wish to have
a public-power yardstick of control
against them, then, first, the Senate
should adopt our amendments, provid-
ing that the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion and Federal power agencies shall
have authority and jurisdiction to
build some of these plants, too, and
market their power under the prefer-
ence clause.
Mr. President, at this time I wish to
say a few words about the Federal
Power Commission's criticisms of the
bill. A Federal Power Commission
analysis of the proposed legislation at
the request of the Joint Committee
pointed out the lack of legislative
standards in the bill and the bill's sub-
sidy implications. Commenting upon
the "fair price" provision, the analysis
stated:
There is not and probably never will be a
free market to provide a standard of what a
"fair price" would be * * * there is little, if
anything, in the legally established concepts of
utility regulation that can be deemed to provide
meaning for the term "fair price." (Hearings,
pt. II, p. 1131.)
The FPC also asked this question:
If persons are to be permitted to use the
energy resource resulting from the Govern-
ment's expenditure of billions of dollars on
atomic research and production, are they to
pay anything for that privilege?
Although licensees for development
of hydroelectric resources under the
Federal Power Act are required to pay
an annual license fee, S. 3690 makes
no provision requiring that private
persons making use of the atomic
energy resource pay for such use.
The FPC concluded:
For all the bill now provides, the AEC may
pay more for the ashes than it charges for the
fuel. If the Government is thus to subsidize the
electric utilities and other persons developing
atomic energy by paying operating costs in ad-
dition to giving them the license privilege with-
out charge, it would seem that Congress should
fix that policy—not attempt to pass the respon-
sibility to the AEC, the Review Board, the
courts, or anyone else.
I completely agree with that point of
view of the Federal Power Commis-
sion. If there are those who say, "It
is not a sound position for the Federal
Power Commission to take. It is mis-
interpreting the act and misjudging
its implication," I say it raises at least
a doubt. It raises at least a charge of
ambiguity in the bill, and it calls for
clarification.
TOO MUCH DISCRETION IN AEC
In my judgment the Atomic Energy
Commission is allowed an amazing
amount of discretion in the adminis-
tration bill with regard to receipts and
disbursements of the taxpayers' money.
The provisions of the bill leave wide
open the possibility that the Govern-
ment may buy back nuclear material
for a higher price than it charges when
it distributes it, especially in view of
the provision which allows the private
producer's operating costs to be con-
sidered in making up the fair price to
be paid. The Commission may very
well set a low price to the licensees for
unprocessed material and pay a high
price for plutonium ash. This would
be a windfall for the utility companies
operating the plants who would al-
ready be making huge profits from the
sale of power. Even if the fair price
and the reasonable charge were the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
347
same, the private operator would be
making his profits on the nuclear
material if he had a breeder reactor
which produced more material than it
burned.
The built-in subsidy feature in S.
3690 would give to the private operator
who had already been given the right
to exploit a $12-billion investment of
the people without even the payment
of a license fee, the assurance that his
operation would be without expense
and that he could probably make a
profit from the operation even if he
never sold a kilowatt of power. It is
no wonder that the giants of industry
are eager to get in on the atomic
energy program.
The social implications of adoption
of this kind of legislative proposal
were discussed by Edward R. Murrow
in his broadcast of June 7, 1954. I
quote from the text of the Murrow
broadcast:
But more interesting—and surely more sig-
nificant—is another issue raised by the Com-
mission in its report to Congress. This has
to do with the development of atomic energy
for peaceful purposes. The Commission rec-
ommends that private industry take this over
from the Government. This is what the report
says: "Obtaining full participation of the
Nation's electrical energy producers and equip-
ment manufacturers in the development and
production of nuclear power is, in our judg-
ment, the best way of securing the maximum
return on the public investment in this phase
of our atomic energy piogram."
Previously in the report the Commission had
said, in effect, that we aie a society of private
entei pi ise and should remain so. Nuclear
power, it said "should be produced and distrib-
uted by the private and public power s> stems
and not by the Commission." And that, it ar-
gued, would let nuclear power "confirm and
strengthen, rather than change, oui way of
life." But what the Commission pioposes may
itself be a change in our way of life. It is not
easy to find a name for the kind of society it
would pioduce. Obviously it would not be so-
cialism, for though the people put up the money
for atomic development and now own the process
and the plant, the profits under socialism, (if
there are profits) would go directly or indirectly
to the people. But just because something isn't
socialism it isn't automatically fiee or piivate
enterprise. In free enteiprise the capital is put
up by private persons—at a risk-—and that is
what entitles them to the profits they make.
Obviously it wouldn't be free or private enter-
prise to collect the equivalent of $75 from every
person in the United States for nuclear develop-
ment, which is what the Government has done.
This is public money and the discovery and the
industry now belong to the public. Of course,
if private industry "buys its way in," and the
public is reimbursed for its capital outlay, that
could end up as private enterprise. But the
AEC doesn't suggest this should happen. And
nothing is being said about it so far in Congress*
It just isn't explained how the public property
is to become private property. I should men-
tion that giving public property to private per-
sons, or selling it at nominal cost, is not
necessarily leprehensible. It was worthily
done by Abraham Lincoln in the Homestead
Act, for example. But it is not the same to give
away a whole range of new knowledge and a
vast equipment that have cost the public an
outlay of $12 billion. This is not said to object
to atomic energy for peaceful purposes becom-
ing a function of private enterprise. Most
Americans will agree that this is a valid objec-
tive. But one is entitled to know just how this
public property is to become private property.
And we may need a new name for the kind of
society we might become.
Murrow went on to say, in this excel-
lent broadcast:
As I said, it isn't socialism, but it also isn't
pure private enterprise. If one assumes that
neither the administration nor Congress wants
to ai range simply a gigantic handout of the
public propeity, what do they have in mind?
It is not a mixed economy, even though the
proposal is that the Government stop making
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and go on
making it for defense. For it is not charater-
istic of a mixed economy to turn over publicly
financed and operated functions to private per-
sons. Another name foi the proposal may be
subsidy. Letting private industry benefit from
the nearly four billions it cost simply to develop
nuclear energy and use pai t of the public's
plant and equipment, would be one of the most
sensational subsidies of all time. Must we learn
to call our foi m of society in the atomic era
"subsidized free enterpiise?" One should hope
not. It sounds like doubletalk. To quote again
from the AEC report, the aim is "securing the
maximum return on the public investment."
But the maximum return to whom? Is it to the
public which put up the capital? Or is it to pri-
vate corporations? These questions are worth
thinking about.
[p. 10806]
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Let me call
attention to section 31 of the pending
bill, in chapter 4, the research chapter.
Section 31 is entitled "Research Assist-
-------
348
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
ance," and in it the Senator will find
that—
a. The Commission is directed to exercise its
powers in such manner as to insure the con-
tinued conduct of research and development
activities in the fields specified below, by pri-
vate or public institutions or persons, and to
assist in the acquisition of an ever-expanding
fund of theoretical and practical knowledge in
such fields. To this end the Commission is
authorized and directed to make arrangements
(including contracts, agreements, and loans)
for the conduct of research and development
activities relating to—
(1) nuclear processes;
(2) the theory and production of atomic
energy, including processes, materials, and
devices related to such production;
(3) utilization of special nuclear material
and radioactive material for medical, biologi-
cal, agricultural, health, or military puiposes:
(4) —
And this is the important item—
utilization of special nuclear material and
radioactive material and processes entailed in
the production of such mateiial foi all othei
purposes, including industrial uses.
Mr. ANDERSON. That is, again,
with reference to the byproduct use.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
so interpret it.
Mr. ANDERSON. The language of
paragraph (4) is, in part, "entailed in
the production of such material"—that
is, nuclear-energy material—"for all
other purposes."
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes; "for
all other purposes, including industrial
uses."
Mr. ANDERSON. But it has to be
tied to the production of this material.
It has to be a byproduct use, or at least
the language might be so read.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I would
refer the Senator from New Mexico to
the word "utilization," the first word
of paragraph (4) of section 31. The
reference is to the utilization of these
materials, including industrial uses—
that is to say, as I view the matter, the
Commission is authorized to join in and
cooperate for industrial uses.
Mr. AIKEN. Does the Senator in-
terpret the provision for "the produc-
tion of such materials for all other
purposes, including industrial uses" to
mean that it might be necessary to
produce on a large scale? Otherwise,
it would hardly be possible to ascertain
the real value of atomic energy for
industrial uses."
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Will the
Senator from Vermont repeat the
question, please?
Mr. AIKEN. Would the Senator
from Iowa interpret paragraph (4),
which relates to the "utilization of spe-
cial nuclear material and radioactive
material and processes entailed in the
production of such material for all
other purposes, including industrial
uses" to mean that it might be neces-
sary to produce on a large scale, in
order to determine the possibilities for
industrial uses?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. It might
well be interpreted that way.
Mr. AIKEN. With the explanation
given by the Senator from Iowa, who
is in charge of the bill on the floor, I
should think that we might be building
up a record which would, partly at
least, meet the objections which have
been raised by the Senator from
Mexico.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I wish to
call attention to section 32, which I
believe we should discuss in connection
with this matter, because it is a part of
it.
Mr. ANDERSON. First, Madam
President, let me interrupt for a sec-
ond, if I may, to say to the Senator
from Vermont that is the reason why
I have not submitted an amendment to
section 44. I had hoped the discussion
which the able Senator from Iowa and
I had the first time I spoke on the bill
would be a starting point, and that we
might subsequently develop it suffi-
ciently far to constitute a legislative
history and to make it possible for
the Commission to do what I think it
should do.
Again I say to the Senator from
Iowa that the suggestion of the Sena-
tor from Connecticut [Mr. BUSH] is
along the line of my thinking. I would
not wish to see the Commission rush
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
349
blindly into spending $300 million or
$400 million on a large plant without
coming to Congress again. But ]
should like to have it looking in that
direction.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I think the
discussion is helpful and will bring out
some desirable ideas. The Senator
from New Mexico is as familiar with
this phase of the subject as I am. But
it is the general theory—expressed in
section 31, as well as in section 32 and
other experimental and development
sections of the bill—which lays the
basis for the 5-year reactor develop-
ment program. At this point in the
RECORD I should like to read the five
different types of activity which are
encompassed in the 5-year program.
The first was the pressurized water
reactor which I mentioned a moment
ago, and which eventually will cost
approximately $85 million, and is esti-
mated to be completed in 1957. That
is the one into which the Duquesne
Light and Power Co. is putting about
$35 million of its own money.
The Government will be putting up
about $50 million eventually. Mani-
festly, that will produce very high-cost
power. We know that it will not neces-
sarily be in the competitive field.
I assume that a part of the justifica-
tion for it is that it will produce a com-
paratively small amount—about 60,000
kilowatts, and that for experimental
purposes it can be fed into a larger sys-
tem, and that the high cost of that
small amount of power can be leveled
out or diluted in a much lower cost
system.
The second type of reactor is the
boiling-water reactor. That is es-
timated to cost somewhere around $17
million. It is an experimental reactor,
not designed to produce power to be fed
into powerlines, necessarily, but to
show what can be done with this type
of reactor. It is estimated that this
will be completed in 1956.
Then there is the sodium-graphite
reactor, upon which approximately $10
million is to be spent.
Mr. ANDERSON. Madam Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. The Commission
has a contract with North American
Aviation for the sodium-graphite type
of reactor, and that program is under-
way.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes.
Mr. ANDERSON. Again, the pro-
duction of power will be extremely
small. We know in advance that the
cost of that electricity will be so high
that it will have no practical value
whatever, except to prove or disprove
the theory behind it.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct. These reactors, with the
exception of the pressurized water re-
actor, on which the Duquesne Power
Co. is cooperating, are really in the na-
ture of experimental tools in the re-
actor field, using various types and
kinds of moderators. The sodium-
graphite reactor, it is estimated, will
be finished in 1955.
Then there is the homogeneous re-
actor, which, it is estimated, will be fin-
ished sometime between 1956 and 1958,
at a cost of approximately $47 million.
There is also the fast-breeder reactor,
which, it is estimated, will cost approx-
imately $40 million, and will be finished
in 1958.
That is the general 5-year program,
but these arc in the nature of experi-
mental reactors. I take the position—
and I think the Congress contemplates
—that if the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion elects eventually to construct a
large-scale producing reactor which
.vould cost $250 million, the Commis-
sion ought to lay the program before
;he joint committee and ought to be
[p. 10837]
authorized by the Congress to enter
upon such a very substantial program
of commercial production. If the Con-
ress authorizes that kind of policy,
,hat is all right.
However, the main job of the Atomic
Energy Commission is still to look
-------
350
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
after the security of the United States
and the production of weapons. That
is no more important, perhaps, than
humanitarian or industrial activities,
but still the national security is very
important, and at this moment the mis-
sion of the Atomic Energy Commission
is to take care of the national security.
But almost of equal importance, so far
as the urgency of the situation is con-
cerned, is the industrial and humani-
tarian aspect. Nevertheless, I do not
think there is any more reason for the
Atomic Energy Commission to go into
the commercial production of power
at this time than there is for the De-
partment of Agriculture to go into the
commercial production of fertilizer.
Mr. ANDERSON. Madam Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. I wish to say
here, in order that it may be in the
RECORD, that in my judgment perhaps
the best way to promote the security of
the United States may be by the rapid
development of peacetime uses of
atomic energy, so that we can offer
something to the people of the world
other than the ability to blow them to
pieces. The British seem to be push-
ing ahead of us in this field. Very
likely the Russians are ahead of us in
this field. Does our country want to
go into southeast Asat, where we are
now having trouble, and say, "We
Americans would like to bring you a
bomb that will shatter you tomorrow,
whereas some other Nation may bring
you a new source of power, the peace-
ful utilization of atomic energy, which
will bring you peace and happiness."
I believe we can accomplish more good
by bringing them an instrument of
peace and happiness rather than an
instrument of destruction.
Mr. AIKEN. Madam President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. AIKEN. I assume from the re-
marks of the Senator from Iowa that
the wording of this bill would not per-
mit the Atomic Energy Commission to
construct a plant at a cost, we will say,
of a quarter of a billion dollars in
order to determine what the benefit to
our heavy industries might be from
the wholesale generation of electric
energy from atomic energy, even
though the Commission might justify
the proposal before the Appropriations
Committee, which it certainly would
have to do. If such a proposal were
brought up, it might involve weeks of
debate in both Houses of Congress.
The other day we passed the so-called
lease-purchase bill, which contains a
provision that no appropriation may
be made for the particular purpose
involved in that bill without authoriza-
tion from the Public Works Commit-
tee, I believe. Then the proposal
for a particular project could go to
the Appropriations Committee for an
appropriation.
If the Senator from Iowa feels that
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
should still keep its fingers tightly on
this program—and I presume it should
—could we not write into the pending
bill a provision which would permit
the appropriation to be made after
clearance had been received from the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
so as to avoid becoming involved in 2
or 3 months' debate upon the subject,
if it were decided that such a program
were desirable?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. There is no
question in my mind that the bill would
permit the Atomic Energy Commission
to build a half-billion-dollar plant if it
could get the money from the Appro-
priations Committee. The authoriza-
tion is in section 261.
Mr. AIKEN. That is the subject on
which I wish the Senator's opinion.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I read sec-
tion 261:
SEC. 261. There are hereby authorized to be
appiopriated such sums as may be necessary
and appropriate to carry out the provisions and
pui poses of this act except such as may be
necessaiy for acquisition or condemnation of
real property or for plant construction or ex-
pansion. The acts appropriating such sums
may appropiiate specified portions thereof to be
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
351
accounted for upon the certification of the Com-
mission only. Funds appropriated to the Com-
mission shall, if obligated by contract during
the fiscal year for which appropriated, remain
available for expenditure for 4 years following
the expiration of the fiscal year for which ap-
propriated.
Mr. ANDERSON. Madam Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. I think the Sen-
ator from Iowa has served the purpose
which the Senator from Vermont had
in mind, and he certainly has served
the purpose I had in mind when he
stated that he believed it would be pos-
sible, under the language of the bill, to
do what was suggested. I have been
afraid that a point of order could be
raised in connection 'with an appro-
priation item of that kind, on the
ground that it was not authorized by
law, and that Congress had never au-
thorized the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion to go into the business of
generating power.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I should
like to clarify my statement.
Mr. ANDERSON. That is what I
want.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. If the
Atomic Energy Commission were to
say, "We are going into the commer-
cial production of power for sale for
profit," that would be quite a different
thing from saying, "It is necessary, in
the expansion of this program, for us
to determine certain things. Theoreti-
cally a plant producing 200,000 kilo-
watts would be very efficient, and would
fit into our industrial system. There-
fore, we believe it is the duty of the
Atomic Energy Commission to con-
struct a 200,000-kilowatt plant for ex-
perimental purposes and for the deter-
mination of certain questions by a
process which private capital and pri-
vate groups simply cannot finance
under our system.''
I believe the bill would authorize
such an activity, and that the Com-
mission could proceed with such a
program if it could obtain an
appropriation.
Perhaps I am trying to draw a fine
line. I do not believe it is the con-
notation of the bill as a whole that the
Atomic Energy Commission shall go
into the commercial competitive power
field. It could go into the experimen-
tal field, the development field, as a
public service, if it could obtain the
money from the Congress by an ap-
propriation. I do not know what the
limit would be. I suppose there is no
practical limit, except the good sense
and judgment of the Appropriations
Committees, plus that of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy.
Mr. ANDERSON. I do not disagree
with the Senator in his last interpreta-
tion. I do not desire to have the
Atomic Energy Commission authorized
to engage in the production of com-
mercial power in order that it may sell
it in the competitive field for a profit.
That is not in my heart or mind at all,
because I think that might be bad.
However, I do want the Commission
to have enough money to build what-
ever plants may be necessary to dem-
onstrate practicability and cost.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That would
be up to the Appropriations Commit-
tees.
Mr. ANDERSON. Yes. Let me say
that throughout the entire atomic
energy program we have been playing
by ear. We have been improvising as
we have been going along. The recent
tests illustrated that as fully as any-
thing could. The fact is that we au-
thorized $2 billion for atomic research
before we even knew whether the atom
bomb would explode. The Congress
that did it was extremely wise. Of
course, if the bomb had failed to ex-
plode, every Member who had been
concerned with it would have been cri-
ticized for throwing money away on a
foolish venture.
We are building a plant in Ohio
which will cost considerably more than
a billion dollars, probably more than a
billion and a half dollars. I am not so
sure that we will need everything'
which will be in the plant when we get
-------
352
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
through building it, because it may
well be that by the time it is completed
a new process will have been developed,
which will make it more or less unim-
portant. However, it was wise to start
to build it, even if it should develop
that a subsequent process may prove
it to have been unneeded. We were in
such a situation that we had to have it.
We are building a plant on the
Savannah River, which was intended
for one purpose, although perhaps it
will be used for another purpose
eventually because of changing tech-
niques. In other words, its purpose
may change after we shall have spent
the money for it.
We threw away millions by rushing
the work. However, the public would
not have been satisfied if the work had
not been rushed. Therefore I believe
the Commission went ahead with it
very properly.
All I want to be able to be sure of is
that the Commission, if it decides to do
so, can take a little bigger chance than
the chances it is now taking.
The Duquesne Power & Light con-
tract has helped so far as it goes.
However, the very able Senator from
Iowa, who is very familiar with the
subject, has stated that it will be a
high-priced operation, because of its
[p. 10838]
limited size. He and I know that the
answer we will get will not be the final
answer. The question will be tenta-
tively answered for us if through the
experimental processes there will be
subsequently developed power at a
lower price. As was brought out in
the recent hearings, the Atomic En-
ergy Commission had to reactivate an
old plant which it had to throw into
operation, although its production cost
was 20 mills, whereas another plant
was producing current at 2 mills.
When we get to the point where we
are pressed for power, even if the AEC
has to build a reactor which will pro-
duce power at a cost of 20 mills, it
would not be a great violation to put it
into operation, if the erection of a sub-
stantially larger plant will make pos-
sible very cheap current all over the
country.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I think it
is essential that I read into the RECORD
section 32 of the bill, which I started to
read a short time ago. It clarifies the
matter. It should be borne in mind
that section 31 under paragraph (4)
refers to industrial uses. I did not
read section 31 into the RECORD. Sec-
tion 32, the subsequent section, says:
The Commission is authorized to conduct,
through its own facilities, activities and
studies of the types specified in section 31.
Section 31 refers to the industrial
uses and activities.
Mr. ANDERSON. Section 31 au-
thorizes the Commission to deal with
private institutions and foundations,
but section 32, dealing with research,
says that if the Commission does not
make that kind of deal, it can do the
work itself. I am afraid that para-
graph (4) may be a little limited in per-
mitting the Commission to go ahead in
building the type of plant I am talking
about. What I am trying to say is
that if the bill does carry language to
let the Commission do it, why not, as
the Senator from Michigan [Mr. FER-
GUSON] suggested, write into it lan-
guage which clearly provides that the
Atomic Energy Commission can build
a plant to develop electric energy for
that purpose and for no other purpose.
Mr. CASE. Madam President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor from Vermont has the floor.
Mr. AIKEN. I shall be glad to yield
if I can still hold the floor. I want to
say to the Senator from Iowa that I do
not want the United States Govern-
ment to go into the wholesale produc-
tion of power from atomic energy, to be
sold in the competitive field. I believe
that we ought to give the Atomic En-
ergy Commission authority to construct
a plant on such a scale that the benefit
of power derived from atomic energy
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
353
to heavy industry can be definitely
determined.
Mr. ANDERSON. That is all I
want.
Mr. AIKEN. As I understand, the
Senator from Iowa believes that after
the Atomic Energy Commission has
made justification before the Appro-
priations Committees, it could get the
funds for that purpose. I believe the
colloquy between the Senator from
Iowa and the Senator from New
Mexico has gone very far in clarifying
the situation in one mind at least, and
that is my mind, and of course, that is
quite important to me.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I wish to
make further clarification, because I
think it is probably very important
that the legislative history of the mat-
ter should be as complete as possible.
Section 261 of the bill reads as
follows:
There are hereby authorized to be appro-
priated such funds as may be necessaiv and
appropj late to cany out the provisions and pm-
poses of this act, except such as may be neces-
sary for acquisition and condemnation of real
property or for plant constuiction ol expansion.
That is not necessarily directed at
anything; except the general attitude of
the Appropriations Committees and
the other committees, that the agencies
of Government should not be given au-
thority to go and condemn property
and buy real estate without coming to
Congress with their programs.
The language is not directed neces-
sarily at the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion. It indicates the general policy
Congress has adopted and which is ap-
plicable to all Government agencies—
I should not say "all," because there
may be some exceptions—that depart-
ments and agencies cannot condemn
land and undertake massive major con-
struction without submitting the mat-
ter to Congress.
Mr. AIKEN. Section 261 would not
prohibit the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion from acquiring or condemning
real property to an extent adequate for
the construction of one experimental
plant of sufficient size to determine the
value of atomic-energy power to indus-
try, would it?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The pro-
posal for the acquisition of additional
real estate probably would have to
come before the joint committee for
authorization. This section was not
inserted for any special reason of sin-
gling out the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion. It is an attempt to follow the
general purposes expressed repeatedly
by Congress so far as agencies of the
Government are concerned; namely,
that such matters as the substantial
condemnation of land or a building
program should, from time to time, be
considered by Congress.
Mr. AIKEN. If the Atomic Energy
Commission could not acquire or con-
demn any real property, how could it
do anything on its own except through
contract with industry?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. As a mat-
ter of fact, at the present time the
Atomic Energy Commission, I believe,
owns ample property so that it could
build one of those plants on its own
property without any difficulty. If they
want to go into some other area of the
United States and construct property
of this kind there
Mr. ANDERSON. Madam Presi-
dent, will the Senator from Iowa yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. The Senator from
Iowa said he thought the Atomic En-
ergy Commission had plenty of prop-
erty. I think I would agree with him
that probably the first plant ought to
be built in connection with some other
plant, so that the energy might be uti-
lized by the other plant, and then,
thereafter the Commission might ac-
quire other property, because, ob-
viously, they might desire to operate at
some other place.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I think the
Senator will agree with me that we are
very much interested in the 5-year pro-
gram. I do not think the Commission
will program a $250-million plant until
it can get some answers from the pro-
-------
354
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
gram under which they are proceeding
and until the Appropriations Commit-
tee gives them the necessary money.
Of course, the answers will be those
resulting from the experimental
development.
Mr. CASE. Madam President, will
the Senator from Iowa yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
CONSTRUCTIVE USES OP ATOMIC ENERGY
Mr. CASE. I had not wanted to in-
terrupt the continuity of the debate,
which I consider to be very important
in connection with the legislative his-
tory of the bill. But I am a little dis-
turbed by the implications which I
think might follow this discussion as
the record now stands. I do not want
this bill to forbid actual production of
atomic power or to limit its production
to pure research. I want it to embrace
and authorize a practical demonstra-
tion production. I recall there was
considerable debate on that point in
connection with the authority given the
Tennessee Valley Authority to engage
in the production of phosphate
fertilizers.
So, I wish to second what the Sen-
ator from New Mexico [Mr. ANDER-
SON] has said about the importance of
our doing something clearly, definitely,
and purposefully in developing atomic
power for constructive purposes rather
than for destructive purposes.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. We are
doing a vast amount of that, more than
is all the rest of the world.
Mr. CASE. The Senator has proved
by his eagerness to interrupt, the point
I wished to make. I dare say that the
Senator from Iowa does not make a
speech in the State of Iowa on the sub-
ject of atomic energy without stressing
that point and without saying that
what the development of radioactive
isotopes means for medicine or for
human happiness surpasses in im-
portance what the development of
atomic energy has meant in a destruc-
tive way. The President himself, re-
cently, in making some comment upon
our atomic program, stressed the ben-
eficial results. It is extremely impor-
tant that before the bar of world public
opinion it be clearly shown that what
we seek is a constructive application in
this field. It is a rather paradoxical
thing that we want to prove the very
antithesis of what we seem to have
been doing. We are at a disadvantage
in the cold war in the Far East today
as a result of some of the unfortunate
experiences in experiments with the
H-bomb. We must correct that and
make clear our constructive and ben-
eficial aims.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is speaking now about what is prob-
ably the most overwhelming purpose of
the bill. The great burden of this bill
is to open atomic energy for peacetime
and humanitarian purposes. That is
probably the major segment of the bill.
[p. 10839]
That is the purpose for which the re-
vision is written.
Mr. CASE. That is fine, but I do not
want that purpose negatived or nulli-
fied by any provisions in the bill.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
think it is, at any place in the bill.
Mr. CASE. So, Mr. President, I
raise the specific question as to whether
by the language of section 261, section
32, and section 44, we have limited the
development of atomic energy for con-
structive purposes or not.
Section 261, to which the Senator has
referred, authorizes such appropria-
tions as may be necessary appropri-
ately to carry out the provisions and
purposes of the act.
Then when we go back to section 44
we find that what is permitted by the
act is the sale of by-product energy, not
its production as an original or pri-
mary purpose.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That sec-
tion refers only to energy which is pro-
duced, possibly, as an incident to
certain research and development ac-
tivities of the Commission. It is not
intended to go to the question of mass
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
355
production of energy at all. It simply
provides that if in the course of the
Commission's activities some energy is
produced which could be used, there is
no use in wasting it. In the construc-
tion of a building frequently material
is left which may be sold for whatever
amount of money can be obtained.
DEMONSTRATION AS WELL AS RESEARCH
Mr. CASE. That strengthens my
fear that in the development of elec-
tric energy, the Commission is limited
to research. Section 32 says that the
Commission is authorized to conduct,
through its own facilities, activities of
the type provided by section 31. Sec-
tion 31 in paragraph (4), provides for
research and development. The ques-
tion is what is covered or included by
those words.
During the hearings of the joint
committee on phosphate resources,
held in the summer of 1938, I recall
that at Knoxville, Tenn., the committee
found itself in the midst of a consider-
able debate as to whether the phos-
phate fertilizer sold by the TVA was
that which was produced in the course
of research or whether its production
was a commercial operation. There
was some contention that the TVA was
getting into commercial business. It
was the contention of Senator Norris
and the TVA authorities at the time,
however that the TVA Act authorized
the production of fertilizer for dem-
onstration purposes. As a part of that
demonstration program, fertilizer was
distributed to a number of counties in
Tennessee and other States where it
could be appropriately distributed,
with reasonable freight rates, to show
that it could be produced and delivered
at a price which farmers could afford
to pay. What I fear here—and I hope
I am wrong—is that the language
which the Senator has been citing
limits the Atomic Energy Commission
to a research program or a develop-
ment program in the nature of a lab-
oratory proposition, with not even a
pilot plant, much less commercial
development.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I should
like to read the language of section 11,
subparagraph (2). The Senator will
find it on page 8 of the act, beginning
with line 18:
q. The term "research and development"
means (1) theoretical analysis, exploration,
or experimentation; or (2) the extension of
investigative findings and theories of a scien-
tific or technical nature into practical applica-
tion for experimental and demonstration
purposes, including the experimental pioduc-
tion and testing of models, devices, equipment,
materials, and piocesses.
That is the technical definition of
"research and development."
Mr. CASE. Would the Senator from
Iowa interpret that definition to mean
that the Atomic Energy Commission
could build a plant of sufficient size to
determine whether or not the electrical
energy could be developed through the
application of atomic energy or fission-
able materials, in such a way as to be
commercially practicable?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. A moment
ago I answered the same question,
when propounded by the Senator from
New Mexico [Mr. ANDERSON] and the
Senator from Vermont [Mr. AIKEN].
The answer is: Yes, if the Atomic
Energy Commission could obtain the
money.
Mr. ANDERSON. Will the Senator
from Iowa permit me to ask if the part
of the report at the top of page 15
bothers him in any way. It refers to
section 44, and reads:
This section will permit the Commission to
dispose of that utilizable energy it produces in
the comse of its own operations, but does not
permit the Commission to enter the power-
pi oducing business without further congres-
sional authorization to construct or operate
such commeicial facilities.
I wonder if that language means that
the energy must be sold to someone
else, or does it prevent the Commission
from constructing a powerplant, as
such, for the development of power?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I think cer-
tainly there was no intent, so far as I
-------
356
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
know, to have section 44 apply to any
commercial activities at all. It does
not refer to that subject. The report
merely points out that section 44 is not
intended to authorize or permit such
action. The construction of large
scale plants for experimentation and
determination purposes, even though
they might cost hundreds of millions
of dollars, is authorized in other sec-
tions of the bill.
The Commission must obtain the
money for such construction; it must
prove its case in order to get the
money. It cannot go out, willy-nilly,
and build the plants.
Mr. President, I wish to say to the
Senator from South Dakota that the
term "research and development" does
not go to the question of the size of the
plant; it goes to the question of the
purpose. Size is immaterial. Other
things being equal, a billion kilowatt
plant could be built if the Commission
could get the money and if the plant
were for the establishment of a certain
purpose within the authority of the
Atomic Energy Commission. The
question of size is not involved; the
question involved is that of purpose.
Mr. CASE. I thank the distin-
guished Senator from Iowa. Refer-
ring again to the definitions contained
on page 8 of the bill, I note Uiat clause
(2) of subparagraph q. roads:
The tei m "leseaich and development" means
(1) theoretical analysis, exp'oi ation, 01 experi-
mentation—
That would not cover the point in
which I am interested; but clause (2)
might. The definition of "research and
development" continues:
or (2) the extension of investigative findings
and theories of a scientific 01 technical Tiatine
into practical application for experimental and
demonstration pui poses—
I have emphasized "and demonstra-
tion purposes"—
including the experimental production and test-
ing of models, devices, equipment, materials,
and processes.
I pose this question: Does the Sena-
tor from Iowa, who is in charge of the
bill, feel that the use of the words "and
demonstration purposes," taken in con-
nection with what he has previously
said, means that, whatever be the size
required to provide the practical ap-
plication for demonstration purposes,
the Commission can engage in what-
ever experiments are necessary in
order to demonstrate the practical
application?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I think the
answer is "Yes," if the Commission
could get the money from Congress
with which to do it.
POSSIBLE UTILIZATION OF PICKSTOWN
Mr. CASE. Then, I should like to
ask a more specific question. In my
State there is a great deal of interest in
the possible development of atomic en-
ergy and in the development of standby
electricity from fissionable materials to
firm up the so-called secondary or dump
power which will be generated on the
Missouri River. I call the Senator's
attention to the fact that a large part
of the hydroelectric power available in
that area represents so-called second-
ary power. The Oahe Dam, which is
the largest of the dams and manifestly
the largest of the reservoirs, has been
estimated by the Hoover Commission
to produce 52 percent of its energy in
the fo'-m of secondary rather than firm
power.
There has been considerable interest
in the State as to how that secondary
power might be firmed up. The sug-
gestion has been repeatedly made that
the firming up might well be provided
by an atomic energy plant. Does the
bill authorize the Commission to con-
sider that as a possibility and to pro-
vide a plant which would firm up the
secondary power of this hydroelectric
project?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I would say
no, that there is no authority to build
a plant for the sole purpose of firming
up power. I do not think that is a pur-
pose of the act. If the Congress au-
thorized the Commission to acquire
property in that area, that would be a
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
357
different question. As I pointed out
before, the Commission can not con-
demn property without authorization
of Congress.
Mr. CASE. Could the Commission
receive property transferred by an-
other agency of the Government?
[p. 10840]
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Probably it
could, if the Commission did not have
to pay anything for it. I would not
want to be too positive or dogmatic
about that statement.
I am informed by the Senator from
Vermont [Mr. AIKEN], who is very
well versed in such questions, that it
would take an act of Congress to en-
able one agency to acquire the property
of another.
Mr. CASE. Under the provisions of
the general act for the disposal of sur-
plus property, I suggest that another
agency might acquire such property. I
think that before the General Services
Administration sells property which is
considered to be in excess of the needs
of a particular agency, it can dispose
of it to another agency.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Perhaps
such property could be disposed of in I
that manner; 1 am noc sure. The point j
I wish to make is that if the production j
of atomic energy is demonstrated t,> b^ j
within reasonable economic soun-,iriesj j
on the basis of cost—and that is what
is being attempted to be demonstrated
by the 5-year program—and if the
Congress is convinced that the build-
ing of a substantial atomic energy
plant in a certain area to firm up the
power is desirable, and if Congress au-
thorizes the Commission to go ahead
with such a project, the Commission
could do so. However, the Atomic En-
ergy Commission is not primarily an
operating agency; it is a research and
development agency. It is not a com-
mercially operating agency any more
than is the Department of Agriculture.
Mr. CASE. The final question which
the junior Senator from South Dakota
is seeking to determine is whether or
not the Atomic Energy Commission
would have the authority, under the
provisions of the proposed act, to
receive from the Corps of Army Engi-
neers and to utilize a certain installa-
tion known as Pickstown, a body of
real estate on which there are build-
ings ranging all the way from houses
to hospitals and administrative office
facilities, which were built by the
Army engineers to house the engineers
and the workers engaged in the con-
struction of the Randall Dam. It hap-
pens that their work is practically
completed. I have been told by the
Chief of Army Engineers, General
Sturgis, that he has discussed with
representatives of the Atomic Energy
Commission the matter of transferring
such buildings and facilities to the
Atomic Energy Commission when such
property is declared excess to the needs
of the Army engineers. It has been
my thought that if those facilities were
transferred, without cost, to the
Atomic Energy Commission, under the
general law for the disposition of sur-
plus real estate or real property, the
Atomic Energy Commission might re-
ceive them and then, possessing them,
could there establish a practical dem-
onstration project, utilizing the abun-
dant water and hydroelectric energy
•which the Government itself owns.
The Government has built the Ran-
dall Darn. That has created a res-
ervoir which is now storing water and
which is now producing hydroelectric
power. The Government is in the
process of building a large backbone
transmission system which will link
together the hydroelectric power pro-
duced by the dams at Gavin's Point,
Randall Dam and Oahe Dam in South
Dakota, and at Garrison Dam, in
North Dakota. On that line there will
be in excess of 1 billion kilowatts of
generative capacity, but a large part
of the production will be secondary
power.
The question I seek to have an-
swered is, Can the Atomic Energy
Commission, under the provisions of
-------
358
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
this measure, receive that property at
Pickstown, land and buildings, when
it is excess to the needs of the Army
engineers, and use it as a basis of op-
erations for a practical demonstration
plant?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. In answer
to the Senator's question I may say
that I do not know. So far as this
measure is concerned, I know nothing
in it that will either prohibit or permit
it. I do not know—because I have not
looked into the question—what the
rights of the interrelated agencies, in-
cluding the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion, may be. I shall undertake to have
that matter looked into immediately, so
that I can get the answer for the Sena-
tor from South Dakota, if possible.
But I would hesitate to answer his
question now.
Mr. CASE. Would it be fair to as-
sume—on the basis of the Senator's
answer to the earlier question—that if
other law permits a transfer to the
Atomic Energy Commission of the real
property I have mentioned when it is
excess to the needs of the Army engi-
neers, once it is in the possession of the
Atomic Energy Commission, it would
be possible for the Commission to en-
gage in a demonstration project there,
under the conditions heretofore
recited?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor from South Dakota has asked a hy-
pothetical question, based upon certain
premises. I do not have the answer to
the question; but if the Atomic Energy
Commission is authorized to accept
that land or other convenient land in
that area and if the Commission de-
termines that it is essential or proper,
in the research and development field
of the Commission, to erect such a
plant, and if the Atomic Energy Com-
mission determines that that is a
proper place at which to conduct re-
search and development, and that a
plant of X kilowatts—several hundred
thousand kilowatts, or any figure the
Senator from South Dakota might
wish to use—would be required for
that purpose, then I would say that if
the Commission could obtain the funds
from the Appropriations Committees,
the Commission could build the plant.
Mr. CASE. Mr. President, I wish to
express appreciation to the Senator
from Iowa for the answer he has given
and for his offer to obtain a further
answer to the hypothetical part of the
question.
I wish to say for the RECORD that
here is a situation in which the Gov-
ernment has a tremendous amount of
electrical energy which it owns and
a tremendous volume of water which
it owns, both of which, as I under-
stand, are essential elements in the
development of a practical plant.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor from South Dakota understands,
does he not, that the Atomic Energy
Commission does practically nothing
on its own, except supervision and the
conducting of certain research and de-
velopment activities of a minor nature?
Mr. CASE. Yes, I understand that.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Com-
mission does almost all its activity
through contractors.
Mr. CASE. Yes; by contract.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes; the
Commission does most of its work
through contractors, and most of the
operation is through contractors.
Again, I wish to say that I do not be-
lieve either the original act or this bill
contemplates that the Atomic Energy
Commission will go into the commercial
production of atomic energy, as such.
It will go into the production of large
amounts of electricity only if it is es-
sential, in the demonstration in con-
nection with research and develop-
ment, to prove certain points or to
demonstrate the practicality of certain
things.
Mr. CASE. In review, may I make
clear that in addition to the water and
the power, the Government owns about
a $7 million plant there, in the form of
a town, with all kinds of administra-
tive facilities—housing, shops, schools,
chapel, and hospital. The Government
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
359
owns both the land and the buildings.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I under-
stand that.
Mr. CASE. I wanted to add that for
emphasis as I suspect that this col-
loquy will be studied in connection
with answering that question.
Mr. THYE. Mr. President, if the
Senator from Vermont will yield to me,
I should like to comment on the crl-
loquy which has taken place between
the Senator from South Dakota and
the Senator from Iowa.
I would say that, in the first in-
stance, property referred to by the
Senator from South Dakota would go
to General Services Administration.
I think the Senator from South Dakota
has raised a question which needs to
be explored, because here is physical
property which possibly could lend
itself to research in the atomic energy
field. Therefore, inasmuch as I rep-
resent in part an adjoining State
which would be one of the beneficiaries
if such a pilot plant or research plant
were developed in connection with
atomic energy, to firm up the hydro-
electric energy that is going into that
area, I would say that a bill should
be introduced in order to begin the
necessary study and discussion of the
matter. By means of the introduction
of such a bill, we would have the neces-
sary discussion and study of the ques-
tion, so that the properties would not
either be disposed of as surplus prop-
erty to be sold to the highest bidder, or
razed, for the purpose of clearing the
land and returning it to the State in
which it was located when it was ac-
quired, before the buildings were
installed.
So I am going to instruct the staff
of the Small Business Committee—
which already is making a study of a
[p. 10841]
possible research activity on the part
of the Atomic Energy Commission in
that field—to look into that matter. I
would be very happy to join the Sen-
ator from South Dakota in the intro-
duction of such a bill, in order to get
the question before the appropriate
congressional committees.
Mr. CASE. I certainly appreciate
the statement the Senator from Minne-
sota [Mr. THYE] has made. As usual,
he has a constructive suggestion to
make in connection with the discussion.
I may say I think possibly I should
obtain the answer the Senator from
Iowa suggested he would get, because
it is my understanding that if prop-
erty is declared to be excess to the
needs of any Federal agency it goes to
the General Services Administration
and then it can be transferred to other
Federal agencies; and that the ones
with a national-defense interest have
first priority in claiming excess
property.
So it might be that real property in
this case—meaning both the land and
the building—could be so transferred.
It so transferred, I seek to determine
whether this bill permits the Atomic
Energy Commission to go ahead with
a plant there.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreement to the amend-
ment offered by the Senator from
Michigan [Mr. FERGUSON].
Mr. GORE. I suggest the absence
of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll,
and the following Senators answered
to their names:
*****
[p. 10842]
REVISION OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY
ACT OF 1946
The Senate resumed the considera-
tion of the bill (S. 3690) to amend the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as
amended, and for other purposes.
Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President,
may I expound a parliamentary in-
quiry?
-------
360
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The1
Senator will state the inquiry.
Mr. MAGNUSON. What is the
pending question before the Senate?
Is it the so-called Hickenlooper amend-
ment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair advises the Senator that that is
correct.
Mr. MAGNUSON. May I ask that
it be read?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will state the amendment.
The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed
by Mr. HICKENLOOPER, on page 2, line
17, after "employed", to insert "(1)."
On page 82, line 19, before the pe-
riod, to insert a comma and the follow-
ing: "or (2) for the construction or
operation of facilities for the com-
mercial production of electric power,
or other useful forms of energy, de-
rived from the utilization or produc-
tion of special nuclear material other
than that power or useful energy pro-
duced or derived incidental to research
and development activities authorized
under section 32."
Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President,
numerous amendments have been sug-
gested to the bill now before the Sen-
ate, including the one just read, offered
by the distinguished Senator from
Iowa. I desire to address myself for a
brief time to amendments suggested
by a distinguished member of the
Joint Atomic Committee, Mr. HOLI-
FIELD, which he proposed to the House,
and which were printed in the CON-
GRESSIONAL RECORD of July 19, 1954, at
page 10956. Mr. HOLIFIELD expressed
great concern about the provisions of
the pending measure, and as many
Members of the Senate know, Mr.
HOLIFIELD and Mr. PRICE, another
Member of Congress, have expressed
themselves in no uncertain terms in
minority views submitted by them, and
appearing in Senate Report No. 1699
on the pending bill. Although we
have had small opportunity to read the
whole report, I know that most of us
have read the separate views of these
two members of the committee in sug-
gesting certain amendments to the
pending legislation.
In their minority views Representa-
tives HOLIFIELD and MELVIN PRICE,
dwell on a matter which has not been
discussed as much in this debate as
have power matters, patent matters,
and contract matters. In their sep-
arate views they refer to what is
termed "international activities" in
this new field we call, colloquially,
"atomic energy."
I wish to quote, so that the RECORD
may be clear; because I do not think
these matters have been placed in the
RECORD, at any point in the whole
debate. In fact, I am sure of it, for I
have checked all the RECORDS since the
debate began about 3 days ago. The
two Representatives to whom I have
referred, who are members of this
joint committee, and who sat through
all the deliberations, all of the hear-
ings, and heard all the witnesses, sub-
mitted very succinct and cogent views
which I think have not been considered
by the Senate during this debate.
Their views relate to the "Interna-
tional Activities," in regard to this
very important matter. Mr. Presi-
dent, I wish to quote from their views,
because I think what they state, after
listening for weeks and months and
evaluating all the testimony, is im-
portant. It seems to me it is definitely
important for us to consider their
views on this important subject.
So, Mr. President, in Report No.
1699 on Calendar No. 1710, Senate bill
3690, we find the following on page
100, under the heading, "Separate
Views on International Activities."
I point out that these are the separate
views of the Senator from Rhode
Island [Mr. PASTORE], and subscribed
to by Representative HOLIFIELD and
Representative PRICE, two Members of
the House of Representatives:
SEPARATE VIEWS ON INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
I have been impressed by the spirit of pa-
triotic unselfishness and the display of biparti-
sanship demonstrated by the committee and its
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
361
staff through the long days spent in prepara-
tion of this bill.
The atomic-energy program is both highly
technical and complex. The framers of this
law had to examine and understand the past
and present complexities of nuclear energy
activities and try somehow to predict the
future. Issues arose which went to the very
roots of individual, political, and economical
philosophies, and yet these were resolved by
the members of the committee in a spirit of
compromise and good will which is the very
essence of our democratic legislative process.
The difficult questions of compulsory licensing
of patents, of antitrust provisions, and of
licensing and regulatory provisions were settled
in this fashion.
I am frank to state that several portions of
this bill do not have my unqualified endorse-
ment, but I am compelled to join the majority
in its favorable report on S. 3690 because, on
balance, the compromises reached have been
for the greater good, and I can accept—as
should any reasonable man in a position of re-
sponsibility—something less than what I think
is perfect in each of its parts if the whole
structure is worth while.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Washington
yield to me for a question?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr.
KUCHEL in the chair). Does the Sena-
tor from Washington yield to the Sena-
tor from Montana for a question?
Mr. MAGNUSON. I yield.
Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator
from Washington is discussing some of
the proposed amendments to the act,
suggested by two Members of the
House of Representatives who have
indicated a great interest in this meas-
ure. Is not that correct?
Mr. MAGNUSON. Yes. I say to my
friend, the Senator from Montana, that
I am discussing what are distinctly
labeled Separate Views on Interna-
tional Activities, as those separate
views relate to the international as-
pects of the pending bill.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I see.
Mr. President, will the Senator
from Washington yield for a further
question?
Mr. MAGNUSON. I yield.
*****
[p. 11527]
Mr. ANDERSON. If it were pro-
vided that funds of the Commission
should not be employed in the construc-
tion or operation of facilities licensed
under section 103 or 104 except under
contract or other arrangement entered
into pursuant to section 31, and if
there were added to that provision an
amendment which read "or (2) for the
construction or operation of facilities
for the commercial production of elec-
tric power, or other useful forms of
energy, derived from the utilization or
production of special nuclear material
other than that power or useful en-
ergy produced or derived incidental to
research and development activities
authorized under section 32," would
the Senator not agree that that would
be a complete nullification of the John-
son amendment?
Mr. JACKSON. Offhand, it cer-
tainly sounds as though it would have
that exact effect. I think we made real
progress yesterday by obtaining ap-
proval of the amendment offered by the
distinguished senior Senator from Col-
[p. 11553]
orado [Mr. JOHNSON], and the
subsequent approval of the preference
amendment offered and approved by
the Senate, which was offered, I be-
lieve, by the distinguished junior Sen-
ator from Iowa [Mr. GILLETTE].
Mr. ANDERSON. Was not the able
Senator from Washington a member
of the Joint Committee on Atomic En-
ergy when he was a Member of the
House of Representatives?
Mr. JACKSON. The Senator is cor-
rect. I was a member for 4 years.
Mr. ANDERSON. Did he not have
the opportunity then to become well ac-
quainted with the senior Senator from
Iowa? Would he not agree that the
Senator from Iowa is a forthright per-
son and probably would be the first
person to admit that the purpose of
the Hickenlooper amendment is to nul-
lify the Johnson amendment?
Mr. JACKSON. I know that the dis-
tinguished senior Senator from Iowa
[Mr. HICKENLOOPER] is a very honest,
-------
362
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
forthright, and able legislator who
would be most candid on any question
relating to the interpretation of his
amendment.
Mr. ANDERSON. I can say I have
discussed it with the Senator from
Iowa. I think he would agree it is in-
tended for that purpose. I appreciate
the fact that he is that forthright
about it.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I
should like to quote again the state-
ment of President Theodore Roosevelt
in his message which has been referred
to:
I esteem it my duty to use every endeavor
to prevent the growing (power) monopoly, the
most threatening which has ever appeared, from
being fastened upon the people of this Nation.
Need I remind the Senate that this
statement, though it is so appropriate
in connection with the events tran-
spiring today, was in reality made
some 50 years ago by President Theo-
dore Roosevelt, a Republican?
In 1910 the second general dam bill
limited the life of power permits to 50
years, provided for a charge, and for
the recovery of the privilege by the
United States.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. JACKSON. I shall be happy to
yield for a question.
Mr. ANDERSON. Would not the
Senator think it better to say, "The
second bill for the construction of the
dam," rather than the "second general
dam bill"?
Mr. JACKSON. If we are on dams,
we had a little colloquy on that subject
on the tidelands bill. As I recall, I
asked the question as to what we were
going to call one of the dams in the
West which the administration had
been tinkering with, and the Senator
from Minnesota [Mr. HUMPHREY]
said:
I think we ought to call it "the let-the-public-
be-damned bill."
That is why I happened to get into
this "dam business."
Mr. GORE. Does the Senator mean,
"into the business regarding dams"?
Mr. JACKSON. I think the Senator
may be right, but I do not want to be
held down to that. I think we need
great latitude in the interpretation of
these questions when we give full ven-
tilation to problems so comprehensive
and far reaching as those growing out
of the splitting of the atom.
Mr. GORE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. JACKSON. I shall be happy to
yield for a question.
Mr. GORE. Could the administra-
tion and the Republicans in the Senate
raise serious question about taking
some latitude with the meaning of a
word when they so stretch the words
"in connection with" as to give legal
authority to a plant in southeastern
Arkansas which had no direct relation
to the Atomic Energy plant at Padu-
cah, Ky.?
Mr. JACKSON. I will say to the dis-
tinguished junior Senator from Ten-
nessee that after they entered into the
contract with the Dixon-Yates group
under the cloak of the Atomic Energy
Act I think we might be prepared for
almost anything. I think we can ex-
pect anything as a result of that con-
tract.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Washington
yield for a question?
Mr. JACKSON. I shall be happy to
yield for a question.
Mr. ANDERSON. Does he not
think that the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion itself would be better engaged in
splitting atoms than in splitting hairs
in this situation?
Mr. JACKSON. The distinguished
junior Senator from New Mexico is so
right.
I stated a little earlier in response to
a question from the distinguished ma-
jority leader that the big problem we
have had in the Atomic Energy Com-
mission is that in the past they have
been bogged down with a lot of col-
lateral administrative duties such as
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
363
the administration of the towns of Oak
Ridge, Los Alamos, Richmond, Wash-
ington, and so on.
The assignment of the Atomic En-
ergy Cpmmission, in order to be effec-
tive and carry out the directive of the
Congress of the United States, should
be in the field of splitting atoms.
When I say "splitting atoms," I do not
mean merely the military atom, but I
mean the peaceful atom as well.
As we know, and as the distin-
guished junior Senator from New
Mexico knows, it is difficult at times to
distinguish and isolate and tag and
separate the peaceful atom from the
military atom.
Is it not correct that the atomic en-
gine which is going into the Nautilus
paved the way and is paving the way
for the first atomic-electric powerplant
which is being constructed at Pitts-
burgh, Pa., in conjunction with the
work of the Westinghouse Electric Co.
and the Duquesne Power & Light Co.?
Is that not correct?
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. JACKSON. I shall be happy to
yield for a question.
Mr. ANDERSON. I have difficulty
answering and staying within the
question, but I am sure that it is
correct.
What I wanted to ask the Senator
was this: When he referred to duties
such as the administration of towns, I
wonder if he noticed when the very
able Chairman of the Atomic Energy
Commission went to Los Alamos a few
days ago, where I hoped he might have
a chance to visit with the distinguished
scientists who have done so much in
the development of nuclear weapons,
that he was immediately confronted
with the question of whether Los Ala-
mos should be an open city or a closed
city?
I mean by that whether the gates
should be opened so that the public
could come in and interview people and
try to sell them magazines and vac-
uum cleaners and devices of that
nature.
Does he know that the persons who
objected to it becoming an open city
did so because they were afraid that
all sorts of people would be rushing in
questioning them about their views on
various matters, and they would have
had a difficult situation?
He was the Chairman of the Com-
mission, with important duties, going
forth to struggle with that very im-
portant question. Does that not il-
lustrate the very thing the Senator is
talking about, when he says the Com-
mission is spending time on matters
which are administrative details, and
the country would be favored if they
did not have to do it?
Mr. JACKSON. The Senator is so
correct.
I know when I served on the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy that was
one of the biggest headaches we had,
and we spent a lot of time on the sub-
ject of the administration of towns.
The Senator knows that if the Gov-
ernment—in this case the Atomic En-
ergy Commission—is going to take
over the administration of a city, it is
going to have to deal with everything
from dogs barking at night to paving
streets and providing homes and all
the complications and ramifications of
everyday living.
Those who are engaged in the work
of splitting atoms, both peaceful atoms
and military atoms, should be spend-
ing all their time in that area and not
be bogged down with a lot of collateral
subjects.
Now, we find the Commission being
told that they must get into another
collateral area—going into the power
business and acting as a broker for a
power company in the distribution of
electric power in the Memphis area.
I should think that this administra-
tion would do its best to try to make
the functions of the Atomic Energy
Commission more businesslike insofar
as the atom is concerned.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield for a further
-------
364
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
question?
Mr. JACKSON. I yield for a ques-
tion.
Mr. ANDERSON. Would not the
Senator think it would have been for-
tunate, indeed, if the Atomic Energy
Commission could have heen spared
the hurt of this debate over the Dixon-
Yates contract into which the Commis-
sion has been dragged? Would he not
have thought it desirable to leave that
Commission out of this whole contro-
versy, and does he not think this bill
might have made better progress if
the whole Dixon-Yates controversy had
been completely left out of it by the
decision of those who have the re-
sponsibility on this floor?
[p. 11554]
Mr. KNOWLAND. Does the distin-
guished Senator from Oregon now
take the position that unless the Sen-
ate of the United States bows its head
to this new Morse formula and unless
the President of the United States
bows his head to this new Morse form-
ula, the Senate of the United States is
not going to be able to function as a
legislative body?
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I am
perfectly aware of the fact that the
majority leader is very tired. I do
not intend to engage in any personal
recriminations with the majority
leader.
I only reply to him by saying that
the Senator from Oregon is going to
stand firm on the parliamentary
rights in the Senate of the United
States accruing to each Senator who is
opposed to this bill. It is a legislative
monstrosity.
We have made our decision, Mr.
President, that we have a tremen-
dously important patriotic duty from
the standpoint of the obligation we
owe to our constituents to fight for our
independence of judgment in the Sen-
ate on the merits of the issues as we
find them. We think this bill is so
important to the future welfare of the
country, Mr. President, that we are
going to fight to prevent its passage
unless it is amended in ways that will
protect the public interest. I have a
feeling that if the President at the
White House understood the sincerity
of our point of view and the reasons
for our differences he would react as
Woodrow Wilson reacted in 1913.
That is my answer to the Senator
from California. Unless someone
wants me to withhold my objection a
moment for comment
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. MORSE. I yield to the Senator
from Minnesota for a question.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Is the Senator
aware of the fact that at a very early
hour this morning the junior Senator
from Minnesota made the unanimous-
consent request that we extract from
this bill all portions other than those
which dealt with the international co-
operation aspect of the measure?
Mr. MORSE. I have understood
that.
Mr. HUMPHREY. And that we
proceed forthwith on those particular
sections?
Mr. MORSE. I was not here at the
time. I was home getting some sleep,
because I intend, if necessary, to hold
the floor tonight during the night.
But I understood when I reached the
floor that the Senator made that pro-
posal, and I want to say I think it was
a statesmanlike proposal.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Will the Sena-
tor yield for a further question?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Was the Sena-
tor aware that as of yesterday we were
proceeding in an orderly manner with
the consideration of amendments; first
the Johnson amendment, second the
Gillette amendment, third the Hum-
phrey amendment, fourth another
amendment suggested by the junior
Senator from Minnesota, fifth another
amendment which was within the
stages of being finally acted upon;
when the unusual tactic of moving to
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
365
lay it on the table was employed?
Mr. MORSE. I understand that. I
would call that a phase of a parliamen-
tary war.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield for a further
question?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Is the Senator
aware of the fact that Section 7 (b) of
the Atomic Energy Act, known as the
McMahon Act, reads as follows:
The Commission shall prepare a report to the
President stating all the facts with respect to
such use, the Commissioner's estimate of the
social, political, economic, and international
effects of such use and the Commission's recom-
mendations for necessary or desiiable supple-
mental legislation.
Mr. MORSE. No such report was
filed.
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator is
aware of the fact that no such report
has been filed?
Mr. MORSE. No such report has
been filed. I pointed that out in a
radio broadcast to the American people
this morning.
Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator is
very astute and an able attorney. In
the mind of an able attorney does the
word "shall" not indicate a directive or
a mandate?
Mr. MORSE. I think it placed a
mandatory obligation upon the Presi-
dent.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Is the Senator
aware of any such report that pre-
ceded the consideration of this legis-
lation?
Mr. MORSE. No. No such report
was filed.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. MORSE. If there are no objec-
tions I yield to the Senator from New
Mexico.
Mr. ANDERSON. There has been a
great deal said about speeding up ac-
tion on this bill. We spent about 18
hours disposing of the Johnson amend-
ment. Because that was not satis-
factory to the majority, even though a
majority voted for it, now we have the
Hickenlooper amendment, which com-
pletely negates the Johnson amend-
ment. Of course, from the parlia-
mentary standpoint it is an ideal
situation for us, because the Hicken-
looper amendment cannot be disposed
of now unless the majority leader
moves to lay it on the table. Of course
that is an ideal situation for us, but it
does involve more than 18 hours of the
same sort of debate we had when we
were making headway, and adopting
an amendment every hour and a half.
I suggest that the Hickenlooper
amendment increases the time required
for this debate.
I should like to ask the Senator from
Oregon, who says he is going to occupy
the floor tonight, to make sure he has
a priority. There are other Senators
who have the same feeling.
Mr. MORSE. As I said, I am merely
a private in the rear ranks and I am
willing to serve.
Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
FERGUSON in the chair). The objection
is heard.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Iowa.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I with-
draw my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are
there any further amendments to be
offered?
[p. 11568]
Mr. MORSE.
At this time I propose to discuss the
subject of Government subsidies and
other Government handouts to business
under our free-enterprise system. In
my judgment this is a matter very
pertinent to the debate on the admin-
istration's atomic energy bill, because
my study of the bill convinces me that
it contains one of the most potentially
-------
366
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
outrageous subsidies to big business
ever to be found in a legislative
proposal.
Government subsidies to business
exist in a variety of forms. They may
take the form of direct grants of Gov-
ernment money to certain industries,
but more often they arise as windfalls
to business resulting from loopholes in
the law. I shall discuss one type of
indirect subsidy a little later in this
speech, but first I want to talk about
the built-in subsidy in the atomic en-
ergy bill.
The bill proposes that the Federal
Government shall relinquish its exclu-
sive ownership rights in facilities for
production or use of special nuclear
material but retain ownership of the
material itself.
When nuclear material is used in an
atomic reactor to produce energy for
power, it is not destroyed. In fact, ac-
cording to an AEC report to the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy, the new
breeder reactors may produce more
material than they consume. "As a
consequence," says the minority report
of the joint committee, "the incidents
of private and public ownership are
intermingled in such a way that not
only may vexatious problems of ad-
ministration arise, but the private
companies licensed for a maximum pe-
riod of 40 years to own and operate
production facilities—atomic reactors
—legally can depend on the Govern-
ment to compensate them adequately
for whatever they produce during the
lifetime of the license. This consti-
tutes a built-in subsidy for licensed
atomic enterprise until about the year
A.D. 2000."
The atomic energy bill provides for
no fee to be paid for the use of nuclear
materials. Instead, it proposes that
the Government shall distribute the
materials to licensees for a "reason-
able charge" and buy the materials
produced by a licensee for a "fair
price."
It proposes that the Government
shall distribute special nuclear mate-
rials for licensees for a reasonable
charge, and to buy the material pro-
duced at a fair price. Watch out for
that one, Mr. President. If I ever saw
a sleeper clause, there it is. We sell at
what price? Well, we license for a
reasonable charge. That is magnan-
imous of us. But we buy the material
back at a fair price. If we mean the
same thing, why do we not use the
same language? Of course, we do not
mean the same thing. We mean that
in the license situation we are dealing
with a lease. Let me tell the Senate
where the sleeper danger is. We lease
it out for a very nominal charge,
which is called reasonable. That is the
uranium; that is the nondestructible
material. We buy back the plutonium
ash, which is material that is used in
bombs and other atomic weapons.
What is the pattern? When we come
to buy defense materials, when we
come to buy bomb material and start
dealing with war equipment, believe
me, we pay plenty. We have to have it.
When we get through with this monop-
olistic giveaway, the source is going to
be the monopoly to which we in effect
have given away uranium. Believe
me, the monopolies will charge plenty
for the plutonium ash. They have
plenty of legal doctrine behind them if
we want to take any legal action. They
will get a big price under the standard
of "fair price" for the plutonium ash.
That is why there are men in the mi-
nority on the joint committee, men like
CHET HOLIFIELD, warning us of the
danger of this section of the bill as be-
ing a hidden sudsidy.
I am not going to get sucked in by
that one. That has got to be changed.
We have got to get it tied down so the
American people cannot be held up
that way.
The bill provides in section 56 that
in determining a "fair price" to be paid
by the Government for nuclear mate-
rial, the Atomic Energy Commission
shall take into consideration the value
of the special material for its intended
use by the United States.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
367
See what a joker that is—intended
use. A bomb is the intended use. If
we take that intended use into account
when we fix the price, the price will be
higher than the Washington Monu-
ment, figuratively speaking. That is
the joker in the bill. They know the
average fellow on the street is not go-
ing to catch the legal implications of
that. We have a duty to protect him.
It is our job in the Senate to see to it
that that kind of language is rewrit-
ten, and its effects restricted.
Listen to it again: In determining a
fair price to be paid by the Govern-
ment for nuclear material the Atomic
Energy Commission shall "take into
consideration the value of the special
material for its intended use by the
United States," and it "may give such
weight to the actual cost of producing
that material as the Commission finds
to be equitable."
What discretion; what wide open,
arbitrary discretion that is. We have
not got a legal standard there binding
upon the Commission. Just imagine.
It is proposed to give to the Commis-
sion discretion authorizing it to give
such weight to the actual cost of pro-
ducing material as the Commission
finds to be equitable. Can we not hear
them? "We have got to have those
bombs; we have got to have this artil-
lery weapon; we have got to have this
newly invented atomic device for air-
planes; we have got to have this ma-
terial." One would think the whole
security of the Nation were at stake.
I served on the Armed Services Com-
mittee for 8 years, and I felt many
times that when the military come up
asking for something the country was
about to collapse if they did not get the
money the next day.
One would think we are in the throes
of complete destruction. The price
they present and the testimony they
present require immediate action;
right now; no time to waste; they must
have it right now. We discover 9 or 10
months later that they have not done
a thing after they got the authoriza-
tion.
So I learned early on the Armed
Services Committee that it is almost
a military pattern as they appear be-
fore congressional committees to try
to scare us to death in order to get
approval for tremendous financial out-
lays involving, too frequently, great
waste of the taxpayers' money.
But here, Mr. President, look how
far we are going. We are going to
give almost unlimited discretion to the
Commission in fixing the price. That
has got to be changed if we are going
to protect the taxpayer. I should like
to see the President of the United
States have an opportunity in confer-
ence to help to change it.
As to the reasonable charge for the
material, the Commission is directed in
section 53 of the bill to "make uniform,
nondiscriminatory charges" for the use
of the material.
See how clever that is. They do not
say anything there, as they did in re-
gard to fixing the price of the material
that the Government buys back, about
any uniform, nondiscriminatory price.
Oh, no. They talk there about fixing
the price on a basis which the Com-
mission thinks is reasonable, which
means a lot of variations. But when
it comes to the Government collecting,
there has to be a uniform, nondiscrim-
inatory charge. To be sure, it is going
to be the least charge. It is not going
to be much. In fact, one of the lessons
I have learned in the Senate, as I have
"watchdogged" now since 1946, the dis-
posal of Federal property, if the task
of getting rid of Federal property was
left up to the commissions and depart-
ments—and one would think that they
were permanent employees of the
Santa Claus union, wearing the cos-
tume every day of the year—they
would give away the people's property
almost every time.
Someday I would like to sit in a Sen-
ate committee and have one single
property disposal bill brought before
us for approval in which the Federal
Government really struck a hard bar-
-------
368
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
gain in the interest of the taxpayers
of the United States.
When it comes to the Government's
selling its property, I do not know why
there is such a great spirit of charity
which seems to overcome our Govern-
ment officials, particularly in the dis-
posing of property to great, powerful
financial interests in the country.
I will try to stop that, too, and I
have been doing my best here since
1946 to stop it in a small way. I get a
lot of beating and battering around for
trying to uphold what is known as the
Morse formula, which just requires 50
percent of the appraised market value
for surplus property going for a public
use, and 100 percent for property go-
ing to private use.
* * * * *
[p. 11826]
TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1954
(Legislative day of Friday, July 2,
1954)
(Continuation of Senate proceedings
of Monday, July 26, 1954, from 12
o'clock midnight on Tuesday, July 27,
1954.)
REVISION OP THE ATOMIC ENERGY
ACT OF 1946
The Senate resumed the considera-
tion of the bill (S. 3690) to amend the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as
amended, and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill is open to further amendment.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President—
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair recognizes the Senator from
Minnesota.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
yield the floor; as I yield to the Senator
from Oregon.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair recognizes the Senator from
Oregon.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, do I
have the floor in my own right, and not
on the basis of having the Senator
from Minnesota yield to me?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the
Senator from Minnesota yielded to the
Senator from Oregon, the Senator
from Oregon has the floor.
Mr. MORSE. I am trying to find out
whether the Senator from Minnesota
yielded the floor, or whether he yielded
to me.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair's understanding is that the Sena-
tor from Minnesota yielded the floor.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes, Mr. Presi-
dent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Then
the Chair recognizes the Senator from
Oregon.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I be-
lieve I shall have the appreciation of
all tired Senators because they will be
assured of a good night's rest. I am
sorry I cannot likewise accommodate
the staff of the Senate. I would like
them to have a good night's rest, too.
But at least my colleagues in the Sen-
ate can now go to bed, because I am
going to talk to the country for a few
hours.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Will the Sena-
tor from Oregon yield?
Mr. MORSE. Only for a question.
Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President,
may we have order, please?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senate will be in order.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I yield
only for a question.
Mr. HUMPHREY. If the Senator
from Oregon will yield, I wish to sub-
mit an amendment, but without caus-
ing him to lose his right to the floor.
In submitting the amendment, I shall
speak only a very short sentence.
Mr. MORSE. I want to stop the
Senator from Minnesota right there. I
have been having a whispered conver-
sation with the Democratic Whip, and
I did not hear how the Senator from
Minnesota started his question. I hope
it was a question. Did he start with a
question?
Mr. HUMPHREY. I did. I asked
whether the Senator from Oregon
would yield to me, for the purpose of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
369
permitting me to submit an amendment
which I should like to submit as a cor-
rective amendment pertaining to the
one I recently submitted—but without
causing the Senator from Oregon to
lose his right to the floor.
Mr. MORSE. I do not yield for that
purpose. I do not yield any further.
I mean no discourtesy to my good
friend from Minnesota, but I am not
going to yield. I am not going to yield
to anyone.
Mr. SPARKMAN. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Oregon yield to
me, for the purpose of permitting me to
correct the RECORD, provided the Sen-
ator from Oregon will not lose his right
to the floor?
Mr. MORSE. No. I think this will
just cause some embarrassment.
Mr. President, the tension is pretty
high at this point. We have been
through this kind of a high spot before
in the Senate. Perhaps we had better
wait for a little period of relaxation to
set in. I can provide that period, Mr.
President. I am going to do it. I have
the floor, and I am going to speak for a
while.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Will the Senator
from Oregon yield for a question?
Mr. MORSE. I do not yield for a
question.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Oregon yield for one
very short question?
Mr. MORSE. I do not yield, Mr.
President. Ordinarily I would love to
yield to my friend, the Senator from
Illinois; but I am not going to yield to
any Senator for any purpose, for the
time being.
Mr. President, I wish to comment
briefly on the amendment I offered
which was laid on the table. I wish to
point out, by using quotation marks,
Mr. President, what a "dangerous"
amendment it was. It was so "dan-
gerous," Mr. President, that it hap-
pened to be the language
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Oregon will suspend. Let
there be order in the Chamber. Those
in the rear of the Chamber will please
take their seats or leave the Chamber,
so that we can have order.
The Senator from Oregon may re-
sume.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, as I
was saying, I want to explain to the
Senate how "dangerous" the amend-
ment I offered really was. I refer to
the amendment which was laid on the
table, without extending to the Senator
from Oregon an opportunity to discuss
the amendment unless he yielded to a
parliamentary bludgeon which was to
be wielded against him.
The language of the amendment, Mr.
President, was taken out of President
Eisenhower's bill, which he sent to the
Senate of the United States and to the
joint committee. The amendment was
taken verbatim out of the Eisenhower
bill. It was taken out of the Eisen-
hower bill because the Federal Power
Commission had warned that the lan-
guage which was being proposed by
some, and which finally got into the
bill, did not provide for adequate legal
standards in regard to the whole price
problem which is involved in this whole
contractual transaction.
Mr. President, section 52 of Senate
bill 3690 provides that any person who
lawfully produces any special nuclear
material shall be paid a fair price by
the Commission for producing such
material.
Section 56 states, in part:
In determining the fair price to be paid by
the Commission pursuant to section 52 for the
production of any special nuclear material,
the Commission shall take into consideration
the value of the special nuclear material for its
intended use by the United States, and may
give such weight to the actual cost of producing
that material as the Commission finds equitable.
Section 53 of the bill lists the factors
to be taken into consideration by the
Commission in determining a reason-
able charge to be collected by the Gov-
ernment for its nuclear materials.
With respect to commercial licenses,
the Commission is directed to make
uniform nondiscriminatory charges for
-------
370
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the use of the material.
Mr. President, what did the Federal
Power Commission have to say about
the legal standards for the pricing pol-
icies provided for in the bill? I would
have the Senate reflect very seriously
upon the warning of the Federal Power
Commission.
Let me say that the junior Senator
from Oregon, Mr. President, is fighting
[p. 12132]
for an amendment, or was fighting for
an amendment, before it was laid on
the table, and now makes this speech
in support of the amendment, even
though it lies on the table, because the
language I have used in my amendment
is the language of President Eisenhow-
er's proposed bill; and his language
conforms to the criticism of the Fed-
eral Power Commission, because of a
lack of standard provided for in the
bill as reported by the joint committee.
Mr. President, when the Senator
from Oregon is fighting for the
standard recommended by Dwight
Eisenhower's own Atomic Energy
Commission, when the Senator from
Oregon is fighting for an amendment
which seeks to meet the criticism of
the Federal Power Commission, he is
also fighting for the best interests of
the taxpayers of America, and I want
to talk to them tonight for a while.
I want the taxpayers of America to
know what is happening to them in
this bill. I want the taxpayers of
America to know of the hidden sub-
sidies still in this bill; and here is one
of them. Here is one of the joker
clauses still left in this bill, Mr. Pres-
ident. Here is one of the sleeper pro-
visions still in this bill. Here is one
of the catch-alls in this bill, Mr. Pres-
ident, seeking to give another windfall
to a selected few big American busi-
nesses—a private-utility monopoly
combine.
All the Senator from Oregon has
sought to do is incorporate in the bill
language which will protect the tax-
payers of the country. Oh, I do not
have any illusions, Mr. President, con-
cerning the nature of the fight I am
making. I do not have any illusions,
Mr. President, about the misrepresen-
tations which are going to be made
about the fight I am making. I do not
have any illusions, Mr. President,
about the criticism and abuse I am
going to take for the fight I am mak-
ing. I am used to it. Let me say, Mr.
President, I have a very thick skin
when it comes to abuse; but I also have
a very forgiving heart.
Mr. President, I think it is sad, I
think it is too bad, I think it is an un-
fortunate incident in the history of the
Senate of the United States—after we
have made the progress we have made
today in trying to compose our differ-
ences, in trying to work out here a bill
which will meet some of the objections
of those of us in opposition to the bill,
that when a Senator submits an amend-
ment as well thought out as this one,
an amendment of such vital importance
to the taxpayers of America, an amend-
ment which I am willing to submit as a
lawyer, Mr. President, would be ap-
proved by most of the courts in Amer-
ica, and most of the judges sitting on
the courts of America, because of its
unquestionably sound provision pro-
viding the courts with a definite legal
standard they can apply in regard to
the pricing features of this bill—that
the Senator who submits the amend-
ment is denied an opportunity even to
explain it, is denied an opportunity to
discuss it, unless he will knuckle down,
unless he will bend his knee, unless he
will put his head in a parliamentary
noose, and will say that he is going to
talk for only "X" minutes or for an
hour.
Mr. President, that has not been the
record of the Senator from Oregon in
the Senate of the United States, and it
is never going to be his record in the
Senate of the United States. The peo-
ple of Oregon did not send me here to
be intimidated by anybody. The peo-
ple of Oregon did not send me here,
Mr. President, to sacrifice my inde-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
371
pendence of judgment on any occasion,
at any time, for any purpose, and I
shall not do it.
I think I have demonstrated here,
today, time and time again, that I know
how to do teamwork. I have been do-
ing teamwork here all day with a group
of men over on the other side of the
aisle, a group of us who started out in
opposition to the bill, Mr. President.
There is no question about the fact that
certain maneuvering, certain repre-
sentations, diminished our number, but
there is still a considerable number of
us left.
Mr. President, I think we were en-
titled to the parliamentary courtesy—
and I speak most respectfully when I
say this, but I am entitled, I think, to
present my point of view, and I do it
very respectfully—of being allowed the
time we needed for further conference.
The conference this morning was
certainly productive of much coopera-
tion, but one cannot confer very well
here on the floor of the Senate, Mr.
President, when debate is going on.
One cannot confer, cannot leave the
floor of the Senate for half an hour,
three-quarters of an hour, or an hour
for a group conference, when he does
not know whether, when he is away, all
his parliamentary rights may be sacri-
ficed by some kind of unanimous-con-
sent agreement entered in his absence.
There is no doubt about the fact,
Mr. President, that there is a great deal
of fatigue here in the Senate. A few
minutes ago I was out in the office of
the Official Reporters of Debates.
There is a beloved public servant out
in that office, a man who has been here,
I just do not know how many years,
but many, many years—Mr. James W.
Murphy, in charge of the Official Re-
porters of Debates of the Senate. He
is exhausted. I urged him to go home.
He would not hear of it. He is just
one of the soldiers who work on until
they drop. But, Mr. President, there
are many other fine members of the
professional staff of the Senate who
are equally tired. I wish to say that
in paying tribute to the services of Mr.
Murphy, I do not mean to show a lack
of appreciation of the services of any
other member of the professional staff.
The Senate ought to have taken a re-
cess until 10 o'clock tomorrow morn-
ing. I wish to say, Mr. President, that
in my judgment we would have saved
time by so doing. In my judgment this
debate would have been over sooner,
had we recessed until 10 o'clock to-
morrow morning.
Mr. President, I do not know what
we are thinking of. We get to the
point where we feel we have to keep the
Senate in continuous session, the way
we have been keeping it in continuous
session, in order to push through this
bill. I am convinced that the bill
would have been disposed of by now if
we had not had the first continuous
session. After all, Senators, like
everyone else, are human. When that
kind of battle challenge is laid down,
those who have any red blood in their
veins usually accept the challenge. A
number of us who have that kind of
blood in our veins have accepted the
challenge, just as I am accepting it
tonight.
Mr. President, when I think of what
I witnessed when, some time ago, I
went into the office of the Official Re-
porters of Debates, I realize there sat
a man who for day after day, night
after night, except for yesterday's re-
cess, has had to sit there under the
duties of his office, and go through,
with pencil in hand, every line of that
transcript—and a man at his age. I
do not know how old Mr. Murphy is,
but he is in his seventies. That is no
way to treat employees. I want to say
that I regret this matter, and I regret
this incident. I regret that I feel by
conviction and principle that I have to
take the floor tonight and use up one
of my speeches on the bill in order to
explain what I think are some of the
bad features still remaining in the bill.
The pricing provision is one of them. I
think the Senate should heed the criti-
cism of the Federal Power Commission
-------
372
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
of the pricing section of the bill. I
think Senators should heed what Presi-
dent Eisenhower himself recommended
in his draft of the bill which came to
the joint committee, through the
Atomic Energy Commission itself.
That is the identical language, and in
just a moment I am going to read it out
of the Eisenhower bill.
But first I want to tell you, Mr. Pres-
ident, what the Federal Power Com-
mission said.
The Federal Power Commission
said:
There is not, and probably never will be a
free market to provide a standard for what a
fair price will be. There is little, if anything,
in the legally established concepts of utility
regulation that can be deemed to provide mean-
ing for the term "fair price."
We find that statement by the Fed-
eral Power Commission in part II of
the hearings, on page 1131.
Mr. President, not even the Federal
Power Commission believes we have
written into the bill acceptable legal
standards for pricing. I think, there-
fore, we ought to change it. That is
all I sought to do. But, Mr. President,
my amendment was laid on the table,
and I was not given a hearing because
I refused to handcuff myself and re-
fused to tie myself down to a limitation
of time for a discussion of that prin-
ciple.
In my judgment, the provisions of
the bill do not provide a standard for
the determination of what a fair price
is. I believe there is danger that a
great subsidy will be paid by the Gov-
ernment to private operators of atomic
reactors, when the Government distrib-
utes special nuclear material to licen-
sees at a reasonable charge, which
section 53 of the bill provides shall be
uniform and nondiscriminatory, and
subsequently pays the licensee a fair
price for the special nuclear material
he produces. I say that provision is
lacking in standard, as the present
provisions of section 56 make perfectly
clear.
I therefore have offered this amend-
ment, which adopts a limitation with
respect to the fair price, by providing
[p. 12133]
Mr. HILL. ' Mr. President, will the
Senator yield for a question?
Mr. MORSE. I yield for a question.
Mr. HILL. Is it not through the de-
bate and discussion that Senators are
able to arrive at intelligent decisions
on amendments?
Mr. MORSE. That is the only way I
know of. When amendments are of-
fered here on the floor of the Senate
and a Senator has not had time to do
library research on them in advance of
their being offered, that is the way the
Senator has to work.
Mr. HILL. Will the Senator yield
for another question?
Mr. MORSE. For a question only.
Mr. HILL. Is it not true that no
Senator knows what amendments may
be offered?
Mr. MORSE. Senators do not have
the slightest idea.
Mr. HILL. Will the Senator yield
for another question, Mr. President?
Mr. MORSE. I yield for another
question.
Mr. HILL. Is it not true that the
only way Senators can know what
the amendment would do, can know the
purpose of the amendment and the
need for the amendment, is by hearing
not only the author of the amendment,
but in many instances other Senators
discuss the amendment and bring out
the facts with relation to the
amendment?
Mr. MORSE. That is correct. I cer-
tainly appreciate the Senator from
Alabama making that so clear in the
RECORD by the very excellent questions
he has asked me. That is the way we
ought to work on amendments in the
Senate.
Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield for a question?
Mr. MORSE. I yield for a question.
Mr. HILL. Is it not true that on yes-
terday we had a perfect example of
just how this free debate operates, and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
373
yet we had no extended debate on the
different amendments?
Mr. MORSE. We did up until I of-
fered my amendment.
Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield for a question?
Mr. MORSE. I yield for a question.
Mr. HILL. Is it not true that the
Senate acted on a number of amend-
ments—perhaps as many as some 8 or
9 amendments—without any extended
debate, and yet with such debate as
brought out the facts with relation to
the amendments and gave to the Sen-
nate the opportunity to act intelli-
gently on the amendments?
Mr. MORSE. That is right. We
were perfectly free at any time to de-
bate at whatever length our discretion
directed us to debate.
Now, Mr. President, continuing with
this analysis:
The subsidy to private monopoly
might be reduced by inclusion of the
limitations contained in the AEC
draft; namely, first, the provision that
the price paid for fissionable materials
by the Government should not exceed
the estimated cost to the Government
of producing similar material in its
own plants; and second, the taking into
account of not only the cost to the li-
censee of producing the material, but
also the estimated revenues to be de-
rived by the licensee in the conduct of
his licensed activities.
An energetic program of power pro-
duction by the Commission would hold
down the cost to the Government of
producing plutonium ash, because rev-
enues to be credited against cost would
be realized from the sale of power.
I am unable to find in S. 3690 a
standard to be followed by the Com-
mission if, under the provisions of the
bill, it were to purchase byproduct ma-
terials from private producers. There
appears to be left wide open tne pos-
sibility that if the Commission did not
make full use of its power-producing
potential and it became necessary for
the Commission to buy byproduct elec-
trical energy from a private producer,
it might pay much more for the elec-
tric power than the power would cost
if produced in a Government plant.
The McMahon Act bans patents for
inventions or discoveries which con-
cern the production of fissionable
material for utilization in atomic
weapons. Patents can be granted in
the nonmilitary field, but they are now
subject to a "public interest" declara-
tion under stated conditions, in which
case the Atomic Energy Commission
and its licenses automatically were en-
titled to their use, with reasonable
compensation to the owner.
Under the McMahon Act the declara-
tion of a patent to be "affected with the
public interest" is mandatory, provided
that (a) the invention or discovery
covered by the patent utilizes or is es-
sential to the utilization of fissionable
material or atomic energy, and (b) the
licensing of such invention or discovery
is necessary to effectuate the policies
and purposes of the act.
The AEC draft proposal carried over
the provisions from the McMahon Act
imposing a duty upon the AEC to de-
clare certain patents affected with a
public interest. The appropriate sec-
tion in the AEC draft stated:
"Any person may apply to the Com-
mission for a license to use the inven-
tion or discovery covered by such
patent, and the Commission shall grant
such license to the extent that it finds
that the use of the invention or dis-
covery is necessary to the conduct of
an activity authorized under this act."
Under the Cole-Hickenlooper bill—
S. 3690—an applicant for a patent li-
cense must prove to the satisfaction of
the Commission that the use of the in-
vention or discovery is of primary im-
portance to the use of fissionable
material or atomic energy; of primary
importance to the effectuation of the
policies and purposes of the act; and
of primary importance to the carrying
out of the activity in which he proposes
to engage. Granting of patent li-
censes under S. 3690 is discretionary
with the Commission.
-------
374
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
The stringently limited test of pri-
mary importance in contrast with
broader considerations under which
patents are now deemed to be affected
with the public interest under the Mc-
Mahon Act, and the complicated ap-
plication procedure provided for in S.
3690 prompted the minority of the
Joint Committee to say in their report:
The application that can survive this proce-
dure will be an impressive one, indeed. The
patent attorneys may derive more satisfaction
from section 152 than the would-be user of the
invention.
The possibility of a patent monopoly,
by firstcomers in the atomic research
and development program is one of the
greatest dangers to free enterprise and
competition in the atomic power pro-
gram. The testimony of Mr. Alfred
Iddles, president of Babcock & Wilcox
Co., which I quoted in my July 17
speech, indicated that firstcomers in
the atomic energy program may plan
to keep to themselves their discoveries
and inventions with the intention of
patenting them after September 1,
1959, the date set in Senate bill 3690
for expiration of the so-called com-
pulsory licensing provisions in the bill.
It is inevitable that the concerns now
participating in the program will en-
joy certain patent advantages over
persons who later enter the field. The
intent of proposed legislation at this
time should be to ward off patent mo-
nopoly. Senate bill 3690, in my judg-
ment, would make it easier for patent
monopolies to be established. It is an
engraved invitation.
The AEC draft proposal called for a
report by the Commission whenever, in
its opinion, the utilization of atomic
material for industrial or other non-
military purposes were sufficiently de-
veloped to be of practical value. This
report which was to be submitted to
the President was to contain the same
material that is now required under
section 7 (b) of the McMahon Act.
The proposal provided for transmis-
sion of the report by the President to
the Congress, together with the Presi-
dent's recommendations.
Section 102 of Senate bill 3690
provides:
Whenever the Commission has made a finding
in writing that any type of utilization of pro-
ductive facility has been sufficiently developed
to be of practical value for industrial or com-
mercial purposes, the Commission may there-
after issue licenses for such type of facility
pursuant to section 103.
In my judgment it would be wise to
provide in legislation at this time that
the President and the Congress be in-
formed before licenses for industrial
use of atomic material are issued. In
view of the great speed with which the
atomic development program has pro-
gressed, it may be necessary for the
Congress to further legislate before
licenses are issued. S. 3690 would al-
low licensing to begin without notice
to either the President or the Congress.
As I have indicated, the Cole-Hick-
enlooper bill differs from the proposed
bill prepared by the Atomic Energy
Commission and submitted to the Con-
gress in at least six very important
respects,
Mr. President, I think this part of
my analysis is of great importance be-
cause these important differences in
which the Cole-Hickenlooper bill dif-
fers from the President's bill as pre-
pared and submitted by the Atomic
Energy Commission, with White House
approval as I understand, represent, I
think, a list of differences that we
ought to consider very carefully and
be certain whether we should not in-
corporate the President's version in
the bill—not rubber stamp it, not
automatically. Reject his recommen-
dations if we think some of them are
[p. 12174]
us consider amendments on their merit rather
than be bound by procedural tricks, action on
the bill was brought to a showdown.
"Despite the safeguards we obtained, I still
voted against the bill because I am convinced
it is not in the best interest of the American
people. The McMahon Act provides that i.he
Atomic Energy Commission shall publish a
report on potential civilian uses of atomic
energy when they feel we have reached the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
375
stage of such possibilities, together with recom-
mendations for whatever necessary legislation
is required. The Commission not yet has done
so. Without that guidance, it appears foolhardy
to me to be setting a pattern of legislative guid-
ance in such a field of yet unknown future po-
tentialities.
"One of the most disturbing portions of
this bill was the Ferguson amendment, legal-
izing the so-called Dixon-Yates contract,
wherein the Atomic Energy Commission was
used as a broker or middleman to provide
power to the Tennessee Valley Authority by a
private utility. This contract was opposed by
a majority of the AEC, was not requested by the
TV A. The Dixon-Yates contract violated all
standards of public contracts and flaunted the
public interest.
"When it appeared obvious the administra-
tion was going to ram the bill through, however,
our wisest course appeared to be to seek to
rewrite much of the measure on the Senate floor
through amendments at least partially safe-
guarding the public."
Senator HUMPHREY issued the following sum-
mary of accomplishments of the prolonged
debate, pointing out that such changes "can
hardly be called a victory for Eisenhower":
Public safeguards written into the bill as an
outgrowth of the Democratic fight include:
1. Humphrey amendment providing pref-
erence for municipalities, cooperatives, and
high-cost-power areas in obtaining licenses for
use of atomic energy to create electrical power,
2. Humphrey amendment requiring the AEC
to give notice to municipalities, cooperatives,
public bodies, and private utilities within the
transmission area when about to accept applica-
tions for such licenses for use of atomic energy
to create electrical power.
3. Humphrey amendment strengthening the
antimonopoly section of the bill, and prohibit-
ing the granting of licenses that would result
in conflict with antitrust laws.
4. Humphrey amendment requiring all li-
censees using atomic eneigy to create electrical
power for interstate commerce to come within
regulatory piovisions of the Federal Power Act.
5. Humphrey amendment lequiring AEC to
undertake a research program into civilian uses,
without preventing use of universities for the
conduct of such research.
6. Humphrey amendment strengthening civil-
ian control over international use of atom ic
energy through requiring approval of the Presi-
dent for any international agreement on atomic
energy rather than just approval of the De-
fense Department.
7. Humphrey amendment providing for crea-
tion of a special division on civilian uses of
atomic power within the administrative offices
of AEC.
8. Johnson amendment empowering the
Atomic Energy Commission to supply its own
electrical energy with its own atomic plants,
instead of obtaining it from private sources, and
authorizing the Commission to allow REA co-
ops and public bodies to build and operate their
own atomic energy power plants.
9. Gillette-Humphrey amendment providing
preference to REA coopeiatives, municipalities,
and other public bodies in distribution of surplus
or byproduct electrical power created from
atomic energy by the Commission for its own
use,
10. Kerr amendment postponing private
patent rights on atomic energy for a period
of 10 years, and requiring equal treatment of all
concerned in obtaining such patents.
11. Gore amendment which prohibits Atomic
Energy Commission from making contracts to
refund to corporations their payments of in-
come taxes.
Two more amendments offered by Senator
HUMPHREY were withdrawn after building legis-
lative history placing into the record the assur-
ances of the administration spokesmen it was
the intent to cover both points in existing legis-
lative language.
They included requiring equal access to
information for all members of the Atomic
Energy Commission, and applying same pref-
erence standards to construction permits as
provided by previous amendment for licenses to
use atomic energy.
The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the
Senate House bill 9757, to amend the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as
amended, and for other purposes,
which was read twice by its title.
Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
move that the Senate proceed to the
consideration of House bill 9757, to
amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1946.
The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill
(H. R. 9757), to amend the Atomic
Energy Act of 1946.
Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I
move to strike out all after the enact-
ing clause of the House bill and that
the language of the Senate bill, as
amended, be substituted in lieu thereof.
The motion was agreed to.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The ques-
tion now is on the final passage of the
bill. The yeas and nays have been or-
dered, and the clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
call the roll.
Mr. ERVIN (when his name was
called). I have a pair with the Sena-
tor from Mississippi [Mr. EASTLANP].
If he were present he would vote "nay."
-------
376
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
If I were permitted to vote, I would
vote "yea." I withhold my vote.
Mr. LONG (when his name was
called). On this vote I have a pair
with the senior Senator from Tennes-
see [Mr. KEFAUVER]. If he were pres-
ent and voting, he would vote "nay."
If I were permitted to vote, I would
vote "yea." I withhold my vote.
The rollcall was concluded.
Mr. YOUNG (after having voted in
the negative). On this vote I have a
pair with the senior Senator from Ohio
[Mr. BRICKER]. If he were present
and voting, he would vote "yea." If
I were permitted to vote, I would vote
"nay." Therefore I withdraw my vote.
Mr. SALTONSTALL. I announce
that the Senator from Ohio [Mr.
BRICKER] is necessarily absent.
Mr. CLEMENTS. I announce that
the Senator from Mississippi [Mr.
EASTLAND], the Senator from Louisi-
ana [Mr. ELLENDER] , the Senator from
Delaware [Mr. FREAK], the Senator
from Georgia [Mr. GEORGE] , the Sena-
tor from Tennessee [Mr. KEFAUVER],
and the Senator from Arkansas [Mr.
McCLELLAN] are necessarily absent.
The Senator from Iowa [Mr. GIL-
LETTE] is absent by leave of the Senate.
I announce that on this vote the Sen-
ator from Louisiana [Mr. ELLENDER]
is paired with the Senator from Iowa
[Mr. GILLETTE]. If present and vot-
ing, the Senator from Louisiana would
vote "yea," and the Senator from Iowa
would vote "nay."
The result was announced—yeas 57,
nays 28, as follows:
So the bill (H. R. 9757) was passed.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Without
objection, Senate bill 3690 is indefi-
nitely postponed.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I move that the vote by which the
bill was passed be reconsidered.
Mr. KNOWLAND. I move that the
motion of the Senator from Iowa be
laid on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was
agreed to.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that
House bill 9757 be printed with the
Senate amendment.
The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered.
[p. 12242]
l.lb(5)(c) Aug. 9: House agrees to conference report, pp. 13780-13787
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield myself 10 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I thought a verbal ex-
planation of the conference report
might be more readily understood than
if the Members had to listen to the
reading of the statement by the read-
ing clerk. After continuous delibera-
tions and negotiations, which lasted the
better part of the week, the conferees
have finally come into agreement,
reached on Friday last in which the
differences between the positions of the
two Houses have been reconciled to the
satisfaction, at least, of a majority of
the conferees representing the two
Houses. It will be recalled that there
were two major differences of position
between the bill, as adopted by the
Senate, and the one adopted here in the
House.
The first area of difference was with
respect to public versus private power
issue. The other body had put in a pro-
vision authorizing, if not directing, but
at least authorizing the Atomic Energy
Commission to build atomic energy
plants for the purpose of generating
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
377
commercial electricity. On the other
hand, a provision was considered in the
House which directed that the Com-
mission should not participate in that
very thing. It was argued that there
was some uncertainty as to whether
the Commission, under the bill orig-
inally reported to the two Houses,
would have had the authority to build
an atomic reactor of sufficient size to
prove its feasibility and practicability
as a commercial atomic plant. There
were some of us who took the position
that that was implicit in the authority
of the Commission. However, in order
to resolve that uncertainty, a provision
has been adopted by the conferees
which makes it very certain that the
Commission may, if it obtains funds
from the Congress, embark upon an
atomic power reactor of whatever size
it may feel is desirable, but it must be
on the basis of a research and develop-
ment project and not for the pure and
sole purpose of generating commercial
electricity.
There was a provision adopted by the
House prohibiting the Commission
from engaging in the generation of
commercial electricity which has been
retained. The provision was adopted
in both bodies, which is characterized
as a preference clause with respect to
the distribution of Federal power.
The substance of that amendment was
retained by the conferees so that now,
if this conference report is adopted, in
the event that the Commission has any
surplus byproduct electrical energy, it
may use it itself, or it may sell it to
another public body, or to private in-
stitutions. But, insofar as it is prac-
ticable the Commission must give
preference to public bodies and to co-
operatives in the sale of that surplus
or byproduct power.
Furthermore, there was question as
to whether other public bodies could
apply and receive a license to generate
electricity from an atomic reactor. In
order to clarify that, a provision has
been inserted making clear and un-
equivocal what was implicit in the orig-
inal bill to the effect that any Federal
agency or any public agency which
may be otherwise empowered by law to
do so, and which may have the funds,
may apply to the Atomic Energy Com-
mission for a license the same as any
individual may. So that now we can
assure our rural electrification people
and those interested in what is called
public power, that any public body,
and REA organization may apply for
a license to use atomic energy to gen-
erate electricity. Furthermore, we
can assure them that if there is for
some unforeseen reason a circumstance
which requires the Commission to limit
licenses, then the Commission must
give preference to the public bodies
and the cooperatives.
The other area of dispute was with
respect to the action taken by the
House which included a provision in
connection with the authority to enter
into international agreements. The
House adopted a provision which
would make it possible for any inter-
national agreement arrived at under
the procedures set forth in the pro-
posed law, to be canceled at any time
by concurrent resolution or under cer-
tain circumstances by the President.
That was not in the measure passed by
the Senate. The conferees were in
complete agreement with the purposes
and objectives of that amendment.
However, there are certain phases of
this program which are of great im-
portance, in which it is highly desir-
able that this limitation should not
apply. There are certain types of con-
tracts—and I may indicate what they
are—it has to do with the importation
of the source material from which
atomic weapons are made—that it is
very important that these agreements
be made as permanent and settled and
dependable as possible. So the con-
ferees have eliminated that provision.
I have discussed the matter with the
2 Members of The House who were
[p. 13780]
most active in presenting that matter
-------
378
LEGAL COMPIL VTION—KADIATION
and have indicated to them the full
implication of this position, and they
appear to be satisfied.
Mr. RABAUT. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the RECORD and
include therein an exchange of letters
between the chairman of the Commis-
sion and myself.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. RABAUT. The letters follow:
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D. C., August 1, 1954.
Hon. W. STERLING COLE,
Chairman, Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy, House of Representatives,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR COLLEAGUE: As one of the conferees on
the Army civil functions aspect of the bill, H. R.
9936, making supplemental appropriations for
1955, it has been my concern that I might not be
present in the House at the time the conference
report on the atomic energy bill is brought to
the floor. Consequently, I desire to make known
at this time my interest in the matter.
As I see it, it is important that the meaning
of the term "interstate commerce" as used in
section 183e be perfectly clear. I know that
there is no- intention in this act to broaden the
interpretation and application of this term to
include public utility companies now held to be
intrastate by reason of their operation within a
single State. There was considerable discussion
in the Senate debate on this amendment offered
by the junior Senator from Minnesota, and while
this debate helped to clarify the sense in which
"interstate commerce" "was used in section 183e,
I believe we should discuss it further to avoid
any remote possibility of ambiguity or misunder-
standing with respect to the application of the
term "interstate commerce" in this act.
I therefore would appreciate having you, as
chairman of the joint committee and a lawyer,
who fully understands the importance of avoid-
ing any possible misunderstanding or misinter-
pretation of this term as it is used in this bill,
please advise me as to the answers to these
questions:
1. Would an electric utility company acting
as a licensee under the Atomic Energy Act, as
amended, and not now subject to the regulatory
provisions of the Federal Power Act and having
no license to transmit electrical energy across
that State's borders to a sister State, but serv-
ing customers within its own State, such as
manufacturers of steel, automobiles, drugs,
stoves, furniture, and other products, who are
themselves engaged in interstate commerce,
would such electric utility company become
engaged in interstate commerce by reason of
its supplying electrical energy to such customers
within its own State and thus become subject to
the regulatory provisions of the Federal Power
Act?
2. Is there any intention whatsoever in this
act to broaden the application of the term
"interstate commerce" to include public utility
companies not now in interstate commerce so as
to bring them under the provisions of the Fed-
eral Power Act simply by reason of their be-
coming licensees under section 103 of the
Atomic Energy Act?
Your generous attention to this inquiry is
most appreciated and I earnestly await an early
reply.
Very sincerely yours,
Louis C. RABAUT,
Member of Congress.
(Copy to Hon. CARL T. DURHAM, House of
Representatives, Washington, D. C.)
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY,
August 9, 1954.
Hon. Louis C. RABAUT,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR MR. RABAUT: This is in reply to your
letter of August 7 regarding the intent of the
phrase "interstate commerce" in the Senate
version of H. R. 9757, section 183e.
The committee of conference has modified this
language and placed it in a separate, new sec-
tion 272. The modified provision is as follows:
"SEC. 272. Every licensee under this act who
holds a license from the Commission for a
utilization or production facility for the genera-
tion of commercial electric energy under section
103 and who transmits such energy in interstate
commerce or sells it at wholesale in interstate
commerce shall be subject to the regulatory
provisions of the Federal Power Act.
This language in no way requires licensees
generating or selling electric energy solely in
intrastate commerce to be construed as being
subject to the regulatory provisions of the Fed-
eral Power Act. It was the intention of the
committee of conference to insure that the
authority of the existing regulatory bodies—
State, local, or Federal—continue to have exactly
the same authority with regard to electric energy
generated from atomic energy as from any
other fuel. In other words, electric utility
companies generating and selling electric en-
ergy and using atomic energy will be subject to
exactly the same regulatory authorities as they
would be if they used any other fuel.
Your first question relates to the regulation
of purely intrastate electric utility companies
which may become licensees of the Commission
for the operation of atomic energy utilization or
production facilities. If such companies do not
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
379
actually expand their services to neighboring
States or take any other action which would
otherwise bring them under interstate commerce
regulations, there is nothing in the conference
bill which could possibly bring such companies
under any regulatory authority to which they
are not now subject.
Your second question inquires as to whether
or not the conference bill in any way broadens
the present definition of "interstate commerce"
in the electric utility field. It does not.
I shall be pleased to assist you in clarifying
any other questions on the revision of the Atomic
Energy Act,
Sincerely yours,
STERLING COLE,
Chairman,
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Speaker, I
probably should not be here in the well
of the House today. At this time in the
session tempers are short, the tem-
perature is hot, and politics is in the
air.
It grieves me somewhat to find my-
self in a position today which requires
that I oppose some of my good friends
on the committee. But there are times
when one necessarily has to take a
position in matters pertaining to the
security and the national defense of
our country. I place this measure in
the forefront of that category today.
I do not like everything that is in
this measure. I said so previously here
on the floor of this house. I do not
[p. 13781]
agree with every word in the measure.
But I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that
all the members of this committee, both
Democrats and Republicans, have
worked long and hard to bring to this
body a measure which would lead to a
sound domestic program, one that
would produce the necessary weapons
material for the Defense Department
and at the same time carry out the re-
quest of the President on international
cooperation and carry out the commit-
ments we have in NATO.
I believe the committee has worked
out and brought to the House a mea-
sure which is sound.
The charge which has recently been
made on the radio and in the press that
this bill constitutes a giveaway pro-
gram simply is not true; this legisla-
tion does no such thing. It authorizes
a program which, if properly executed
and carried out by the executive branch
of the Government, in time could give
to this country just what the existing
act has given to us before. There will
be some who will argue that it is a give-
away; but as long as this Government
owns and controls every gram of fis-
sionable material, the DuPonts, or any
other concern in this country can build
a reactor to the sky, and it is not worth
2 cents without that material. Do not
forget that the Government controls all
of it, even that which is produced by a
licensed reactor under this bill. We
own it continuously. I do not think
the time has yet arrived when we can
turn that ownership loose. So it is a
continuing Government monopoly. We
have provided under this measure for
more control of this operation than has
ever been done before. We have re-
quired authorization under this mea-
sure for everything that the
Commission builds from now on. I do
not think you will ever again experience
the difficulty that we faced here in the
last measure due to some contracts.
We have prevented the AEC from
going into the power business. I do not
believe any Member of the House wants
the Atomic Energy Commission in the
power business. We have made it pos-
sible for any REA or for any agency
of the Government other than the AEC
to come in and qualify and secure a
license to operate a reactor just the
same as anybody else. Any coopera-
tive and any duly authorized Govern-
ment agency can produce and sell
atomic power if it gets the license to
do so. But the AEC can only build a
full-scale reactor in connection with its
basic research programs. Of course
they can sell what comes from that, if
necessary, or use it themselves. That
is about as far as the bill allows the
AEC to go into the power field. You
have heard otherwise, but the problem
is rather simple, and this is just what
the bill does.
-------
380
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Some people have said that this pat-
ent provision in here will give to the
people who have had the inside on con-
tracts for the past few years a monop-
oly in the patent field. Personally, I
do not like the present patent law.
The Government today, as we all know,
requires of every individual who takes
a little job with the Federal Govern-
ment, and there are thousands of them,
Mr. Speaker—scientists working for
the Government—that everything that
comes from his brain must belong to
the Government. On top of that, the
industry of this country has followed
suit. So where do we find ourselves
with that kind of a policy?
For many, many thousands of years
science in Europe was free to operate
as it saw fit. But men came along, men
like Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin, who
said the state must own your minds.
What happened? I recommend and I
urge that the House and the executive
branch of the Government look at pat-
ent practices today. For thousands of
years we did not have the kind of sci-
entific personnel that we have today.
We are now in a different era; we are
in a different atmosphere; we have to
depend on these men; and we have to
take the leadership. It is important
that these young men have a free rein.
Why should the individual Members
here invest forty or fifty thousand dol-
lars in order that their sons may get a
doctor of philosophy degree, then have
him go into industry or into his own
Government and have them say: "You
will not get the benefits." That is not
right. That is what I do not like; but
that is what the present patent prac-
tices result in. This same patent prac-
tice prevails to a certain extent in this
act. To the extent it does, I do not like
it.
The bill gives preference to public
bodies, cooperatives, and high-cost
power areas in the sale of all power
distributed by the AEC if and when
there is any. That is written into the
act.
Let us look into the international
aspects a minute. I would support this
measure if it were only for one thing.
That is the problem we face today in
the international field. We all know
what the relations are between our-
selves and England pretty well. We
know that Churchill did not come over
here and advocate coexistence except
for the fact that he had some problem
at home. What was it? It is a polit-
ical problem, as we all know. Prob-
ably Attlee and Bevan are likely to
get more votes than he did. An elec-
tion will be coming along shortly, prob-
ably within the next 2 years. What
can we expect of Bevan? Although he
is not a Communist, we know whose
camp he would be in. It has been said,
and I think rightly so, that seven
atomic weapons would destroy the
British Isles. That is probably true,
so you can see why those people worry.
What do we do under this act to give
them some assurance that we are back
of them? It is peculiarly natural that
America and England should stand to-
gether, regardless whether they ever
develop the security of a European
pact which they are talking about but
have not yet signed. NATO is in ex-
istence today, and it is one body we
can cooperate with and assure the
people of England that they have some
protection, some back up from this tre-
mendous power that we have. We have
the delivery capacity, and we all know
that we have enough atomic weapons
to destroy any country in the world.
That is well kown. That is a fact. I
think under this provision for coopera-
tion with NATO, we say to England
and we say to our allies here that we
stand back of them with this tremen-
dous power. And this even though
some people say they have not co-
operated. I would like to give you an
idea of the valuable assistance that
came to us through source material
from Belgium and England. We would
not have had much, if they had not co-
operated with us. Therefore, it is
nothing but commonsense and decency
to cooperate with them in this respect.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
381
That is what we are trying to do here
in this bill, and we do exactly that
under this measure. If there was not
one other thing in the bill other than
that, I would vote for it.
Now, as to the other aspects of the
international field, I think the Presi-
dent can do what needs to be done
under this bill. It does not go as far
as I would like to have it go, but I
think he can at least make a beginning
in the field of international peacetime
cooperation. We do not give them any
dangerous secrets; it is simply co-
operation. We hand some information
to them, much of which is probably
pretty well known at the present time.
There is nothing of a secret nature,
nothing in the nature of weapons, or
anything of that sort.
Now, this House has always been
dignified in its position when it comes
to national defense measures and when
cooperation regarding the security of
the country is involved; politics are
forgotten. That is the reason I am
particularly proud to be a Member of
the House. I have seen on many oc-
casions the great leader we have today
walk down into the well of this House
at crucial times and say to us "This
thing must be done." Personally I
would like to see that today on my side
of the aisle. Politics has entered into
this, unfortunately, and I plead with
this body to dignify its position and
not put politics into the atom. We
have no control over the other body,
but, may I ask you one time again, do
not put politics into this. This pro-
gram has been carried out efficiently.
It has been a laborious task. We Mem-
bers on the joint committee have tried
to serve you as well as we could. We
have given you all the information
that we possibly could give you with-
out divulging any secrets. We know
what we have done, and we know
what we can do under this measure. I
do not hesitate to urge this House to
adopt this conference report today.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I hesitate to single out
any one member of the joint committee
for particular mention, because all of
the members of that committee have
devoted a great amount of time and
energy and sleepless nights in working
on this problem. As I indicated when
this matter was under discussion, this
bill is the culmination of 2 years of ef-
fort by the joint committee, and that
effort was initiated originally by the
gentleman from North Carolina [Mr.
DURHAM] who has just spoken. My
only reason for singling him out at this
time is to verify the fact that he, with
us, has labored long and hard, but he
had the added impediment of having to
endure the pain and suffering of ill
health. I want just to mention a word
of respect and compliment to him for
his faithfulness in this work. He first
[p. 13782]
became acquainted with atomic energy
in 1946 as a member of the Committee
on Military Affairs. That experience,
that knowledge has been of great ben-
efit to us on the joint committee in
considering the bill known as the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Mr.
DURHAM has been a pillar of strength,
wisdom, and vision in the consideration
of the vital legislation and he deserves
the plaudit and gratitude of the House
of Representatives.
Now I turn to the bill under consid-
eration. There is a section of this con-
ference report which I feel should be
clarified, section 152, that provision
imposing public ownership upon any
patent derived in the course of any as-
sociation with the commission what-
ever. The question has been raised as
to whether that association might cover
a licensing arrangement between the
commission and an individual. It is
not intended that section 152 should
cover licensees unless in some other
respects they do have an association
with the commission by reason of being
a contractor or subcontractor or hav-
ing money given to them by the Com-
mission. But the mere fact of a person
-------
382
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
having a license does not mean neces-
sarily that the product of his opera-
tion, if a patent should flow, would
become publicly owned.
While section 152 clearly prohibits
the granting of patents on any inven-
tion or discovery in the atomic field
"made or conceived under any con-
tract, subcontract, arrangement, or
other relationship with the Commis-
sion," it would be necessary to straift
this language to blanket within the
prohibitions those persons whose sole
relationship with the Commission is a
license granted by the Commission or
the use under license of some special
nuclear material owned by the Com-
mission. It is the intent of section 152
to make sure that ideas and inventions
which flow from Commission-financed
activity do not give rise to any private
patents which might be used contrary
to the best interest of the public. In
order to make sure that this very broad
definition does not work to the detri-
ment of both free enterprise and the
public, the Commission is specifically
granted the authority to "waive its
claim to any such invention or dis-
covery," if that invention or discov-
ery has been privately financed in
either licensed facilities, or in Com-
mission facilities, as provided in
section 22, or under any other circum-
stance which "the Commission may
deem appropriate." It would be a se-
rious misinterpretation of the intent of
section 152 to turn the strength of its
protective language against the stim-
ulus which patents provide for private
initiative.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield 10 minutes
to the gentleman from California [Mr.
HOLIFIELD] .
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous consent to revise and
extend my remarks and include addi-
tional material.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I
am sorry to find myself in disagreement
with my chairman [Mr. COLE] and my
esteemed friend [Mr. DURHAM]. But
I believe that it is the duty of a mem-
ber of the committee to present his
views upon the bill as he sees them.
As I see it, the atomic energy bill, as
reported by the conferees, is a worse
bill in many instances than it was when
it left the House. The conferees have
largely sterilized the constructive
amendments adopted in the House and
Senate, but have retained three ad-
verse amendments adopted by either
the House or the Senate.
The three amendments retained by
the conferees which render the bill far
more of a threat to the public interest
than the original bill are:
First. The amendment to section
164, introduced by Senator FERGUSON
and adopted by the Senate, which
would authorize the Atomic Energy
Commission to enter into a series of
contracts of the Dixon-Yates variety,
opening the TVA to private power sup-
ply to an extent limited only by the
total power supply which TVA is under
contract to deliver to the atomic pro-
gram. The AEG might conceivably re-
place the entire 2.9 million kilowatts it
gets from TVA on the Dixon-Yates
basis if granted the authority in this
bill, or in the Ferguson amendment.
The Dixon-Yates contract only re-
places 600,000 kilowatts and leaves
2,300,000 to be replaced by similar
arrangements.
Second. The amendment to section
44 introduced by Representative COLE
and adopted by the House, which would
preclude the AEC from selling or dis-
tributing any power not produced in-
cident to the operation of its research,
development, and production of nuclear
material facilities. This effectively
eliminates the Commission as an im-
portant participant in supplying
atomic power to municipal and rural
cooperative electric systems.
Third. The amendment to section
153 introduced by Representative COLE
and adopted by the House, giving the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
383
AEC discretion to allow private pat-
ents on inventions and discoveries
made or conceived under Commission
contracts, subcontracts, or other ar-
rangements; making possible rein-
statement of patent applications denied
under the present act; and eliminating
altogether the provision for compul-
sory or even discretionary licensing of
others to use private patents during an
adjustment period, following the new
act.
You will remember that the Pres-
ident in his February 17 speech said
that it was necessary to have a 5-year
compulsory patenting period in order
to protect the rest of private industry
from those people who have partic-
ipated in the program.
The conferees left just enough of the
language of constructive amendments,
adopted during the debate, to mislead
the people into believing that some
protection would be afforded. But the
substance has been effectively removed.
This is particularly true of two amend-
ments that were originally designed to
incorporate the preference for public
bodies and cooperatives; the new sec-
tion 45 which would have established
the basis for a sound Federal atomic
power program; and the amendment
which would have brought all licenses
for atomic power development under
the same regulation as applies to li-
censees for waterpower development.
What was done to emasculate these
constructive amendments may be
briefly summarized as follows:
The amendment to section 44, intro-
duced by Representative JONES and
Senator GILLETTE, providing a pref-
erence to public bodies and coopera-
tives in connection with the marketing
of electrical energy produced in AEC
facilities, was qualified by insertion
of the words "insofar as practicable."
Lawyers will recognize this as render-
ing the preference virtually unenforce-
able, particularly where a private
company is the only electric system
adjacent to the Commission's facilities.
The amendment to section 182 (c),
introduced by Senator HUMPHREY, pro-
viding a preference for public bodies
and cooperatives in securing licenses
where conflicting applications are in-
volved, received the same treatment.
Here again, insertion of the words "in-
sofar as practicable" left it within the
discretion of the Commission to refuse
to implement the preference. So the
preference clause that are in the con-
ference report are meaningless.
The amendment adding a subsection
183 (e), designed to subject atomic
power licensees to the same Federal
Power Commission regulation as wa-
terpower licensees, got trimmed in the
Senate before it was adopted.: It was
modified to apply only to those li-
censees which would come under the
Federal Power Act anyway as inter-
state utilities, and so lost its effect.
The conference damage to the two
preference amendments and to the
Federal atomic power program amend-
ment is very serious in terms of Fed-
eral power policy. The insertion of
"insofar as practicable" in the pref-
erence provisions would establish a
dangerous precedent which could aid
the administration drive to undermine
this principle. In the case of the Fed-
eral atomic power program amend-
ment, it materially reduces the chance
for municipal and cooperative rural
electric systems to get their share of
atomic power supply without paying
high rates to the neighboring private
monopoly.
Fundamentally, the bill represents a
complete reversal of the Federal power
policy which has been evolving since
the administration of President Theo-
dore Roosevelt. In spite of some empty
language taken from that power policy,
it leaves atomic power development, so
far as the public interest is concerned,
about where water power was before
enactment of the Federal Water
Power Act at the end of the Wilson
administration.
The Conferees also struck the heart
out of the two important Senate
amendments, designed to strengthen
-------
384
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the anti-monopoly provisions of the
bill, including (a) Senator HUM-
PHREY'S amendment to section 105 (c),
prohibiting the Commission from issu-
ing a license, except on a presidentially-
approved finding that it is essential to
defense, if the Attorney General ad-
vises that it would result in a situation
[p. 13783]
inconsistent with the antitrust laws;
and (b) Senator LANCER'S amendment
inserting a new subsection 105 (d),
providing for the possible forfeiture,
in the discretion of the court, of any
atomic patent found by any court of
competent jurisdiction to have been in-
tentionally used by the owner for vio-
lation of the antitrust law.
The bill as returned by the conferees
is thus a thoroughly bad bill from the
standpoint of farm, labor, rural electric
co-op, public power and consumer or-
ganizations. It reflects the objectives
of the drive of powerful private inter-
eats to oust the Federal Government
from future development of the new
atomic industry and take over. Provi-
sion is made for the Atomic Energy
Commission to continue the real pio-
neering work while private capital,
without assuming the risk, gets the
fruits.
The conferee's product provides for
an AEC setup which overweight mili-
tary, as against civilian, activities. Its
provisions covering patents, atomic
power development, other atomic indus-
trial development, and private exploi-
tation of atomic source materials in
public lands, play into the hands of un-
restrained monopoly at every point.
Its antitrust provisions are wholly in-
adequate. It provides for possible
hidden subsidy to private power mo-
nopoly, while foreclosing AEC partici-
pation in atomic power development.
It strikes out retroactively the reserva-
tion to the United States of uranium
and other source materials in public
lands, patented, conveyed, or leased to
private interests.
The provisions which purport to im-
plement the President's plan for inter-
national cooperation, in the peaceful
use of atomic energy, actually have the
opposite effect of imposing obstacles to
the exercise of powers he now has to
undertake the negotiation of treaties
or executive agreements. The Bricker
amendment distrust of the President's
treaty-making powers is written into
this phase of the bill. For those rea-
sons, I am going to vote against the
conference report. I have worked long
and hard for several months on this
bill. I want to pay tribute to the mem-
bers of the committee on both sides of
the aisle for the work they have done.
We have worked without heat and
acrimony and we have worked hard to
produce a good bill. I wish I could vote
for the bill, but these things weigh so
heavily on my conscience, I must take
the opposite position to that taken by
my friend, the gentleman from North
Carolina [Mr. DURHAM] and the gen-
tleman from New York [Mr. COLE] on
this matter. I realize that unless this
bill is very, very carefully adminis-
tered, there are giveaway provisions
in it which far outweigh anything that
I have known of in the past in the
patent field. It is my opinion that
within the next few months after the
President signs this bill, private cor-
porations and individuals who have
worked for private corporations can
file private patents by merely saying
that they did not think of those patents
while they were working on a Govern-
ment contract. The Ferguson amend-
ment provision provides for a series of
95 percent funding operations for pri-
vate utilities, which is in controvention
of regulations under the Private Util-
ity Holding Company Act of 1937,
which provides that private utilities
shall put up at least 35 percent to 40
percent equity investment and fund the
balance of it to the public on a. 60 to 65
percent basis. This Dixon-Yates for-
mula cuts that down and provides that
the speculators can put up 5 percent
of the total capital investment and
that they can sell the bonds to the com-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
385
pany on the basis of 95 percent. We
remember what happened under the old
Insull utility empire through the use
of the blue-sky financing operations.
In my opinion, the provisions of this
act under the Dixon-Yates contract
type, which is authorized and legalized
by the Ferguson amendment provides
a way of breaking down one of the most
important prohibitions against specu-
lative funding in private utility financ-
ing. Because of these reasons I shall
vote against the bill.
CONFERENCE REPORT ON ATOMIC ENERGY LEG-
ISLATION—STATEMENT op CONGRESSMEN CHET
HOLIFIELD AND MELVIN PRICE
AUGUST 9, 1954.
The atomic energy bill, H. R. 9757, as
worked out in conference, still contains many
serious defects and is disappointing to us in
its final formulation. Mr. HOLIFIELD, as a
conferee, withheld his vote from the conference
report, and we shall not vote for the confer-
ence bill.
From the very beginning we objected strongly
to tying together in a single package legislation
on the domestic and international aspects of
atomic energy. Not only may such single-
package legislation cause our objectives in the
international and domestic fields to work at
cross purposes, but there is far less urgency to
grant private ownership and patent rights in
atomic energy than to seek ways and means of
promoting peace and protecting the free world.
However, the majority did not allow Con-
gress the opportunity to consider and vote
separately the international and domestic provi-
sions relating to atomic energy.
Attempts were made to "sell" this bill as
implementing legislation for President Eisen-
hower's international atomic pool proposal.
The President never has advised the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy or the Congress
what implementing legislation is needed. Fur-
thermore, the pending atomic eneigy bill, in-
stead of preparing the way for an intei national
atomic agency, actually ties the President's
hands in negotiating agreements with other
countries.
We believe the restrictive provisions of the
bill relating to international atomic1 activities
are shortsighted, they ai e bnsod on the nariow,
selfish, and false premise that the rosoi von of
atomic in formation lies wholly within the
United States. The bill will not encourage a
two-way flow of information and may depiive
our Nation of the benefits of technological ad-
vances in other countries. The philosophy of
this legislation is to Uoi'p the atomic pool empty
We soi \ o notice hoi e and now that wo will
watch VCM y cmefullj how the punisions of i-his
bill aie intoi pro tod and administeied by the
Atomic Energy Commission. It contains no
effective measures for preventing monopoly
control of atomic industry. There are many
legislative loopholes which can work to the
advantage of the large corporations already
possessing inside information in the atomic
energy field.
If the Atomic Energy Commission is not
zealous in protecting the public investment in
atomic energy and in promoting a wide distribu-
tion of the benefits of that investment, drastic
legislative action will have to be taken in the
near future.
We are hopeful that a change in the congres-
sional majority next year will cause the Con-
gress to re-examine the atomic energy legisla-
tion, plug the loopholes against monopoly, and
make it plain that the Federal Government as
well as private industry should undertake to
produce electrical power from atomic energy.
In failing to assert clearcut Federal respon-
sibilities in the atomic power field, the majority
have shown a timidity which will defeat their
professed objective to insure American leader-
ship in the peacetime development of atomic
energy. The profit-making opportunities in
atomic enterprise are years distant. Unless the
United States Government strikes out boldly in
a comprehensive program of reactor develop-
ment and undertakes to produce and distribute
electrical power derived from nuclear fission, we
will soon find other countries forging rapidly
ahead in this field.
We believe that the United States has arrived
at a point in atomic-weapons development and
production where greatly increased attention
can be given to the peacetime uses of atomic
energy without impairing our national security.
Indeed, an effective demonstration of American
leadership in developing such peacetime uses
will do more to gain the friendship of other
people throughout the world than any demon-
stration of superiority in atomic weapons.
Accordingly we propose that the United
States undertake a billion dollar "ciash" pro-
gram for peacetime atomic-energy development
to let the whole world know that we are serious
about putting the atom to work for peace.
This billion-dollar piogram, spread over the
next 5 years, would represent about five times
the expenditures now planned for atomic icactor
development. Compared with the $40 billion
or $50 billion that we are spending yearly for
military purposes, $200 million a year for the
next 5 yeais would be a modest investment for
peace and well within our budgetary capabilities.
The Nation would soon receive dividends on this
investment in the form of advancing technology,
new industrial and employment opportunities,
and substantial additions to the Nation's energy
resources.
We have warned repeatedly against the
danger of creating a twilight zone of inaction,
where the Fedei al Govei nment fails to take
responsibility and private industry is not pre-
pared to assume it. That philosophy of inertia
-------
386
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
has shown itself in the budget policies of the
Eisenhower administration and in the adminis-
trative policies of the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion. The advice of the private utility lobby,
which prevails in the present administration
and is reflected in the atomic energy bill, is not
adequate to lay the foundations of American
leadership in the peacetime development of
atomic energy.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
an amendment which was offered to the atomic
energy bill proposing to establish a division in
the Atomic Energy Commission specifically de-
voted to civilian power application, coordinate
in status with the Division of Military Applica-
tion.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
an amendment establishing an Electric Power
Liaison Committee which would serve to inte-
grate atomic power policies with other power
policies of the Federal Government.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
amendments establishing clearly and unequiv-
ocally the historic preference clause for public
agencies and cooperatives in acquiring electric
power from atomic sources. By the insertion of
the clause "so far as practicable" the prefer-
ence clause has become a legal nullity.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
amendments which would provide safeguards in
[p. 13784]
the licensing of atomic facilities similar to those
now contained in the Federal Power Act.
The majority have been unwilling to prevent
the abuse of the independence of the Atomic
Energy Commission involved in the so-called
Dixon-Yates utility contract ordered by the
President. By adopting the Ferguson amend-
ment, the majority have not only given the stamp
of approval to the Dixon-Yates contract, but
have invited further assaults on the TV A.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
an amendment maintaining the affirmative re-
sponsibility of the Atomic Energy Commission
to exercise its licensing power so as to prevent
monopoly and other restraints of trade.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
an amendment which would provide a seat for
labor and management in the advisory councils
of the Atomic Energy Commission.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
amendments which would firmly insure against
patent monopoly bottlenecks in the development
of atomic industry. They have not followed the
Presidents requirement of a 5-year compulsory
patent licensing clause until a wider industrial
participation occurs.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
an amendment preserving the organizational
integrity of the Atomic Energy Commission by
guaranteeing that all Commissioners will have
equal access to information relating to atomic
affairs.
The majority have been unwilling to require
the Atomic Energy Commission to make the
comprehensive report to Congress contemplated
in section 7 (b) of the existing act.
The majority have been unwilling to accept
amendments facilitating the establishment of an
international atomic agency.
Amendments along these and other lines to
improve the atomic-energy bill and to protect
the public interest were voted down.
Our efforts, however, have not been alto-
gether in vain. The bill is improved over the
original version.
We have prevented an effort to weaken the
research responsibilities of the Atomic Energy
Commission.
We have compelled some recognition of the
threat of monopoly combinations.
We have obtained a few procedural safeguards
for municipalities, cooperatives, and other
agencies in the licensing of atomic reactors.
We have obtained some recognition of the
preference rights of such agencies in the event
atomic power is produced as a byproduct in
Atomic Energy Commission facilities.
We have managed to keep the door open for
other agencies of the Federal Government to
obtain licenses for the production and distribu-
tion of electric power from atomic sources even
though the Atomic Energy Commission has been
barred by the majority from commercial power
production.
We have prevented the Atomic Energy
Commission from directly reimbursing private
utilities for Federal income-tax payments, which
payments were contemplated in the so-called
Dixon-Yates contract.
Various other improvements were written into
the bill by our efforts even before it reached the
stage of amendment.
As we said at the outset, we are hopeful that
a new Congress with a new mandate from the
people will finish the job of legislative improve-
ment that some of us have begun in the face of
such overwhelming opposition.
The process of reexamination must be under-
taken not only by the Congress but by those
agencies of the executive branch that are alert
to the electrical power possibilities of the atom.
We must say that the Federal Power Commis-
sion has shown a great deal more concern for
the public interest in this regard than the
Atomic Energy Commission.
Since the Federal Power Commission already
has jurisdiction in the electric power field, in-
cluding responsibility for making surveys and
investigations as a basis for legislative recom-
mendations to the Congress, we will introduce
a House concurrent resolution expressing the
sense of Congress that the Federal Power Com-
mission undertake such a survey project under
existing authority. This report would serve to
compensate for the failure of the Atomic
Energy Commission to provide the Congress
with the comprehensive report required under
section 7 (b) of the Atomic Energy Act.
Of course we do not expect that the Con-
- gress will have time to vote upon this resolution
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
387
in the closing days of the session. However, we
intend to reintroduce the resolution promptly
at the opening of the new session in January,
In the meantime we take this means of serving
notice that we do not intend to let the matter of
atomic power policy fall by the wayside.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gen-
tleman from Illinois [Mr. PRICE],
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, I am in
much the same position as my col-
league, the gentleman from California
[Mr. HOLIFIELD] on this matter. I dis-
like the necessity of registering oppo-
sition to this bill. It was difficult for
me to vote against the bill when it was
originally considered here in the House
for I recognize there were avenues
which needed revision to permit the im-
plementation of the President's pro-
gram for international cooperation,
and particularly in the weapons field.
Personally, I am not one of those who
feels that this bill is at all adequate to
permit the cooperation which the Presi-
dent may be compelled to seek in this
particular field. But I could have sup-
ported the bill originally, and I would
now support the conference report,
were I not in such violent disagree-
ment with the patent provisions. In
that regard, I find myself pretty much
in the same position as the President
himself, who advocated and urged pro-
tection in this law against any possi-
ble monopolistic practices.
I want at this point to compliment
the Members who served on the confer-
ence committee. I concede that they
had a difficult job. I am in agreement
with my colleagues Mr. DURHAM, Mr.
COLE, and Mr. HOLIFIELD in expressing
the opinion that the committee on both
sides of the aisle did a monumental job
in working on this bill over the past
several months, but I have the feeling
that the committee discarded a very
crucial protective feature of the bill
and that was the provision for compul-
sory licensing of patents.
STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN MELVIN PRICE
ON PATENT PROVISIONS OF CONFERENCE BILL
In taking this unwise action, the majority
of the conference committee ignored the recom-
mendations of President Eisenhower, ignored
the recommendations of the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy, ignored the recommendations
of some very able patent attorneys, and re-
jected the decision of the other body.
When President Eisenhower submitted a
message to the Congress on Febi uai y 17 of
this >ear, proposing certain amendments to ihe
Atomic Energy Act, he said that it was neces-
sai y to continue "for a limited period the
authority to require a patent ownei to license
otheis to use an invention essential to the peace-
time applications of atomic energy."
The President was pioposing, in other words,
that a system of compulsory licensing of patents
be established to prevent any patent holder from
imposing a monopoly bottleneck on the develop-
ment of atomic eneigy. In elaboiating his pro-
posal, the President said:
"Until industrial participation in the utiliza-
tion of atomic eneigy acquires a broader base,
considerations of fail ness lequire some mechan-
ism to assure that the limited number of com-
panies, which as Government contractors now
have access to the program, cannot build a
patent monopoly which would exclude others
desiring to enter the field. I hope that par-
ticipation in the development of atomic power
will have broadened sufficiently in the next 5
years to remove the need for such provisions.'*
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, in
working out the detailed pi o visions of the
atomic energy bill, took heed of the President's
recommendation. Provisions foi compulsory
licensing of patents for a 5-year period were
written into the bill. The Committee report
said in this context:
"We are mindful of the fact that in the im-
mediate future, relatively few firms may be in-
volved in this effort. We acknowledge that
dangers of restrictive patent practices are pres-
ent, though not inherent, in such a situation.
Accordingly, we recommend to the Congress that
holdeis of patents on inventions of primary im-
portance to the peacetime uses of atomic energy
be required to license such patents to others in
return for fair royalties. This requiiement of
compulsory licensing will apply to all patents
in the field which are sought in the next 5 years.
(83d Cong., 2d sess., H. Rept. No. 2181, p. 9.)"
Although Congressman HOLIFIELD and I, in a
sspaiate statement of our views on the commit-
tae bill, criticized the restiictions that were
written around the compulsoiy-licensing provi-
sions, nevertheless we felt that the principle of
accessibility to patents at least had been recog-
nized and we commended the committee majority
for accepting it. Unfoitunately the House
majority threw out those compulsory patent
licensing provisions and adopted the Cole
amendment instead. The other body, in con-
trast, accepted the compulsory patent licensing
provisions and went a step further by adopting
the Kerr amendment extending the period of
such licensing to 10 years.
The conference committee version contains
-------
388
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the Cole amendment with a modification to the
effect that the Atomic Energy Commission
would give preferred consideration for commer-
cial licenses in the next 5 years to those appli-
cants who agree to make their licenses available
to other Commission licensees upon demonstra-
tion of need and payment of reasonable royalties.
The conference language on patents is a
makeshift. It would not guarantee access to
patents. There is no reason to suppose that any
industrial applicant would make such agreement,
in which case the preference provision would be
meaningless. Furthermore, the Commission is
not compelled to give preferred consideration
to license applicants in the research and devel-
opment field under section 104 (b). The manda-
tory preference applies only to applicants under
section 103, and it is doubtful that any licenses
would be granted under this section within the
5-year period of the preference conditions.
Finally, it is too much to expect that license
applicants would agree as a general proposition
to make licensing concessions regarding patents
long in advance of specific requests by those
seeking access to the patent.
[p. 13785]
I regret to say that the conferees, in adopt-
ing this makeshift and meaningless patent
language, placed an insurmountable obstacle in
the way of my voting for the conference bill.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gen-
tleman from Texas [Mr. KILDAY].
Mr. KILDAY. Mr. Speaker, while I
am a member of the Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy, I was not a mem-
ber of the conference committee on this
bill.
I do feel that the conference report
should be adopted. It happens that
when we first began to legislate on the
subject of atomic energy, the legislation
was referred to the former Committee
on Military Affairs, of which I was a
member. I therefore know thoroughly
that the existing Atomic Energy Act
was written in an atmosphere of hys-
teria ; that we were not able to get the
type of consideration which a bill of
that nature should have had. That is
easily understandable, because it was
so soon after the explosion of the first
atomic bomb. As a matter of fact, the
atmosphere was such that the normal
committee processes of the other body
could not function; and a special
committee had to be appointed in the
other body, which finally wrote the
legislation.
This bill has been under considera-
tion by the joint committee for a
little more than a year, and has come
here after having gone through the
processes of legislation and through a
conference committee. I am positive
that at no time in the reasonably near
future, certainly not for a period of
years and perhaps never, will it be
possible to get a unanimous report on a
bill affecting atomic energy, and partic-
ularly the participation of private in-
dustry in the atomic program.
I do not think there is anything in
this bill that should cause concern on
the part of any Member of the House.
I think it has been prepared with due
care. While I appreciate the fact that
uhere are circumstances involved in this
legislation which will prevent some
from voting for it, I think a vast ma-
jority of the Members of the House are
thoroughly justified in voting for this
conference report.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gen-
tleman from California [Mr. HIN-
SHAW].
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, in
order to set at rest the thoughts on the
part of some Members of the House and
various members of the press that
there is anything in this bill or that
there was anything in this bill before,
that precluded Government agencies
other than the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, from going into the business
of the production of electric power
through the use of atomic energy, that
simply is not so.
There is nothing to preclude an
agency of Government from going into
this business if it is otherwise qualified.
I want to say for the benefit of the
Members of the House that this busi-
ness of producing power from atomic
energy is something of tremendous size.
It means a plant of tremendous size.
The people who deal in reactor tech-
niques think that a reactor producing
250,000 to 300,000 kilowatts is prob-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
389
ably in the future an economic size of
reactor.
Those who talk about putting an
REA into the business do not quite
realize the nature of reactors. An
REA, if it used atomic energy at all,
would probably use what they call a
package reactor which would produce
at very high cost per kilowatt, and
therefore probably would not be used
at all. REA's, as I understand them,
usually operate on from 10,000 to
15,000 or 20,000 kilowatts and not
250,000 to 300,000 kilowatts.
So, Mr. Speaker, this bill is designed
to promote eventually such things as
the production of electric power from
atomic heat, and other peaceful uses
and peaceful arts in connection with
atomic energy.
I am glad that we have come to the
end of the consideration of the bill. I
trust it will receive unanimous support
of all present or, I might say, as nearly
unanimous support as possible to show
that we have dealt with this subject for
the time being in a way that is thor-
oughly satisfactory to everyone con-
cerned. In the meantime we, and in
turn the public, should realize that this
act can be amended at any time if it is
found that it is in anywise wrong or
fails to accomplish its purpose.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, in concluding the dis-
cussion of this bill, which to my mind is
of transcendant importance, I feel im-
pelled to express very briefly and en-
tirely inadequately a thought or two
on the general subject involved.
We all know, of course, that atoms
have been with us from the time of cre-
ation. It was only recently, however,
that man has learned to split the atom
and how to wed the atom, and in that
act bring about terrific force and ter-
rific energy. It was about 9 years ago
—exactly 9 years ago this month, that
this new force was used in warfare
when the two bombs were dropped in
Japan causing casualties amounting
to approximately 150,000 human be-
ings. Since that time the efforts of
this Government have been directed
toward improving the use of this great
force for weapon purposes, but that ef-
fort was required, not because of any
desire on the part of this Government
to maim and kill and to destroy, but
because of the conditions in the world.
It was announced at the very begin-
ning and has been reiterated continu-
ously since that our effort in this direc-
tion has been toward creating a stock-
pile of atomic weapons that could be
used against Communist aggression,
against the threat of invasion of free
people wherever it might become advis-
able or necessary.
Weapons have been improved. The
expression is now used that the weapon
of Nagasaki and Hiroshima used 9
years ago is now outmoded and called a
"model T." They have become bigger,
bigger, and ever bigger. All this has
been done to the point where the world
now lives in mortal constant and con-
tinuous fear of atomic energy. The
hearts of the people in this country
and people throughout the world are
distraught and discouraged and filled
with despair as they contemplate the
future with nothing involving the
use of the atom except death and
destruction.
The appeal of this bill, as I view it,
is that the door to a different use of the
atom is about to be opened. When that
door is opened, it will prove the fact
that there is nothing essentially or in-
herently sinister, baneful, or evil in
atomic energy; there is nothing wrong
or sinful in the energy itself; as a mat-
ter of fact lightning is more baneful
and sinister than atomic energy be-
cause we cannot predetermine where
or when it will strike nor what the con-
sequences will be. Not so with atomic
energy.
The effects of this new energy,
whether it is directed to the destruc-
tion of man or for the creation of good,
depends upon the hearts of the people
who control that energy. We have
learned that this energy can be con-
-------
390
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
trolled. The experts have indicated
that through the control of this energy
a field of unlimited possibilities is laid
before us. This bill, Mr. Speaker, is
the key to that door, opening into an
Elysian era of unknown proportion.
I am confident that those Members
of this body who vote for this bill to-
day, if they could remain Members of
this House 25 years from now, possibly
50 years from now, will, in looking back
over their record, point to this one vote
as being the outstanding one of their
entire career. At long last the bright
hope of the future is being lighted by
making available for the use of man
this new force, not only for generating
electricity but for improving the bod-
ies of people, for making the things
that people want and need, the absence
of which are the causes of war itself.
For my own part, and I am sure this
feeling is shared by all members of the
joint committee whether they vote for
or against this conference report, our
goal has been the same; we are proud
of the part we have played in this ef-
fort to make the use of this energy
available to mankind, not only for this
country but for people throughout the
world, for good, for creation, rather
than for devastation. We can now
begin to turn from fear to hope, from
despair to delight, from destruction to
creation, from being animals of the
jungle to creatures of God. Only the
future and the hearts of men will de-
termine the eventual outcome.
The detailed arguments and discus-
sions, the debates which have gone on
about patents, public power, and other
important matters of national policy
have tended to conceal the really major
contribution which this bill will make.
As important as atomic weapons and
thermonuclear weapons are to the de-
fense of our country, they can do no
more than preserve the uneasy peace
of the cold war. The NATO and inter-
national exchange provisions of the bill
will go a long way toward insuring the
absence of an all-out holocaust. But
the real contribution of this bill lies
in the promise it offers for a way to
bring the cold war itself to an end.
Most of the evils of the world have
their roots in misery, hunger, and
want. The peacetime applications of
[p. 13786]
atomic energy can do much to destroy
these roots of war. Cheap atomic
power for the underdeveloped nations
of the world can make men more resist-
ant to the evil ideas contained in any
form of totalitarian government Radio-
active isotopes offer the world its first
real hope for raising world food pro-
duction to a level adequate to bring
hunger to a halt. The fields, the for-
ests, and even the oceans themselves
can be made to supply a good life for
all people. The great strides which
have already been made in the war
against cancer and many, many other
scourges of mankind do no more than
show the way toward the elimination
of the physical and mental ills from
which mankind has suffered too long.
No legislative act of any Congress
can bring Utopia to our people or to
any part of the world. But if there
was ever a bill passed by any Con-
gress which brought Utopia nearer,
which freed men's minds to work for
human betterment, which promised not
to win war but to eliminate war, this
is such a bill. We should all be proud
of the fact that despite our constant
vigilance in military matters, we have
found time and have had the vision
to take these steps toward a better fu-
ture. The absence of war itself is cer-
tainly to be worked for, but we cannot
rest until the cold war itself has been
replaced by a prosperous and healthy
free world in which the roots of war no
longer exist.
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman from New York has expired.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I move the previous question.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the conference report.
The conference report was agreed to,
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
391
and a motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
* *
[p. 13787]
l.lb(5)(d) Aug. 13: Senate rejects conference report, pp. 14338-14339,
14341, 14343-14347, 14349-14350, 14353, 14355-14356
REVISION OF ATOMIC ENERGY ACT
OF 1954—CONFERENCE REPORT
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I submit a report of the commit-
tee of conference on the disagreeing
votes of the two Houses on the amend-
ment of the Senate to the bill (H. R.
9757) to amend the Atomic Energy Act
of 1946, as amended, and for other pur-
poses.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro
tempore. The report will be read for
the information of the Senate.
(The legislative clerk read the
report.)
(For conference report, see House
proceedings of August 9, 1954, pp.
13765-13779, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.)
Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President,
pursuant to the order of the Senate of
August 11, 1954, I now request that
the Senate proceed to the considera-
tion of the conference report.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro
tempore. Under the unanimous-con-
sent agreement of August 11, the ques-
tion is on agreeing to the conference
report.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro
tempore. The Senator from Iowa [Mr.
HICKENLOOPER] has 90 minutes. The
Senator from Texas [Mr. JOHNSON]
has 90 minutes.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield my-
self sufficient time to make the state-
ment I wish to make.
Mr. President, this is the conference
report on H. R. 9757, which is the pro-
posed Atomic Energy Act of 1954. I
should like at this time to read the
statement of the managers on the part
of the House in submitting the confer-
ence report to the House, because it is
substantially the same as the report
the Managers on the part of the Sen-
ate would make.
In the first place, I may say that the
committee of conference met for sev-
eral days, and the Managers on the
part of the House agreed to this report
by a vote of 4 to 1, one not voting.
There were five managers on the
part of the House on the conference
committee.
On the part of the Senate there were
five conferees. The report submitted
to the Senate is signed by 3 of those
conferees, 2 not signing the report.
The report has been in the Senate
for several days, and is available to
any Senators who may not presently
have it on their desks.
*****
[p. 14338]
STATES AND MUNICIPALITIES
PREFERENCE TO FEDERALLY FINANCED
POWER
Mr. MALONE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield to
the Senator from Nevada.
Mr. MALONE. I should like to ask
a vital question of the distinguished
Senator from Iowa, who, I think, has
done a first-class job in a difficult situa-
tion in bringing to the floor a bill which
seems to be a very practicable measure
in a new and importantly vital field—
a principle observed more than half a
century in reclamation law with re-
-------
392
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
gard to power financed by Federal
funds—and that is a State and mu-
nicipal preference for use of the power.
Senator Newlands, from Nevada, in-
troduced the bill to set up what is now
known as the Bureau of Reclamation
in 1902.
The law has been amended many
times since, but the principle has been
carried through when public money is
used to finance a power project, or
where power is developed as a byprod-
uct, such as, for example, the Boulder
Dam, now Hoover Dam, and many
other projects throughout the West.
Public bodies—the States or munici-
palities—were given a flat preference
under like conditions. The public bod-
ies, States and municipalities, are given
preference under the law; there is no
discretion exercised by the Secretary
of the Interior.
Do I understand correctly that there
is a preference clause in this bill which
would guarantee that the same policy
is carried forward?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. There is a
preference clause in this bill for coop-
erative and public bodies, for all power
produced by public bodies or the Atomic
Energy Commission.
Mr. MALONE. Is the provision a
flat preference under like conditions, or
is such preference dependent upon the
judgment of a commission or an
individual?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. It is indefi-
nite to a certain extent.
The Senator from Nevada will find
this provision on page 12 of the report,
in the middle of section 44:
In contracting for the disposal of such energy,
the Commission shall, insofar as practicable, give
preference and priority to public bodies and
cooperatives—
Public bodies would include munici-
palities; and cooperatives are really
private bodies, but we put in the word
"cooperatives" to emphasize it for un-
derstanding of Senators on the floor,
"or to privately owned utilities provid-
ing electric utility services to high-cost
areas not being served by public bodies
or cooperatives."
I should like to proceed with my
statement, but I wish to say that the
reason why the term "insofar as prac-
ticable" was used in this bill is that the
Atomic Energy Commission is not a
commercial power-producing agency.
The Commission has authority to
produce power if it gets the money
from the Congress enabling it to do
so. It has the authority to build any
sized reactor for research and develop-
ment, and to produce power on a com-
mercial basis, if it feels the reactor is
feasible and if it desires to build it. If
the Commission builds such a reactor
and has excess power resulting there-
from, and if there is a cooperative or a
municipal body accessible to receive
that power, there is no question in the
world that this preference governs and
controls. But the phrase is used be-
cause the Atomic Energy Commission
is a research and development body,
and in connection with its other instal-
lations and with its research and
development, it might be not only
desirable but almost necessary that
it locate such experimental power-
producing reactor in an area adjacent
to certain facilities where there would
be no cooperatives or no public bodies
with accessibility to the power.
Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield at that point?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield to
the Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. MALONE. If the Senator will
permit, I should like to follow through
and complete my questions.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I have only
90 minutes.
Mr. MALONE. Perhaps we could
get consent to devote more time to this
important bill.
Mr. President, I should like to ask
the distinguished Senator from Iowa
why he believes that under this bill,
which sets up a special body to develop
power, the Commission would always
give preference to a State or munici-
pality in allocating the power.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. On the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
393
basis of the language, which states
that they shall give preference insofar
as practicable.
Mr. MALONE. Who makes the
decision who is to be the judge?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I suppose
the Commission will make the decision.
If there are a competitive cooperative
or public body and private users, the
Commission would have no recourse
other than to give preference to the
cooperative.
Mr. MALONE. Mr. President, I
should like to say to the distinguished
Senator from Iowa that we in the West
have been dealing with this problem
for more than a half century. The
junior Senator from Nevada has per-
sonally dealt with the problem in his
engineering practice for 30 years and
as State engineer of his State from
1927 to 1935. The matter of prefer-
ence is always the problem. The power
from Boulder Dam, now Hoover Dam,
when it was sold, was sold with the
preference clause favoring the State
of Nevada, the State of Arizona, the
city of Los Angeles, and other south-
ern California cities in their turns.
There was no latitude given any official
at all. The private companies and
other agencies cooperated in such
allocations.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I should
like to correct the Senator's impression.
Mr. MALONE. Very well.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Those were
plants built specifically for the purpose
of producing commercial power as a
commercial operation. The AEC is not
in that business. It is not authorized
to go into the business of producing
public power or commercial power. It
will produce usable power only in con-
nection with whatever research and
development activities it undertakes.
If we want to put Government
money into any public bodies such as
TVA, such as the Bonneville power
district, such as any other public body,
for the purpose of producing commer-
cial power, which they do today, then a
[p. 14340]
different type of preference clause
should be written in the bill.
Mr. MALONE. The Bureau of Rec-
lamation is not in the business of pro-
ducing commercial power, as such. It
is in the business of building dams and
projects to store water for irrigation,
for flood control, and for other pur-
poses, and incidentally producing
power to contribute in amortizing the
cost of such projects. The Bureau is
not in the commercial power business,
as such, at all.
Many of us have always been against
the idea of the Bureau entering the
business of commercial power as such.
It is incidental to the objective of the
projects and is for the purpose of re-
paying the cost.
They set a commercial price on their
power to assist in repaying the cost,
and the flat preference applies.
I have some knowledge of the com-
mercial application of atomic energy.
The production of nuclear power ac-
cording to the learned professors and
theorists was that it would be feasible
within 25 or 30 years, but they ignored
or did not know about the high-cost
power areas in the intermountain and
desert areas.
I discussed with the Commission
when I first came to the Senate in 1947
the subject of feasibility. I maintained
that feasibility was a relative term.
Power is costing us 2 to 3 cents per
kilowatt-hour in many of the desert
and mountain areas in Nevada. We
wanted the first commercial reactor
built in Eureka, Nev.
We could have utilized from 20,000
to 30,000 kilowatts of power in that
area.
The Commission decided to build a
60,000-kilowatt reactor, which is too
big for the Eureka area. Our work
in the promotion of the commercial re-
actor idea for the high-cost areas re-
sulted in a rather extensive survey of
such areas and the Eureka area was
chosen at the highest cost and a favor-
able location.
Research was the original purpose of
-------
394
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the Commission, but now it is going
into 60,000-kilowatt reactors as a sort
of pilot plant—and can go into any
size reactor which they may later
decide is necessary to prove same
effective.
Does the Senator from Iowa see the
distinction—that the Commission is
the judge?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I see the
distinction, except that I believe the
Senator is making some assumptions
with which I do not agree.
Mr. MALONE. I understand that
the Senator does not see the lengths to
which they can go.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The as-
sumption, as I understand the Senator,
is that the Atomic Energy Commission
is going into the power business.
Mr. MALONE. It is in the power
business.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. It is not in
the commercial power business. It is in
the research and development business.
Mr. MALONE. We hope it will be
commercial, and I think it will be.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. But not as
a business of the Commission. Once
the Commission establishes the eco-
nomic factors relating to power from
reactors, then it is out of the power
business from that time on. It may be
turned over to any public power bodies
or to any private people who can get a
license to go into that business.
Mr. MALONE. If the Senator will
further yield, this will be the last ques-
tion I shall ask. There is nothing in
the bill which puts the Commission out
of the power business when it comes
under the head of research or pilot
plant experimentation—and the need
for research never ends.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes, in-
deed, there is.
Mr. MALONE. They can continue
to build experimental reactors, just as
we continue to build dams for reclama-
tion and flood control.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. MALONE. If the distinguished
Senator from Iowa will study the situ-
ation, he will see that if they are in the
business only for research, it should
not matter to them who gets the power.
If the power is not attractive to a mu-
nicipality or a State, then there will be
no bids or requests for it; but if it is
attractive to them, it should not make
any difference to the Commission to
whom the power goes; on the same
basis, since what they will want to do
is to dispose of it on a reasonable basis
—if they need it for use of the Com-
mission then it will not be offered for
sale.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I suggest
to the Senator that the Commission is
today building 5 different types of
reactors, using 5 different types of
elements within the reactor, to see if
they can get some answers on the
question of economy, feasibility, prac-
ticability, and all that. Those are
experimental and developmental re-
actors. The Commission may decide
that 1 or 2 or 3 of those can be certified
as practical reactors. After that, they
get out of that reactor business.
Mr. MALONE. We hope it proves
commercial and that they then get out
of the business—but under the bill they
can continue in business for further
research.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. According
to this bill, that is what will happen.
Of course, I do not know what future
Congresses will do.
Mr. MALONE. Who is the judge
when the decision is made that the re-
actors are practical? Practical where?
Practical in the high-cost desert and
mountain areas, or in the power cen-
ters where low-cost petroleum or coal
is available? Who is the judge?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Com-
mission certifies to that.
Mr. MALONE. And it is the judge
beyond any question under this bill—
so it is particularly important.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. It is the
judge.
Mr. MALONE. It may continue to
build reactors.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
395
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. They may
certify that a particular project is not
a practical one, and they may go on to
another type. They have five of them
under consideration right now.
Mr. MALONE. I point out to the
distinguished Senator that the setting
of such a policy—allowing a public offi-
cer to use his discretion in allotting the
power—would be a precedent in the
Congress of the United States. We
would then have the precedent of pub-
lic money—taxpayers' money used to
finance a product without a flat prefer-
ence clause.
Now, if they are only in the business
to develop power for research, then it
does not make any difference to them
as to the principle involved in the dis-
posal of it, and I suggest TO the Sen-
ator that the best thing to do would be
by unanimous consent or by returning
it to committee and to delete those
words, "insofar as practicable," and I
so suggest at this moment.
The more than half century principle
would then be carried on, that when
taxpayers' money is utilized to develop
a commercial product then public
bodies would have preference in its
utilization.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
know what the parliamentary situation
is on this particular matter. I yield to
the Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, it
was my intention to make the same ob-
servation. I am frank to admit that
all the phrase "insofar as practicable"
does is to confuse the minds of many
who are interested in giving effect to
the additional preference by furnish-
ing the power developed to public
projects and cooperatives. Personally,
I feel there is no legal meaning that
would disturb that traditional purpose
of the Congress, but I think it is re-
grettable that the language was in-
serted, because, in explaining this
feature of the law, whether much
power or little power is produced, the
fact of the matter is that we intended
that that power, if and when distrib-
uted, would be distributed according to
the Federal Power Act.
By adding the words "insofar as
practicable," I think all we have done
is to confuse the matter.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I have no
objection to having a mandatory pref-
erence without the phrase "insofar as
practicable," but I do not feel that I
have the responsibility, as an individ-
ual, at this moment to accept any sug-
gestion about eliminating those words,
by unanimous consent or otherwise. I
may consult a little with some of those
assisting me, if the Senator will be
patient with me. Based on the fact
that I believe this gives a preference
to public bodies and cooperatives when-
ever they are accessible to receive the
excess power, I do not disagree with the
Senator's theory. I can say that.
Mr. PASTORE. I wish to say to the
Senator that under parliamentary pro-
cedure I do not see how the Senator
can agree Ito such a suggestion. I
think the Senator must take the bill
back to conference and have the words
eliminated there.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
know whether unanimous consent on
the floor of the Senate could take care
of the matter. It is my opinion that we
could not delete those words without
submitting the matter to the other
body, but I am out of my element in
passing on this parliamentary situa-
tion.
The Senator from Tennessee has
been desirous of asking a question, and
I yield to him.
[p. 14341]
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. My view
and the view of the committee is—and
it is my intention and the intention of
the committee—that the "insofar as
practicable" phrase goes to the ques-
tion of the location in keeping with the
Atomic Energy Commission's responsi-
bility as a research and development
agency. If the Atomic Energy Com-
-------
396
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
mission should decide it should build
a research and development plant di-
rected toward experimentation, to re-
ceive data and information on commer-
cial power, in the eastern part of the
Senator's State, there are REA coop-
eratives and public bodies which have
an absolute preference under this bill.
There is no possible question about it,
if they are accessible to the power gen-
erated in connection with that devel-
opment.
Mr. MUNDT. It is that particular
phase of this situation in which I am
interested, because, obviously, if a
plant is built in some area which the
REA does not serve, that is another
question.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The ques-
tion was discussed in our committee
meeting. Suppose that at some time in
the future the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion should say, "We believe it is desir-
able and proper to construct a plant in
one of the New England States, in a
high-cost area." The Senator from
Nevada may have a high-cost area in
his State. A place is found where it is
desirable, for various scientific reasons,
to construct the plant. There is no
municipal body within 120 miles of that
place; there is no cooperative within
120 miles of it. Suppose the Atomic
Energy Commission says, "If we main-
tain absolute preference under this sit-
uation we shall have to operate an un-
economical line or use discretion as to
whether it should be disposed of at
whatever price is practicable."
Mr. MUNDT. It is important that
the legislative history in connection
with this conference report be very
clear, because it can be a guide to fu-
ture administrators. It is important
that the statement of the chairman of
the conference committee be very clear,
and I think it is important that there
be something in the RECORD from the
REA itself, because we wish to make
sure that in areas where there are mu-
nicipalities, where there are State or
public bodies, the preference clause will
in no sense be weakened or vitiated by
anything we may do here today.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Let me say
that as quickly as I can read this pre-
pared statement into the RECORD, I
shall bare my breast to any questions
that Senators may have to ask me.
I have been in touch with the Direc-
tor of the REA. He is at the present
time in Alaska on some REA business.
I received a telegram from him which
I shall ask to have placed in the RECORD
in a little while.
Mr. MALONE rose.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I now yield
to the Senator from Nevada.
Mr. MALONE. I wish to draw the
attention of the distinguished Senator
from Iowa to one fact with reference
to what he has referred to as a high-
cost area. He said the Atomic Energy
Commission might have to build an un-
economical transmission line presum-
ably to deliver the power. If he had
given it due consideration I am sure he
would realize that the public body must
receive the power and deliver it to the
place of use. If the operation is un-
economical, it will not apply for it. It
is a matter of preference to utilize it.
If a public body does not apply for
it within the reasonable time set by
the Commission, then general bids may
be received.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. So far as I
am concerned, I have stated my own
position. The provision was main-
tained because it was sought to protect
the opportunities of certain high-cost
areas. We went along with the idea.
I am stating my assumption that if
the power is accessible to REA or any
other public body on a reasonable basis,
they should have a preference.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Iowa yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. As one of the
conferees, I believe, with the Senator
from South Dakota and the Senator
from Nevada, that those words should
not have been inserted if they do not
mean something.
Mr. MALONE. They do mean some-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
397
thing.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Presi-
dent, I again ask that I be not inter-
rupted until I finish my prepared re-
marks.
PRODUCTION OF POWER BY THE
COMMISSION
The committee of conference has
worked out many points of difference
between the House and Senate versions
of the bill.
One of the more controversial items
in the bill related to the ability of the
Federal Government to enter the busi-
ness of commercially producing elec-
tricity from atomic energy. This was
encouraged by the Senate—Johnson—
amendment which added section 45.
The bill as introduced did not preclude
Federal agencies from getting licenses
from the Commission, and in fact per-
mitted them to obtain licenses on an
equal footing with other applicants for
licenses. The amendments made by
the committee of conference to sections
103 and 104 reinforce this fact. Spe-
cifically, they make it clear that the
Commission must issue licenses to per-
sons who might apply therefor if they
are otherwise qualified. In the defini-
tion chapter of the bill, the term "per-
son" is defined to include "any public
or private institution, group, Govern-
ment agency other than the Commis-
sion, any State or any political
subdivision of, or any political entity
within a State or other entity." Thus,
"persons" clearly include all Federal
agencies other than the Commission.
In addition, the committee of con-
ference added a new section to the
bill, section 273, which reincorporates
as a separate section the sentence in
the Senate amendment dealing with
the right of other Federal agencies to
obtain licenses. There are public agen-
cies, State and Federal, which are well
versed in the problems of distribution
of energy for commercial purposes. If
these agencies desire to generate elec-
tricity from atomic energy they may
obtain licenses to do so. If the number
of licenses which can be granted is
limited at the time when these public
agencies are applying for licenses, they
will be preferred according to the
terms of section 182c.
With respect to the ability of the
Commission to build large scale re-
actors, the committee of conference
clarified what had been the intent of
the legislation as it was introduced,
namely, that the Commission would be
—and is presently—empowered to
build full-scale reactors if they are be-
ing built as part of the research and
development program of the Commis-
sion in order to prove out as practical
a particular type of reactor.
Mr. President, under existing law
the Commission is assisting in the
building of five different typ'es of re-
actors. It already has the authority
to do so. The five types are: a pres-
surized water reactor, a boiling water
reactor, a sodium-graphite reactor, a
homogeneous reactor, and a fast
breeder reactor. As I recall, they
range from approximately 10,000 kilo-
watts capacity to 60,000 kilowatts
capacity.
The Commission now has the author-
ity to do this, and is doing it. The bill
amplifies and clarifies the fact that the
Commission can do it. Under the bill,
if Congress gives the Commission
power, the Commission can build a 1
million kilowatt reactor as a part of its
experimental and developmental activi-
ties. The Commission could do it un-
der the old law, also, if it could get the
money from Congress.
In order to accomplish this, clarify-
ing language was added to the section
dealing with the research and devel-
opment program of the Commission,
section 31 a (4). Among the research
and development activities specifically
authorized there are now included
those relating to building and testing
full-scale atomic-powerplants.
The House adopted an amendment
specifically prohibiting the Commission
from engaging in the commercial sale
of electric power except for the power
-------
398
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
generated in connection with research
and development facilities or that gen-
erated at production facilities of the
Commission. This was retained by the
conferees as part of section 44.
I reiterate what I have said several
times, that that provision was included
so as to state clearly and make certain
beyond question that the Atomic En-
ergy Commission's research and de-
velopment group in government is not
in the business of building commercial
powerplants for the purpose of the
commercial sale of power. If it is de-
sired to have the Government sell
power commercially, other governmen-
tal agencies could do that, or could
equip themselves to do it; or a special
Government agency could be created
to go into that business. But the
Atomic Energy Commission's research
and development group should not be
[p. 14343]
in the business of the production and
sale of commercial power. I wish to
make that perfectly clear.
The Atomic Energy Commission, if
it builds a 1 million kilowatt reactor
as an experiment, can sell as much
power as it does not need; but to go
into the business of building reactors
throughout the country, for the pur-
pose of producing commercial power,
no. That should rest with other agen-
cies, public or private.
That portion of the Senate amend-
ment relating to Commission opera-
tion of powerplants which would have
exempted the construction or expan-
sion of such plants from specific con-
gressional authorization was removed
from section 261 as being contrary to
the intent of the sponsors of the
amendment. The Commission must,
under the conference bill, obtain spe-
cific congressional authorization as
well as appropriations for each new
plant, construction, or expansion re-
gardless of the type of plant involved.
That is nothing unique. This prin-
ciple is followed throughout most of the
departments of the Government. If
the Commission seeks to build new
plants, it will have to come to Congress
for the money. This provision does not
apply uniquely to the Atomic Energy
Commission; it is in keeping with poli-
cies which have been established for a
long time.
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
AUTHORITY (SEC. 183 E)
Another Senate amendment, the
Humphrey amendment, added section
183 e, required licensees operating uti-
lization or production facilities under
section 103 to be subject to the regu-
latory provisions of the Federal Power
Act. This was moved to a new section,
section 272. It provides a specific
statement in the bill that the jurisdic-
tion of the Federal Power Act is appli-
cable to commercial electrical energy
transmitted in interstate commerce or
marketed at wholesale in interstate
commerce without regard to the fact
that such electricity is generated from
atomic energy. While it was the con-
tention of the sponsors of the bill that
this effect was obtained by the provi-
sions of section 271, this amendment
was accepted and retained in substance
by the conferees on the theory that it
was a specific restatement of the ap-
plicability of the Federal Power Act.
*****
[p. 14344]
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. For a li-
cense under section 103, which is the
commercial production licensing sec-
tion, and that the Commission may—
the word "shall" refers to section 103—
give such consideration to applicants
under section 104, which is the experi-
mental licensing provision, who in-
clude in their application for their li-
censing agreement that they will cross-
license any patent which they may de-
velop within a 5-year period with other
licensees who hold licenses from the
Commission, at a reasonable royalty
fee, to be fixed by the Commission un-
der the procedure set up under the bill.
Mr. KERR. If the Senator from.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
399
Oklahoma understood the Senator from
Iowa, section 182 d applies only to
those seeking a license under section
103?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Let me get
the exact language for the Senator. I
am about to read from page 36 of the
conference report.
Mr. KERR. Is the Senator about to
read from section 182 d?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I am about
to read from section 182 d of the pro-
posed bill.
Mr. KERR. Of the conference re-
port?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes, of the
conference report which is before us.
Mr. KERR. The only place in which
the word "shall" occurs there is with
reference to a license under section 103.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I so stated
to the Senator from Oklahoma a mo-
ment ago.
Mr. KERR. I am not arguing with
the Senator; I am merely trying to
make something clear.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. With ref-
erence to section 104, which is the
research and experimental licensing
section of the bill, it says that the
Commission "may."
Mr. KERR. But the commercial li-
censing to which the Senator has re-
ferred is contained in section 103, is it
not?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. KERR. The only place where
the word "shall" appears under sec-
tion 182 d is with reference to patent
licenses under section 103. Is that not
correct?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct.
Mr. KERR. What licenses are con-
templated under section 103?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I will have
to say to the Senator from Oklahoma
I do not know, and I do not think any-
body else knows what the future holds
in that regard.
Mr. KERR. I will ask the Senator
if it is not very clearly set forth in
section 102?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. It says li-
censes in connection with processes and
any other matters which may be found
to be usable.
Mr. KERR. I think the answer to
the question will be found in section
102. If it goes beyond that, I would
like to have the Senator tell me what
it is.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I again say
I do not know. I do know what the
licenses will be. I shall read into the
RECORD section 102, but I say nobody
has a crystal ball to look into and see
what may eventuate in the future.
Mr. KERR. Will the Senator read
section 102 and see if that does not de-
fine what is available under section
103?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Section 102
reads:
Whenever the Commission has made a finding
in writing that any type of utilization or produc-
tion facility has been sufficiently developed to be
of practical value for industrial or commercial
purposes, the Commission may thereafter issue
licenses for such type of facility pursuant to
section 103.
That has nothing specifically to do,
except in production generally, with
licenses. Here is the procedure: Any
person or organization, public or pri-
vate, who wants to go into the business
of trying to make heat, or use uranium
to turn generators to make electric
energy, will have to come in under sec-
tion 104 d and get a license to build an
experimental reactor. After he has
built the reactor, and the Commission
has looked it over and made a finding
that that particular type of reactor—
and there are a number of types, at
least in theory, and probably they are
feasible—has been sufficiently devel-
oped to be of practical value for indus-
trial or commercial purposes, then he
must apply to the Commission, under
section 103, under the commercial
clauses, for a license to use that type
of reactor for commercial purposes.
Mr. KERR. Will the Senator yield
further for a question at that point?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
-------
400
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Mr. KERR. The word "shall" in sec-
tion 182 d does not apply, subsequently
to what the Senator has just referred
to, as being necessary to take place.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct. The word "shall" applies to
section 103, which refers to the com-
mercial operation in this field.
Mr. KERR. Is it not a fact that sec-
tion 182 d in the conference report ex-
pires 5 years from the date of the
agreement to the conference report?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. KERR. Does the Senator think
any of that 5-year period will be sub-
sequent to what he has described as
having to take place with reference to
a license for a research development
under section 104, and then with refer-
ence to the granting or securing of a
license under section 103? Does the
Senator think any of that 5-year period
will still apply subsequent to that time?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I think it
may well be, although I cannot look
into the future. I will say to the Sena-
tor that I had a call yesterday from
an organization in the eastern part of
the United States that has been doing
some work on this matter. The person
to whom I talked said, "We have a re-
actor. We are ready to go to work on
building a prototype reactor. We are
convinced it will be a commercial re-
actor, and we think it is all right. We
think we will have it operating in a
year. We would like to get into pro-
duction. What do your licensing pro-
visions require?"
I said, "You will have to read it and
get your attorney to look into it."
Mr. KERR. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield for another question?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is one
group which said, "We think we can
have a commercial reactor in opera-
tion." I do not know that I agree with
them.
Mr. KERR. Madam President, will
the Senator yield for another question?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs.
BOWRING in the chair). Does the Sena-
tor from Iowa yield to the Senator
from Oklahoma?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
[p. 14345]
Mr. KERR. Sections 102 and 103 of
the conference report are practically
identical with the sections which ap-
peared in H. R. 9757, when the com-
mittee reported it to the Senate several
weeks ago, are they not?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I think
that is substantially correct.
Mr. KERR. At that time the com-
mittee was of the opinion that section
152 was a necessary addition to H. R.
9757.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Will the
Senator state the question again? I
have section 152 before me now.
Mr. KERR. The Senator from Iowa
has advised me that sections 102 and
103 in the conference report are prac-
tically identical with the sections as
they appeared in H. R. 9757, when the
bill came to the Senate several weeks
ago.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is substantially correct. There may
be some slight variations, but the in-
tent and purposes are the same.
Mr. KERR. To all intents and pur-
poses they are the same?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes.
Mr. KERR. At that time the Senate
and the committee felt that section 152
was a necessary addition to the bill?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. At that
time, yes. That is the compulsory li-
censing section. I think the Senate felt
it was a necessary addition.
Mr. KERR. Did the committee not
feel it was a necessary addition?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I forget
what the vote was, but I think the
committee inserted it.
Mr. KERR. It was in the bill when
it was brought to the Senate; was it
not?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The com-
mittee inserted it. I am sure it was
felt to be necessary.
Mr. KERR. Will the Senator tell
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
401
the Senate
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I am not so
certain that all the provisions are
necessary.
Mr. KERR. Will the Senator tell the
Senate where any part of section 152
can be found in the conference report?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. It has been
entirely removed, in the conference
report, with the exception of section
182 d.
Mr. KERR. But the only place in
section 182 d where the word "shall"
appears is with reference to licenses to
be issued in connection with section
103.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct.
Mr. KERR. Those licenses were
made available under the bill when it
passed the Senate.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. KERR. Licensing under section
103 was in the bill when we passed it.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct.
Mr. KERR. At that time the Atomic
Energy Commission, the Senator from
Iowa, and the Senate felt that section
152 was a necessary part of the bill, in
addition to section 103.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes. I
think the committee felt it was a proper
provision. But I assure the Senator
that the majority of the committee
thinks that section 182 (d) is wholly
adequate to meet certain objections
which might have been heard before,
and accomplishes the desired purpose.
Mr. KERR. Madam President, will
the Senator yield for one more
question?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I am de-
lighted to yield. I have occupied the
floor for almost 1 hour of my total allot-
ment of one and a half hours. Other
Senators supporting- the conference re-
port are entitled to some opportunity
to be heard. I do not wish to monop-
olize all the time. Also, I wish to give
Senators opposing the conference re-
port an opportunity to discuss it.
Mr. KERR. First, I thank the Sen-
ator for his very gracious courtesy to
me in this colloquy, as well as when
the bill was before the Senate.
The Senator from Iowa has said he
could not look into the future and fore-
see what might be the situation.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. What type
of patent is referred to? The funda-
mental patents in this field already
belong to the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion and are in the public domain. As
a matter of fact, they are available
without charge.
Mr. KERR. I shall discuss that sub-
ject in a little while.
I ask the Senator if, at the same time
he tells us he cannot foresee the future,
he is not asking the Senate and the
Congress if we accept section 182 (d)
in lieu of section 152, to take a leap in
the dark?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
wish to take the time to discuss that
question fully. In the Atomic Energy
Act of 1946 covering the whole field of
atomic energy, we took the biggest leap
in the dark that we have ever taken.
We had only the least idea of what
would happen. We knew that the
bomb would explode, but wre did not
know anything further. We wrote the
bill and took a leap in the dark. We
provided safeguards. We gave discre-
tion in many cases. The Atomic En-
ergy Act of 1946 has worked quite well,
but the situation has changed.
It is time for the American economy
to take part in this industry. We shall
have to take some reasonable chances,
with reasonable safeguards, in order to
permit this great art to expand in a
great free economy.
Mr. KERR. Previously, however,
every patent developed under the
Atomic Energy Act of 1946 either be-
longs to the Government or was avail-
able to the Government.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The fact
that the Government was preempting
patents and rights theretofore consid-
sidered sacred property rights of indi-
viduals was a theory which was revolt-
-------
402
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
ing to every member of the committee
who participated in writing that par-
ticular bill, but we knew of no other
way to accomplish the desired end at
that particular moment.
Now we think it is time that the
American economy, at a reasonable
time in the future, should be permitted
to have access to this information and
use its genius in that field.
Mr. KERR. Again I thank the Sen-
ator for his courtesy to me.
Mr. PASTORE. Madam President,
will the Senator yield to me for one
question?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. PASTORE. As a preface to my
question, let me recapitulate my under-
standing of what has been presented by
the Senator from Iowa.
Under the procedure provided by this
proposed law, as the Senator has ex-
plained in the first instance an appli-
cant comes in under section 104 (b),
which provides for research in this
particular field.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
substantially correct. Let me clarify
that point. It is conceivable that some-
one may "cook up" in a basement some-
where a reactor which the Commission
might look at and say, "This is a prac-
tical reactor. We will permit you to
apply under section 103, because you
have already built the reactor. You
did not apply under section 104 (b)."
However, I doubt that such a thing will
occur.
Mr. PASTORE. In any event, that
applicant or individual comes in under
the provisions of section 104 (b).
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. PASTORE. Until the point is
reached, under section 102, where the
particular utilization reaches the level
of practicability; is that correct?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. PASTORE. The procedure is
then covered under section 103 (b) ?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. But the in-
dividual must apply and be rescreened.
Mr. PASTORE. I shall come to that
point in a moment.
When the individual applies under
section 104 (b), it is discretionary with
the Commission as to whether or not it
will enforce the preference, insofar as
obligating the applicant to agree that
he will cross-license for a period of 5
years is concerned?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct.
Mr. PASTORE. At that point it is
discretionary. We are dealing with
one applicant. When that one appli-
cant comes under section 103, when he
applies for the commercial utilization
of this development, it is mandatory
upon the Commission, under section
182, to require the licensee, if he wants
to obtain the preference, to agree to
cross-license for a period of 5 years.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. If he wants
it. It says "The Commission shall give
preference."
Mr. PASTORE. That is correct.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
wish to be misunderstood. It is not
obligatory.
Mr. PASTORE. The question I de-
sire to ask the distinguished Senator
from Iowa is this: How are we to in-
voke the preference if only one person
is being dealt with?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. In the case
of only one individual the preference is
not involved.
Mr. PASTORE. In other words, if
we are dealing with one individual, the
entire preference feature of section 182
is not worth the paper on which it is
written.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. If we are
dealing exclusively with one individual,
that is correct. I do not believe there
is much likelihood of such a situation.
[p. 14346]
Mr. PASTORE. Very well. Let me
begin by referring to section 104 (b).
When the work has reached the point
where the application is practicable,
section 103 applies. We are always
dealing with one individual. Where is
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
403
the rivalry or contest?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Under sec-
tion 104 (b) undoubtedly a number of
individuals will be pursuing the same
theory.
Mr. PASTORE. Perhaps at inter-
vals of 1 or 2 or 3 years?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I am as-
suming that they will start to work as
quickly as possible. Several individ-
uals will be pursuing the same theory.
When the theory becomes practicable,
and has been certified, several appli-
cants will be found working on the
same theory, and the preference will
apply.
Mr. PASTORE. Will the Senator
permit me to ask one more question?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes.
Mr. PASTORE. I am perfectly will-
ing to have this discussion charged to
my own time, if the Senator feels that
would be fair.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
quite all right. I wish to yield further
time to this side, however.
Mr. PASTORE. The Senator has
said the reason why the conferees elim-
inated the compulsory licensing feature
was that they were afraid the entire
act might be vitiated on the ground
that it was unconstitutional. Is that
correct?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That ques-
tion was raised in the House. It was
raised in the committee. Arguments
which are quite persuasive to many
persons indicate that there is a consti-
tutional question.
Mr. PASTORE. Could not that con-
stitutional question be taken care of by
obligating and requiring every appli-
cant for a license to agree, before he
received the license, that for a period
of 5 years he would, at a reasonable
royalty, grant to anyone who wanted
it the use of that license, which was
affected with the public interest?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That could
be done. It was not done in the confer-
ence report.
Mr. PASTORE, In other words, all
these arguments of unconstitutionality
are nothing more than "eyewash."
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I do not
agree to that statement. I said that
that language could have been adopted
by the conference committee. It could
have been put into the conference bill,
but it was not.
Mr. PASTORE. That would not
have raised the question of unconstitu-
tionality, would it?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I have not
undertaken any research on that mat-
ter. I could not answer the Senator's
question.
Madam President, I should like to
terminate this portion of my remarks
and yield to the Senator from Texas
[Mr. JOHNSON].
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield to
the distinguished Senator from New
Mexico [Mr. ANDERSON].
Mr. ANDERSON. I shall vote
against the adoption of the conference
report.
First, I wish to say to the able Sen-
ator from Iowa [Mr. HICKENLOOPER]
that I have appreciated listening to his
discussion today. The Senator from
Iowa, in my opinion, tried hard to make
possible a conference report to which
there would be agreement. Through-
out the entire conference, his attitude
was one of trying to develop a good bill
which would be acceptable to both the
House and the Senate. I should cer-
tainly feel ashamed of myself if I did
not say that, while I disagree with his
final conclusion, I can only commend
the conduct he maintained throughout
the entire conference.
I am opposed to this conference re-
port for many reasons. Strangely, the
reasons are not those that might have
impelled me in the early discussion of
the bill itself. I was not completely
satisfied with the bill as it was reported
by the committee.
At that time the bill contained a pro-
vision legalizing the Dixon-Yates con-
tract. I fought that provision as hard
as I could. I lost that fight, and recog-
nized the validity of the majority senti-
ment of the Senate of the United
-------
404
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
States. Subsequently in the conference
I did not raise one question about that
provision, because it represented the
sentiment of the Senate of the United
States. If this bill goes back to confer-
ence, I do not intend to raise the issue
of the Dixon-Yates contract, because
that matter has been closed as far as
this bill is concerned.
I am interested only in trying to
make sure that we get a better bill than
we now have. If the bill goes back to
conference, it shall not be my purpose
to try to prevent its enactment into
law. I am desirous of seeing a confer-
ence report quickly emerge and be
adopted by both the House and the
Senate. I think that can be done.
I am interested in the amendments,
however, which represented the senti-
ment of the Senate and which were
adopted by the Senate. I think the
atomic-energy bill was greatly im-
proved in its course through the Sen-
ate. It was improved first by the
Johnson amendment, which would have
permitted the Atomic Energy Com-
mission to build atomic-energy plants
for the generation of electric energy.
It was improved by the Gillette
amendment, providing preference and
priority to public bodies and coopera-
tives.
It was improved by the Gore amend-
ment, providing that there should be
no direct reimbursement to contractors
for their Federal taxes.
Finally, it was improved by the Kerr
amendment, extending the period of
compulsory licensing of atomic patents
from 5 to 10 years, requiring the patent
licenses to be nonexclusive, and that the
terms for similar licenses be the same
for comparable uses.
As I indicated a moment ago, I think
the junior Senator from Nevada [Mr.
MALONE] put his finger on the very
touchy point in this whole thing when
he pointed out the references that were
made to this particular section relating
to the Johnson amendment. I commend
the Senator from Nevada for what he
did in that regard.
There were other good amendments,
several by the junior Senator from
Minnesota [Mr. HUMPHREY], at least
2 by the able Senator from Rhode
Island [Mr. PASTORE], 1 by the able
senior Senator irom North Dakota
[Mr. LANGEK]. These were all good
amendments, but in the main, my feel-
ing that the bill had been greatly im-
proved in the Senate rested on the
broad base of the Johnson, Gillette,
Gore, and Kerr amendments.
Madam President, I supported the
bill on final passage, and urged other
Senators to support it. It was not
everything I wanted. It contained one
amendment which I had bitterly re-
sisted. But, in my judgment, it was an
improvement over the act of 1946, be-
cause the art of using nuclear energy
has greatly advanced since 1946, and
we needed to bring our legislative pro-
gram more nearly in line with our
scientific progress.
Then the bill went to conference, and
to some degree, at least, these gains
were whittled away. The Gore amend-
ment, I am happy to say, was retained.
The Gillette amendment was greatly
reduced in its effect. Instead of re-
quiring that in disposing of such en-
ergy, the Commission would at all
times give preference and priority to
public bodies and cooperatives, it was
made to read that the Commission
would "insofar as practicable" give
preference and priority to public bodies
and cooperatives; and, in respect to a
part of the Pastore amendment, there
was added to the preference section
these words: "or to privately owned
utilities providing electric services to
high-cost areas not being served by
public bodies or cooperatives."
Mr. Newlands, the great Senator
from Nevada, who originally had the
preference clause adopted in 1901, did
a very wise thing. I believe that that
preference clause should remain in this
bill and should be more clearly ex-
pressed.
It ought to be said in behalf of the
conferees that I do not think they
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
405
intended to strike quite so deeply as
they did strike by the words "insofar
as practicable." I think it would be
agreed that those words were inserted
because of a situation the Senator from
Iowa [Mr. HICKENLOOPER] suggested,
that there might be a utility 150 miles
away which it might not be practicable
to serve. Since then I have found that
the preference clause, as the Senator
from Nevada [Mr. MALONE] pointed
out a while ago, can be applied in in-
stances of that kind. Therefore, the
words "insofar as practicable" should
be stricken from the conference report.
The Senator from Nevada suggested
we might do that by unanimous con-
sent. I know of no way of doing it in
the Senate. I think the bill must go
back to conference in order that those
words may be stricken from the report.
* # * # *
[p. 14347]
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Madam
President, I submitted the conference
report to the legislative counsel of the
Senate and asked him to make a report
to me on the effects of the changes
that were made by the conference in
the bill as it passed the Senate, es-
pecially as it relates to Section 45,
which was placed in the bill by the
Senate. I have received a memoran-
dum from legislative counsel. The leg-
islative counsel's office has no interest
one way or another in the bill, I
presume; all that it did was to make
an analysis of the language in the
conference report.
I ask unanimous consent to insert
this memorandum at this point in the
RECORD. It comes from the legislative
counsel, signed by Mr. John Reynolds,
who is the assistant counsel.
There being no objection, the memo-
randum was ordered to be printed in
the RECORD, as follows:
MEMORANDUM FOR SENATOR JOHNSON OF
COLORADO
This memorandum responds to your request
for an analysis of certain action taken by the
committee of conference on H. R. 9757 in con-
nection with the deletion of section 45 of the
bill, as it passed the Senate. The changes made
in the bill by this conference action (other than
the deletion of sec. 45) are in several parts. The
effect of these changes would appear to be as
follows:
(1) Section 31a (4) is amended to read as
follows:
"(4) utilization of special nuclear material,
atomic energy, and radioactive material and
processes entailed in the utilization or produc-
tion of atomic energy or such material for all
other purposes, including industrial uses, the
generation of usable energy, and the demonstra-
tion of the practical value of utilization or pro-
duction facilities for industrial or commercial
purposes; and."
The conference substitute for section 31a (4)
broadens or clarifies the authority of the Com-
mission with respect to the conduct of research
and development activities. Under the confer-
ence substitute, read in conjunction with section
32, the Commission has the express authority,
among other things, to engage in research
and development activities for the purpose of
demonstrating the practical value of utilization
or production facilities for industrial or com-
mercial purposes. Under this authoiity the
Commission could clearly build plants to demon-
strate the practical value of atomic-energy fa-
cilities for commercial purposes, including the
generation of power. If the Commission had
this authority under section 31a (4), prior to
the conference action, it had it only inferentially,
not explicitly.
(2) The conference action included four
amendments to sections 103b, 104a, 104b, and
104c. The effect of these amendments is to
make it clear that any person may apply for a
commercial license under section 103, or a li-
cense for medical therapy and reseaich and
development under section 104. "Person" is
defined in section lln, as follows:
"n. The term 'person' means (1) any indi-
vidual, corporation, partnership, firm, associa-
tion, trust, estate, public or private institution,
group, Government agency other than the Com-
mission, any State or any political subdivision
of, or any political entity within a State, any
foreign government or nation or any political
subdivision of any such government or nation,
or other entity; and (2) any legal successor,
representative, agent, or agency of the fore-
going."
(3) The conference action amended section
44 to read as follows:
"SEC. 44. Disposition of energy: If energy
is produced at production facilities of the Com-
mission or is produced in experimental utiliza-
tion facilities of the Commission, such energy
may be used by the Commission, or transferred
to other Goveinment agencies, or sold to pub-
licly, cooperatively, or privately owned utilities
or uscis at reasonable and nondiscriminatory
prices. If the energy produced is electric
energy, the price shall be subject to regulation
-------
406
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
by the appropriate agency having jurisdiction.
In contracting for the disposal of such energy,
the Commission shall insofar as practicable
give preference and priority to public bodies and
cooperatives or to privately owned utilities pro-
viding electric utility seivices to high-cost aieas
not being served by public bodies or cooperatives.
Nothing in this act shall be construed to author-
ize the Commission to engage in the sale 01 dis-
tribution of energy for commercial use except
such energy as may be produced by the Com-
mission incident to the operation of i eseai ch
and development facilities of the Commission,
or facilities for the production of special nuclear
material of the Commission."
As revised in conference, section 44, as it
appeared in the Senate bill, is retained with
the following changes:
(a) The section heading is broadened to read
"Disposition of Energy" instead of "Byproduct
Energy."
(b) The energy referred to in the section is
that energy which is produced at production
facilities of the Commission or which is pro-
duced in experimental utilization facilities of
the Commission. Under the Senate bill the
energy was that produced in the production of
special nuclear material at production or ex-
perimental utilization facilities owned by the
United States. Under the Senate bill the energy
had to be a "by-product" occurring in the pro-
duction of special nuclear material. Under the
conference substitute, read in conjunction with
the revised section 31 a. (4), the energy may be
produced directly in a facility designed by the
Commission to demonstrate how special nu-
clear material may be utilized for commercial
purposes. It would seem that this change en-
larges the possibilities of the Commission for
producing disposable energy.
(c) The section specifically provides that
where the energy produced is electric eneigy,
the price will be subject to regulation by the ap-
propriate agency having jurisdiction.
(d) Language is added which has the effect
of prohibiting the Commission from engaging
in the sale or distiibution of eneigy for com-
mercial use, unless it is produced by the Com-
mission incident (1) to the operation of research
and development facilities of the Commission,
or (2) to the operation of facilities of the Com-
mission for the production of special nuclear
material.
(4) The conference action deletes in section
261 (authorization for appropriations) the
parenthetical phrase "(other than for such
acquisition, condemnation, construction, or ex-
pansion as may be undertaken under the au-
thority of section 45a. of this act)." Since the
conference action deletes section 45, as it ap-
peared in the Senate bill, this amendment is
comformable to that deletion.
(5) The conference action adds a new section
273 to the bill which is largely a restatement of
the last sentence in section 45b.
The effect of this amendment is to further
clarify (without retaining sec. 45) the changes
discussed in (2) above; namely, to indicate be-
yond any doubt that Goveinment agencies which
are authorized by law to engage in the produc-
tion, marketing, or distribution of electric
energy are eligible for commeicial licenses to
construct and operate facilities for the purpose
of producing electric energy for public consump-
tion.
CONCLUSION
The conference action in deleting section 45
makes it very clear that the Commission has no
authority to construct facilities for the sole pur-
pose of pioducing electric power for sale.
The other action taken by the conference
committee, along the lines previously indicated,
clarify the following matters:
(1) The Commission has the authority to
build plants to demonstrate the practical value
of atomic energy for industrial or commercial
purposes.
(2) Government agencies are not barred from
obtaining Commission licenses under sections
103 and 104. In this connection, they may ob-
tain a license to engage in the production,
marketing, or distribution of electric energy un-
[p. 14349]
der section 103, if they are authorized by law to
engage in such activity and they can comply
generally with the requirements for such
licenses.
(3) The Commission has the authority to
utilize and dispose of energy produced in a
production or experimental utilization facility
owned by the Commission. Such energy may be
produced in a facility designed by the Com-
mission to demonstrate how special nuclear ma-
terial may be utilized for commeicial purposes.
In the disposition of electric energy so produced
the pi ice will be subject to icgulation by the
appropriate regulatory agency. All energy to
be sold 01 distributed by the Commission for
commercial use, must be produced as an inci-
dent to the operation of icseaich and develop-
ment facilities of the Commission, or to the
opei ation of facilities of the Commission for
the production of special nuclear material.
Respectfully,
JOHN M. REYNOLDS,
Assistant Counsel.
AUGUST 7, 1954.
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Madam
President, I shall read the conclu-
sion, which is not long, although the
other parts of the analysis are some-
what extended.
In dropping from the conference re-
port section 45, which was inserted by
the Senate, the conferees made five sep-
arate amendments in different parts of
the bill. He has listed those five
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
407
changes which were made in the
conference report.
This is the conclusion Mr. Reynolds
reached:
The conference action in deleting section 45
makes it very clear that the Commission has no
authority to construct facilities for the sole pur-
pose of producing electric power for sale.
There Mr. Reynolds is talking about
the conference report, and I know the
Senators have been disturbed, thinking
that perhaps under section 45, which
was placed in the bill by the Senate,
the Atomic Energy Commission was
authorized to build powerplants at
every crossroads in the country. It is
clear from this language that the con-
ference report does not permit any
such thing as that to happen.
The analysis goes on:
The other actions taken by the conference
committee, along the lines previously indicated,
clarify the following matters:
(1) The Commission has the autholity to
build plants to demonstrate the practical value
of atomic energy for industiial or commercial
purposes.
That is the principle in which the
Senator from Colorado was interested.
He wanted to be sure that, in this great
new effort and in this unknown poten-
tial of power development, at some
place in this bill provision would be
made to assure that yardsticks would
be possible, so that if the Atomic En-
ergy Commission itself felt that the
private power companies were not do-
ing full justice to this new source of
power, this new kind of power, the
Commission itself might build yard-
sticks and demonstrate what could be
done in the field. That is the first point
Mr. Reynolds found that the conference
report now provides.
(2) Goveinment agencies are not barred from
obtaining Commission licenses under sections
103 and 104. In this connection they may obtain
a license to engage in the production, market-
ing, or distribution of electric energy under sec-
tion 103, if they are authorized by law to engage
in such activity and they can comply generally
with the requirements for such licenses.
Mr. BYRD. Would that apply to
REA?
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. That
would apply to REA.
Mr. BYRD. And the REA could get
a license if authorized by law?
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Yes, if
they were authorized by law, and had
the money. They are building steam
plants now, and the conference report
includes that part of section 45 which
was adopted by the Senate to make cer-
tain that the REA, if it has the money,
and if it has the authority, can build
an atomic powerplant just as now they
can build a steam plant. When the bill
came before the Senate, they could not
do that. However, they can now do it.
Mr. GORE. Madam President, I
wish to congratulate the able senior
Senator from Colorado upon this ac-
complishment. It is to be regretted
that his amendment has been modified,
but to this specific effect the accom-
plishment is very real.
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. I thank
the Senator. The third conclusion of
the memorandum is as follows:
(3) The Commission has the authority to
utilize and dispose of energy produced in a
production or experimental utilization facility
owned by the Commission Such energy may be
produced in a facility designed by the Commis-
sion to demonstrate how special nuclear material
may be utilized for commercial purposes. In
the disposition of electiic eneigy so produced
the price will be subject to regulation by the
appropriate regulatory agency.
That provision includes the public
utilities commissions of the States and
the Federal Power Commission, or
other regulatory agencies.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator has expired.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield to
the distinguished Senator from Colo-
rado 2 additional minutes.
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. The
third conclusion continues:
All energy to be sold or distributed by the
Commission for commercial use, must be pro-
duced as an incident to the operation of
research and development facilities of the Com-
mission, or to the operation of facilities of the
Commission for the production of special nu-
clear material.
That should prove conclusively that
the conference bill does not make it pos-
-------
408
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
sible for the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion to build an atomic powerplant at
every crossroads in the country.
In working out these different
amendments, Section 44 was com-
pletely rewritten. Section 44, as Sena-
tors will recall, had for its title and had
for its purpose and objective the by-
product of powerplants.
The purpose oi section 44 is changed
and the title is now changed to "Dis-
position of Energy."
I should like to read the last sentence
of section 44, because it emphasizes
what I have already said.
Nothing in this act shall be construed to
authorize the Commission to engage in the sale
or distribution of energy for commercial use
except such energy as may be produced by the
Commission incident to the operation of research
and development facilities of the Commission,
or of production facilities of the Commission.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator from Colorado has
expired.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Madam
President, I desire to be as generous as
my allotment will permit, but I do not
have the time to yield further to the
Senator from Colorado. I could take
time from some other Senator and I
know most of them would agree. Could
the Senator complete his statement in
an additional 2 minutes?
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. I think
so.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield 2
minutes to the Senator from Colorado.
Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Madam
President, a long time ago I had a
very wonderful milk cow, one of the
best I have ever seen anywhere. That
milk cow had the bad habit of giving
milk to fill a gallon and a half milk
bucket, and just as the person doing
the milking was about through, the cow
would kick the bucket over.
That is what the conference did with
section 44. We worked this whole mat-
ter out on an agreeable basis, and
everything seemed to be all right, and
then they wrote in the words "insofar
as practicable," relating to contracting
for the disposal of such energy. That
is where the conferees kicked the
bucket of milk over so far as giving
preference and priority to public bodies
and cooperatives is concerned.
As the junior Senator from Nevada
[Mr. MALONE] has pointed out, those
words should not be in the bill. I
pleaded with the committee of confer-
ence not to include them in the confer-
ence report; I urged them to leave out
that language. There are plenty of
safeguards without such language.
The REA's throughout the country
do not want Congress to establish that
kind of principle with respect to the
preference clause, where the REA's are
entitled to receive electric energy pro-
duced with the finances of the United
States Government.
The bill should be returned to con-
ference. The three words "insofar as
practicable" should be deleted. Then
section 44 would be fairly satisfactory.
* * * * *
[p. 14350]
Mr. HUMPHREY. I have prepared
a statement on the conference report,
and I ask unanimous consent that the
statement be printed in the body of
the RECORD.
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
STATEMENT BY SENATOR HUMPHREY
I want to vote in favor of an atomic energy
bill that will permit the private companies, the
REA's, and the public bodies,to enjoy the peace-
time benefits of atomic energy and electrical
powe generated from atomic energy. The con-
feren e report is unsatisfactory in at least three
respe ts. First, it emasculates the preference
claus Second, it is inadequate in the patent
provi ions and the antitiust regulations. If this
confe ence report is rejected and then goes back
to conference where the Senate amendments can
be agreed to, we can and will vote for the bill.
I shall cast my vote for the atomic-energy bill
designed along the lines of the bill as approved
by the Senate.
I now want to address myself to those parts
of the conference report which deal with prefer-
ence for public bodies and coopeiatives—and if
I were to give a title to what I have to say, I
think I would call it A Lesson in Duplicity, or
What Is Practicable?
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
409
Section 44 of the act provides for the sale of
byproduct energy and in its original form the
section was entitled "Byproduct Energy." As
it comes to us from conference, however, the
section is entitled "Disposition of Eneigy."
Now, titles are not always of great impoitance.
But this change in title is very significant—
because it highlights and symbolizes the true
character of the confei ence i eport. It is a
pei feet example of the sleight of hand that
characteiizes the entile lepoit.
After all, just what does section 44 deal with?
It deals only with byproduct energy. It was cor-
rectly labeled when it was last before us. But
now—now it is called Disposition of Eneigy.
And the reason is cleat'. The sponsois of this
change in the title of section 44 know that only
a few will lead the act carefully and completely.
Many will lead it, but they will lead quickly—-
and they will fall into the trap. For in a quick
reading of a section with such a title, and
[p. 14352]
with the misleading language in the body of the
section that I will discuss more in detail, they
may be fooled into thinking that the section car-
ries out the traditional electi ic power policies
of the Government—namely, to develop the
natural power resouices of the Nation for the
benefit of the people.
And for the great majority of the people—
who will not read the act at all—just imagine
how easy it will be to fool them with this false
new title and with the misleading language in
the body of the section. All the pioponents of
this fake provision need do is to icad the title
slowly, and the pioference language slowly, and
they can fool any audience
That change in title is the tipoff. Now let us
see where it leads to. As passed by the Senate,
section 44 piovides that the Atomic Eneigy
Commission "shall at all times in disposing of
such energy, give pieferenee and prioi jty to
public bodies and cooperatives " Now this pro-
vision is absolutely cleai. It requnes no .spe-
cial interpietation. It is not subject to the
whims of the pai ticulai persons who may be
charged with the duty of disposing of bypioduct
enei gy at any particular time It follows the
pattein that has been consistently used by the
Congress in all power legislation containing
pieference language.
But what has the confei ence repoi t done
with this9 It has inserted the magic woids "in-
sofar as practicable." The confei ence i epoit
substitutes foi the Senate language the follow-
ing: "In contracting foi the disposal of such
energy, the Commission shall insofai as piac-
ticable give pieference and pi unity to public
bodies and coopt'iatives * * * "
Insofar as pi ac tic able. Can anyone tell me
what that means? Can you find any two people
anywheie who, under a given set of facts, will
give you the same intei pietatum? Is it pi act.ca-
ble to spend SI foi lunch or $2 for lunch? Is
it practicable to buy one kind of an automobile
rather than another kind, or perhaps none at
all? Is it practicable to eat 2 meals a day in-
stead of 3? I could go on and on this way.
Almost anything we do in life could be sub-
jected to the same question, and you would get
the same result—every person would give you a
different answer.
Let us just take the dictionary meaning of
the word. One dictionary defines practicable
in the following ways: (1) Capable of being1
done or used, (2) useful; (3) feasible; (4) us-
able; (5) possible. I should like the proponents
of the conference language to tell me which one
of these meanings they think applies. Certainly,
something can be possible and yet not be useful.
It can be capable of being done or used and yet
not be feasible. It can be usable, but not neces-
saiily useful. What does this language mean as
set forth in section 44 of the conference repoi t?
What is the test to be? Is it to be feasibility?
Is it to usefulness? Is it to be capability of
being done? I don't know what it means here,
and I defy anyone to show me cleai ly and sim-
ply what it does mean.
What the conference report does to the lan-
guage that we adopted in the Senate is to
destioy it This is not legislation, this is emascu-
lation. This is not clanfication, this is befud-
dlement. The conference i eport has taken
peifectly cleai, simple language—language that
has had a long history of legislative use and ad-
ministrative application—and has surrounded
it with a fog that no human understanding can
penetrate. It would have been far more honest
to have deleted the entire preference piovision.
Personally, I have nevei been able to under-
stand why the power lobby has fought so long
and so bitterly—and has spent so much of its
customers' money—fighting the so-called prefer-
ence piovisions of the power marketing statutes.
Despite the fact that the Congi ess has con-
sistently included preference pi ovisions in the
power marketing statutes, the ruial electric sys-
tems of the country still get less than 6 peicent
of the power sold by the Federal Government.
The public bodies get more. They get 26 per-
cent, but the bulk of it still goes to the private
powei companies And during the years that
these pieference piovisions have been in effect,
the private power companies have prospered
and prospered I am afiaid theie is only one
explanation foi this bjtter and expensive fight
which the powei companies have been waging
against the piefeicnce piovisions, and that ex-
planation is that it is in the nature of a mo-
nopoly to ti y to swallow up eveiythmg.
We must always remember that the power
utilities are monopolies, piotected monopolies.
They have their territoiies and no one else
can serve in those tei ritories. If you want elec-
ti icity, you must buy it from the power
company serving your area. And the power
companies aie guaranteed rates which retuin
them a handsome profit—after all taxes have
been paid. Thus, they are not only monopolies,
but they aie protected in their monopolistic
-------
410
LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
activities.
To emphasize just what this means, compare
these power company monopolies with any or-
dinary business type of monopoly. Before our
antitrust laws were enacted, it was possible for
a business organization or a syndicate of some
kind to get a monopoly on some pioduct. But
despite that, they were always subject to the
danger that some other group would develop
a substitute product and crack their monopoly
by use of the substitute. But the power com-
panies are protected even from that. There is
no substitute for electricity in the modern day
world. And it doesn't matter how the science
of producing electricity changes, the protected
monopoly called a power company cannot be
disturbed. They, and they alone, can serve in
their respective areas,
In this connection, it is interesting to note
that the big battles which the Power Trust has
carried on against the rural electric systems has
been in connection with cooperative generation
and transmission. It is there that they fight
most bitterly. They don't want these systems
to be too independent. They don't want them
to have their own sources of power. They want
the rural electric systems to be totally dependent
upon the private utilities for their power sources,
because they realize that as long as they con-
trol the power sources, they really control the
rural electric systems—and perhaps at some
propitious time they will be able to swallow up
the distribution systems as well. So they fight
bitterly whenever the issue is a source of power
for the rural electrics and the public bodies
which is not under the control of the Power
Trust.
That is why the words "insofar as practi-
cable" have been inserted in section 44 of the
Atomic Energy Act. It is power trust language.
They know that they cannot, yet, win their
fight against the rural electric systems and the
public bodies by meeting the issue directly.
They know that Congress is not, at this time,
knowingly going to thiow out the window the
50 years of successful operation of the prefer-
ence provisions. So they try to accomplish their
end through the back door. They leave the
preference language in, but they inseit 3 little
words—3 destiuctive words, 3 words, the mean-
ing of which no one can be sure, 3 little words
that can receive any interpretation that anyone
wants to give them, 3 little words that strike the
death knell for the preference provision.
Let us just try to visualize a few of the ob-
vious situations that normally arise in connec-
tion with the sale of electric power by the
Government. Suppose a few miles away from a
rural electric system, the Atomic Energy Com-
mission should have a plant from which it has
electric power to dispose of. Would it be
practicable for the Commission to construct
those few miles of line in order to serve that
rural electric system?
Suppose a power company already had a line
connected with the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion plant. Would it be practicable for the
Commission to work out an arrangement for the
power company to take the Commission's power
and deliver it to a rural electric cooperative?
Suppose a rural electric cooperative was will-
ing to build a line to the Atomic Energy Com-
mission plant in order to purchase power there,
but it needed time to obtain a loan and con-
struct the line. Would it be practicable for the
Commission to wait? I could go on and on like
this.
There would be no normal situation in which
you could say definitely that service to a rural
electric cooperative by the Atomic Energy Com-
mission would or would not be practicable. In
eveiy case, it would be a matter of personal
opinion. It would be no different from the
varying taste which all of us have for different
flavois. It would be like saying that vanilla
ice cream should be eaten by certain people in-
sofar as practicable. But with the other flavors
available and with a group of people who prefer
those other flavors, would it be practicable for
them to eat the vanilla ice cream?
So here, we can be sure that there will almost
always be a number of possible ways for the
Atomic Energy Commission to sell or dispose
of the electric energy. Faced with all these
possible alternatives, how can we say the Com-
mission will ever find it practicable to sell to a
rural electric cooperative or to a public body?
Let us have some honesty in dealing with
this subject. Let us have legislation that has
some meaning. Let us not pretend to give pref-
erence rights—as they have always been given
and as they should always continue to be given
—to the rural electric cooperatives and to the
public bodies, when, in fact, we are doing noth-
ing 'of the kind. Let us not talk about
pieference and priority to public bodies and
cooperatives when what we are really saying is
that the Commission should do with electric
power as it will. You either give preference
or you don't—and the Senate amendment to
section 44, as emasculated in the conference re-
port, does not give it.
I feel very strongly about this subject. I feel
strongly about it, in the first place, because I
feel that we should not make fools of ourselves
by enacting provisions which have no meaning.
Or, rather, by enacting provisions which have
so many different meanings that they might as
well have no meaning. I have already pointed
out to you how many different meanings the
word "practicable" has, and I will welcome be-
ing informed just which one of the many mean-
ings of "practicable" is intended to be applied
to section 44. We should not ever pass acts
containing provisions capable of so many dif-
ferent interpretations. Just as legislators with
pride in their work, just as any conscientious
craftsman, we should never turn out shoddy
merchandise; and this provision as now con-
tained in the conference report is the shoddiest
kind of legislative merchandise.
And I am strongly opposed to this part of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
411
the conference report because it is just not
honest treatment. It is the worst kind of
hypocrisy and duplicity. In its present form,
it gives the outward appearance of dealing
properly with the preference issue, but actually
it does nothing of the kind. It attempts to fool
the people into believing that there is a prefer-
ence provision, while all the time, through the
device of those three weasel words, it destroys
preference. I don't mind arguing any issue
that I believe in with any man, but for heaven's
sake when we discuss this issue, let us discuss
just that and not try to fool one another by the
use of duplicity.
[p. 14353]
Mr. KEER.
I thank the Senator from Iowa and
the Senate for accepting an amend-
ment suggested by many Senators but,
in the final analysis, it was put into
words by the staff of the Joint Com-
mittee on Atomic Energy.
The Senator from Iowa brought
back to the floor of the Senate the lan-
guage which was accepted by the Sen-
ate under the Kerr amendment, and it
was language calculated to implement
section 152 of the bill. It was language
calculated to make a reality of the
recommendations of the President. It
was language calculated to protect this
country from the development of mo-
nopoly, which was in the minds of the
President of the United States, Atomic
Energy Commission, the Joint Commit-
tee on Atomic Energy, and the Mem-
bers of the Senate when we approved
that language and made it part of the
bill. The bill went to conference, and
I want to say to the Senate that sec-
tion 152 disappeared. We talk about a
performance of magic. The hand was
quicker than the eye, and that lan-
guage and that principle are no longer
contained in the conference report.
My good friend from Iowa says, "No,
that is not in it, but section 182 (d) is."
I hope Senators will read section 182
(d). I have read it. I have combed it
with a fine-toothed comb, and I say to
the Senate that I do not know what it
is; but, as the farmer said, "I know
what it ain't."
I am much like the farmer who went
to the zoo and saw a hippopotamus for
the first time in his life. He was
amazed and astounded, and was seek-
ing information from the keeper of the
zoo as to what that amazing phenome-
non was. After some 30 minutes of
explanation he shook his head, walked
away, and said, "I don't know what it
is, but I know it ain't a horse."
I do not know what section 182 (d)
is, Madam President, but I know it is
not protection from monopoly. It says
"any license issued under section 103."
Let Senators read section 103. I
challenge the chairman of the commit-
tee or any other Senator to find the
word "patent" in that section.
Let Senators read section 104 (a) or
section 104 (b), and, in connection with
those sections, section 182 (d). The
bill does not say that he who receives
the license "shall agree." It says that
the "Commission may require."
It is stated that a license received
under section 103 shall have certain
limitations. But section 103 does not
relate to patents. It is not meant to
include patents.
Sections 103 and 104 (b) were both
in the bill when it came to the Senate,
but the cross-licensing of patents was
also there in section 152.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Madam
President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. KERR. I am glad to yield to my
good friend from Iowa.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I invite the
Senator's attention to the fact that
anything which is contained in an
application for a license under this
bill, or any statements or agreements
or commitments contained in such ap-
plication for a license, inhere in and
become a part of the license when it
is issued.
Mr. KERR. But that is only with
reference to a license under section 103
or section 104 (b), which do not refer
to a patent.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Madam
President, I do not wish to trespass on
the time of the Senator from Okla-
-------
412
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
homa, but if there is an agreement in
the license with regard to cross-licens-
ing patents, that inheres in the license
and becomes an integral part of the
license.
Mr. KERR. Madam President I
love the Senator from Iowa. He is a
great man. He is a good man. He is
an honorable man. But he is mistaken,
because section 182 (d) refers only to
licenses under section 103; and the
word "patent" cannot be found in sec-
tion 103.
Madam President, no Senator has a
higher respect for private enterprise
than has the senior Senator from Okla-
homa. No Senator would do more,
within the limitations and opportuni-
ties of his responsibility, than I would
to protect private enterprise. But we
do not protect private enterprise by
creating monopoly. We do not foster
an environment in which private enter-
prise can develop and expand by cre-
ating not only the opportunity for a
monopoly, but also a condition from
which only monopoly can emerge.
Madam President, more than 100
years ago this Government began to
enact antitrust laws for the prevention
of monopoly in limited fields. We could
only contemplate fields which we could
visualize. But who visualized the field
of atomic energy?
When steam came along, suppose
somebody had sought the opportunity
to obtain a monopoly on its use. Sup-
pose, when electricity came along,
somebody had sought the opportunity
to secure a patent and a monopoly on
its use. Madam President, people would
have risen up in every section of our
great country to demand the preven-
tion of such an occurrence. Yet such
an opportunity is in this conference re-
port with reference to atomic energy.
There is no comparison between atomic
energy and steam or electricity.
Under the proposed legislation, if
someone should receive a patent for the
cure of cancer, it would be his property,
although it might have been formulated
from knowledge gained as the result
of a §12-billion expenditure by the Gov-
ernment.
I have watched the northern lights,
or the aurora borealis, the most amaz-
ing natural phenomenon I have ever
seen, compared to which all other
things the Senator from Oklahoma has
ever witnessed pale into insignificance.
The same is true as we contemplate
the future of atomic energy. We can-
not see into the future. No man has
yet discovered the source of the aurora
borealis. No man has ever explained
that mystery.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator from Oklahoma
has expired.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Madam
President, I yield the Senator 2 addi-
tional minutes.
Mr. KERR. The aurora borealis is
the most amazing phenomenon of na-
ture man has yet witnessed. Yet as all
other sights are pale as compared to it,
so is it a minor event compared to the
power and glory and future possibili-
ties of atomic power. Behold what God
hath permitted and what man has
wrought in unlocking the magic door
and solving of the mystery of atomic
energy. Yet this has been done by
the expenditure of $12 billion of Gov-
ernment money. This was the people's
money and their interest in the results
must be our primary interest. Shall
we now take action which will permit a
limited few, in opposition to the warn-
ing of the President and in opposition
to everything we know, to gain a mo-
nopoly in this great field?
Mr. KEFAUVER. Madam Pres-
ident, will the Senator yield for a ques-
tion.
Mr. KERR. I yield.
Mr. KEFAUVER. Does not the
amendment of the Senator, which was
stricken out in conference, follow al-
most exactly the recommendation of
the President in his message to the
Congress, which is printed on page 12
of part 1 of the hearings?
Mr. KERR. Indeed it does and the
Senator from Oklahoma has made ref-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
413
erence to that Presidential action.
The action of the Senate followed the
language of the President. It followed
the recommendation of the Atomic
Energy Commission. It followed the
recommendation of the joint commit-
tee. It followed the will of a majority
of the Senate.
Senators should not now he intimi-
dated by someone who says, "If the
Senate does not accept the conference
report it will deny the President the
legislation which he wants."
I say to him, "Will the Senate deny
the President the legislation he wants
and the provision he wants for the pre-
vention of monopoly merely as a tribute
to the stubbornness of one man?"
I do not believe that the Senate will
participate in any such unconditional
surrender to the stubbornness of one
man or the will of those whose purpose
must be to permit the opportunity for
the development of complete monopoly
in the peacetime use of atomic energy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator from Oklahoma has
expired.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Madam
President, I yield 10 minutes to the dis-
tinguished Senator from Rhode Island
[Mr. PASTORE], a member of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy.
Mr. PASTORE. Madam President,
merely for the purposes of emphasiz-
ing the amount of work devoted to this
proposed legislation, I remind Members
of the Senate that the Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy devoted 14 months
to a study of this measure. In that pe-
riod we held 91 meetings, both execu-
tive and public. We listened to more
than 200 witnesses.
I am amazed at this juncture to hear
a rumor, which is now quite prevalent
on the floor of the Senate, and which
has been prevalent for several days
throughout the corridors of the Capi-
tol, that unless we agree to the confer-
ence report we stand a chance of losing
for all time, and particularly for this
session, all the work, all the study, and
all the consideration which went into
the preparation of this proposed legis-
lation.
[p. 14355]
Madam President, I am one of those
who do not believe that rumor. But if
there is any substance to the rumor, the
responsibility for such a result will fall
upon the shoulders of the 6 Republi-
cans who constitute the majority of the
conference committee.
Madam President, we are not very
far apart when we speak in terms of
compromise and when we speak in
terms of time that will have to be de-
voted to this problem in order to arrive
at a reasonable and equitable bill.
It has been said many times on the
Senate floor—and I think it worthy of
repetition—that the taxpayers of the
United States have spent more than
$12 billion for fundamental research
in the field of atomic energy. There
are many—and I am included within
that group—who feel that the time has
come for private industry to play its
part in this program. I am one of
those who feel that the door should
now be opened for all to come in, with
a high degree of liberality, and make
their contribution to the goal that we
are trying to achieve through this act.
What are -we saying, Madam Presi-
dent? We are saying to everyone in
the United States of America who is
engaged in free enterprise, "You can
now take advantage of the $12 billion
expenditure. There will be no re-
straints upon you. True enough, you
will invest your own money, but all
we are asking you to do is to adopt the
same philosophy that brought this act
into being." The United States is open-
ing the door to all to come in, but by
this very act we propose to allow the
first few who come in to close the door
to everyone else.
If that does not shock every sense of
reason, if that does not destroy the phi-
losophy of the act, if it does not emas-
culate the very motives which brought
;his act into being, someone will have
;o answer the question for me.
-------
414
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
It has been argued that section 182
does not constitute a monopoly. All we
have to do is to read it. It has been
brought out very clearly today that be-
fore anyone can participate in this
program he must apply under section
104b, which means that he will have to
apply for a license in order to benefit
from the research element of the pro-
gram. Section 104 provides that once
the practicability of the research has
been established, an applicant may ap-
ply for a commercial license under
section 103.
When the applicant comes in under
section 104b, in the first instance, it is
discretionary with the Commission as
to whether or not it will require the
licensee or the applicant for a license
to agree to cross-licensing. I suppose
the reason for the discretion in that
part of the section is that now we are
engaged in a research program, and
everyone feels that those who come in
must invest large sums of money for a
very small return.
After this license has been obtained,
and after we have reached the level
prescribed by section 102, where the
practicability is established, then an
applicant may apply for a commercial
license under section 103.
What does the bill provide in that
respect? Section 182 provides that
preference shall be given to licensees
who agree to allow others to use the
patents which they acquire within a
period of 5 years.
The one hiatus in section 182 lies in
the fact that there will be only one
applicant, and there will be no oppor-
tunity to exercise any preference.
Therefore, I maintain that it is an
innocuous provision. It results in no
preference because there will be no
rivalry. The Commission will not be
in position to say, "A shall have it be-
cause he agrees and B shall not have it
because he will not agree," for the
simple reason that it will be dealing
with only one individual at a time. If
that one individual refuses to agree, of
course there will be no agreement for a
cross-license.
The question has been raised as to
the possible violation of the Constitu-
tion because article I, section 8, of the
Constitution provides that the Congress
can limit only the time of a patent, but
not the exclusiveness of such patent.
There is a legal question as to
whether the Congress has the right to
deal with the question of the exclusive-
ness of the patent, or whether the
patentee who applies has, under basic
fundamental law, the exclusive right
to the patent and Congress has the
right to limit the time only.
If that confuses anyone, then I say,
Madam President, let us rewrite sec-
tion 182 so as to provide that no license
shall be granted to any applicant un-
less he agrees to allow someone else to
use any patent which he applies for or
acquires within a period of 5 years, if
such a patent is affected with the public
interest and if it is designed to carry
out the purposes of this law. I submit
that if we rewrite section 182 in that
manner, we will not violate any con-
stitutional provision.
But that is not the reason the prefer-
ence was written into the bill. The
preference was included because there
was a very clear intent, from the be-
ginning, to leave the patent ownership
question wide open and unrestricted.
The argument has been made re-
peatedly that cross-licensing of patents
would stifle creativeness and initiative
on the part of private industry. Under
my suggestion we would be allowing
private industry to obtain a patent.
We would be allowing private industry
to be paid for the use of the patent,
which is the important thing. All we
are saying to private industry is, "We
do not want you, through the provi-
sions of this law, to do to others what
you do not want done to yourselves."
To use positive language, "All we want
you to do is to grant the same oppor-
tunities to those who follow you as we
are giving you when we unlock the door
to the benefits of a $12 billion invest-
ment." That is how simple my argu-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
415
ment is.
What did the President of the United
States say in that connection? He rec-
ognized the problem when he said:
Until industrial participation in the utiliza-
tion of atomic energy acquires a broader base—
The broadness of the base is what I
am talking about—
considerations of fairness—
Now we are talking about justice
and equity—
requires some mechanism to assure that the
limited number of companies—
Everyone recognizes that there will
not be a stampede for these licenses.
Not many have the money to enter this
business. There will be only a handful
of companies in the beginning—
to assure that the limited number of companies,
which as Government contractors now have ac-
cess to the program, cannot build a patent
monopoly which would exclude others desiring
to enter the field. I hope that participation in
the development of atomic power will have
broadened sufficiently in the next 5 yeais to
remove the need for such provisions.
Madam President, every single mem-
ber of the Commission who appeared
before our hearings took the position
that there should be compulsory licens-
ing. That was unanimously agreed
upon. They all took the position that it
should be for a period of 5 years.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator from Rhode Island
has expired.
Mr. PASTORE. May I have 5 more
minutes?
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. The Sen-
ator does not have any more time. He
has used every single minute he has,
plus an additional minute.
Mr. PASTORE. One more minute
to wind up my remarks.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield
the Senator 1 minute.
Mr. PASTORE. Madam President,
all I am asking is that we carry out the
recommendation of the President, and
the unanimous recommendation of the
5 Commissioners; that we rewrite into
the bill what we originally wrote into
it when it came to the floor of the
Senate, and that we repudiate the
views of 1 member of the committee
and reestablish the judgment of the
remainder of the joint committee.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Madam
President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. PASTORE. I have only 1 min-
ute. Will the Senator give me another
minute?
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Yes.
Mr. PASTORE. I yield.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas, Does not
the Senator believe, if we refuse to ap-
prove the conference report, that the
bill can go back to conference, and the
conferees can adjust the differences in
a very few days, so that a bill may be
enacted at this session?
Mr. PASTORE. In my opinion, such
amendments have already been drafted.
The joint committee knows what is
going on. It knows what our problem
is. I imagine the staff has already
drafted suitable language. It would
not require more than 21 hours to
rewrite the bill the way it should be
rewritten. It was written properly
when it came to the floor of the Senate.
Let us not be carried off by false ru-
mors that there is a possibility of los-
ing the entire law unless we knuckle
down to the will of 1 or 2.
We do not take that kind of chance.
If anyone dare do it, let him assume
the responsibility of repudiating his
own President.
[p. 14356]
*****
The result was announced—yeas, 41,
nays 48, as follows:
*****
So the conference report was re-
jected.
*****
[p. 14364]
-------
416
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
l.lb(5)(e) Aug. 16, 17: Senate and House agree to conference report,
respectively, pp. 14603-14606,14867-14873
REVISION OF ATOMIC ENERGY
ACT OP 1946—CONFERENCE
REPORT
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident, I had understood that as soon as
we completed action on House bill 9580
we were to proceed to the consideration
of the conference report on the atomic
energy bill, since it is a privileged
matter.
Mr. FERGUSON. I shall be glad to
have the unfinished business laid aside
temporarily.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The report
of the conference committee is now on
the way from the conference room to
the Senate Chamber.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Is is not here
now?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. No. This
is for the information of Senators. I
had hoped it would arrive in 1 more
minute.
If I may. I should like to explain the
report for a moment. I believe the offi-
cial report will be here for submission
very shortly.
Mr. FERGUSON. I am glad to yield
to the Senator. In fact, I shall relin-
quish the floor.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Let me say
in brief that the conference committee
has met again, in accordance with the
instructions of the Senate and the
House, and I shall state what we have
done in capsule form.
We have stricken out the words "in-
sofar as practicable" in the places
those words appear in the bill, so far
as preference is concerned with rela-
tion to REA's and public bodies, as to
the purchase of power from the Atomic
Energy Commission, if it ever produces
any power which can be sold. That
leaves the preference for REA's and
public bodies unqualified by the words
"insofar as practicable."
We have also stricken section 182
(d).
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the unfinished business be
temporarily laid aside for the submis-
sion and consideration of the confer-
ence report on House bill 9757, the
atomic-energy bill, together with the
papers of the conference.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair advises the Senate that this is
a privileged matter.
Mr. FERGUSON. I shall be glad to
have it taken up.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I submit a
report of the committee of conference
on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendment of the Sen-
ate to the bill (H. R. 9757) to amend
the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as
amended, and for other purposes. I
ask unanimous consent for the present
consideration of the report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
report will be read for the information
of the Senate.
The legislative clerk read the report.
(For conference report, see pp.
14852-14867 of House proceedings of
today.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is
there objection to the present consid-
eration of the report?
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the report.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Pres-
ident, this report has been signed by
all the conferees of both Houses. As I
said a moment ago, the conferees have
deleted the objectionable words "inso-
far as practicable" which referred to
the preference clause. We have
stricken the words "insofar as prac-
ticable" from the preference clauses
affecting REA's and public bodies, as to
which words there was some objection
raised.
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. HOLLAND. The striking of the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
417
three words referred to relates to
the provision which was inserted in the
Senate, known as the Gillette amend-
ment, does it not?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. HOLLAND. It relates to the
sale of excess electrical power produced
by the Atomic Energy Commission, if
it ever produces any for its own use
and has an excess amount beyond what
it may need for its own use.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct. For example, on page 12 of
the first conference report, in section
44, the words "insofar as practicable"
are eliminated, and the section reads:
The Commission shall give preference and
priority to public bodies and cooperatives or
to privately owned utilities providing electiic
utility services to high cost areas—
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield once more?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. HOLLAND. Does the omission
of these three words in effect mean that
the provisions of the so-called Gillette
amendment as to the disposition of
excess power at Atomic Energy Com-
mission plants will remain in the
conference bill?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
I shall have to add parenthetically
that it does not change the preference
clause one bit, in my own personal
opinion. It merely eliminates the
words which many people thought
might have qualified the preference
clause.
Mr. HILL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. HILL. Whatever may be the
opinion of the distinguished deputy
chairman of the joint committee, the
words "insofar as practicable" are en-
tirely out of the bill now?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. HILL. So far as the preference
clause is concerned.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct. They are stricken from
the two places where they appeared.
Mr. HILL. In other words, in the
two places where those words appeared
they are now stricken.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct.
Mr. HILL. The preference clause
now in the bill is as it was inserted by
the Senate at the time the bill was
under consideration by the Senate.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Section 44
is as it was placed in the bill by the
Senate. The other change removes the
words "insofar as practicable" as the
bill came from the committee.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Iowa yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. As a matter of
fact, the language which is now in the
bill fully meets the situation which was
mentioned by the able Senator from
Nevada [Mr. MALONE] the other day,
and completely preserves the prefer-
ence clause originally suggested by
him?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Without
doubt it does. In my opinion it was
preserved the other day. In my opin-
ion the effect was not changed at all,
but this wording gives aid and com-
fort to those who thought those words
might have qualified the clause.
Mr. ANDERSON. The Senator
from Iowa will recall that I stated that
I was quite sure that the conferees
had not intended to do violence to the
preference clause, but the language
was questionable.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. ANDERSON. The point is that
the bill as now agreed to by the confer-
ence committee meets every point in
which the Senator from Nevada [Mr.
MALONE] was interested in?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
right.
Mr. ANDERSON. The two Sena-
tors from South Dakota were also in-
terested in this matter.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. We have
-------
418
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
eliminated the words "insofar as prac-
ticable."
Mr. MALONE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
PREFERENCE MODIFICATION PHRASE
"INSOFAR AS PRACTICABLE"
ELIMINATED
Mr. MALONE. I did not under-
stand the Senator's entire explanation
of the elimination of the objectionable
modification phrase for which it was re-
turned to the House on Friday, August
13. At the risk of repeating, on page
12, of the report section 44, following
the elimination of the words "insofar
as practicable", now reads:
In contracting.for the disposal of such energy,
the Commission shall give preference and prior-
ity to public bodies and cooperatives or to pri-
vately owned utilities providing electric utility
services to high-cost areas not being served by
public bodies or cooperatives.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is the
way the language reads, according to
this conference report.
Mr. MALONE. Would the distin-
guished Senator from Iowa outline the
second change which was made on page
36, subsection (c) section 182?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The second
change is on page 36 of the original
conference report. I use that only be-
cause it is convenient for reference.
In subsection (c) of what was sec-
tion 182, the words "insofar as prac-
ticable" appearing in the last sentence
have been removed from this confer-
ence report.
Mr. MALONE. It now reads:
"where such conflicting applications re-
sulting from limited opportunity for
such license include those submitted by
public or cooperative bodies such
applications shall be given preferred
consideration"?
[p. 14603]
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct; that is the way it reads.
Mr. MALONE. I thank the Senator
from Iowa, and appreciate his cour-
tesy, including the debate on Friday,
August 13, when the bill was returned
to the House for the express purpose of
deleting the phrase "insofar as prac-
ticable."
Mr. CASE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. CASE. Not to be redundant,
but perhaps to understand the provi-
sion in terms of some correspondence
which the Senator from South Dakota
has had in this connection, does it ac-
complish exactly what was proposed to
be accomplished by the proposal sug-
gested by the distinguished Senator
from California, the majority leader,
when he suggested that a separate res-
olution might be adopted following the
conference report?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Exactly
and completely.
Mr. CASE. I thank the Senator.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. It con-
forms to the proposed joint resolution
which was suggested the other day.
The other change is to strike out—I
shall have to refer for convenience to
the original conference report sub-
mitted earlier—subsection (d) of sec-
tion 182, as found on page 36 of the
original conference report.
I must use those references, because
they are numbered. Subsection (d) is
stricken. The language of the so-called
Cole amendment of the House is re-
tained. The language of the original
section 152 of the bill, as it came to
both Houses from the conference com-
mittee, is retained, with certain modi-
fications representing suggestions and
amendments by the Senator from Okla-
homa [Mr. KERR].
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield for a question at
that point?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I have this
position marked. I should like to com-
plete my statement on it.
Certain modifications are made, with
the insertion in paragraph (2) under
subsection (b) of what appears to be
section 153 in the mimeographed sheet,
of the word "nonexclusive" in the pat-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
419
ent section.
That paragraph of subsection 153
(b) will then read:
Any person may apply to the Commission for
a nonexclusive patent license—
That is in the old section 152 and in
the new section 153—
to use the invention or discovery covered by
such patent, and the Commission shall grant
such patent license to the extent that it finds
that the use of the invention or discovery is
of primary importance to the conduct of an
activity by such person authorized under this
act.
In subsection (e) (4), the general
languag-e and intent of the Kerr
amendment is preserved, and the pro-
vision at the end of subsection (c) (4)
will read as follows:
The Commission shall license the application
to use the invention or discovery covered by the
patent for the purposes stated in such applica-
tion on terms deemed equitable by the Com-
mission and generally not less fair than those
granted by the patentee or by the Commission
to similar licensees for comparable use.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. Would the Sena-
tor from Iowa agree with me that that
language does not destroy the Kerr
amendment as it was originally pro-
posed?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. ANDERSON. It merely pre-
vents it from being so inflexible that
the Commission could not use it.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor from Oklahoma is present on the
floor. I believe it reaches the purpose
the Senator from Oklahoma attempted
to accomplish. Yet it contains enough
flexibility so that injustices will not
result from a requirement that the
Commission cannot use equitable judg-
ment in determining these questions in
the future.
Mr. ANDERSON. In other words,
the Senator from Oklahoma was trying
to make sure that it would be impos-
sible to license a patent at an exorbit-
ant rate to one person and practically
give it away to the next one? This
meets the point he had in mind, without
chaining it down absolutely tight, to
the point where there would be no flex-
ibility. Is that correct?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct. However, I wish to call atten-
tion to the point which was made the
other night on the floor of the Senate,
that we did not want to tie the amend-
ment down so that a patent holder
could not give the use of his patent
free of charge or for only $1 to a uni-
versity, for research purposes, and
then be forced to charge only $1 or give
it free to an industrial concern. We
wanted to provide some leeway in that
connection.
Mr. ANDERSON. In the discussion
on the floor, the Senator from Okla-
homa made it clear that he was in full
agreement with that kind of provision.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I believe
he made it abundantly clear. We have
tried to leave a reasonable amount
of sound discretion in the Atomic
Energy Commission in deciding these
questions.
The remaining changes appearing
on the first page of the mimeographed
sheets, which have been placed on the
desk of every Senator, refer only to the
renumbering of the sections, which
has become necessary because of the
changes in section numbers. They are
only mechanical changes.
Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. KEFAUVER. May I inquire
what happened to the amendment of-
fered by the distinguished Senator
from Colorado [Mr. JOHNSON], with
reference to making some atomic power
available for commercial uses?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That was
not a question of serious dispute when
we defeated the first conference report.
The Senator from Colorado, I am sure,
will say that the spirit and purpose of
his amendment, which was to make it
clear that the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion could build experimental reactors
of any size desired, provided it got the
-------
420
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
money from Congress, is preserved
amply in the bill.
Mr. KEFAUVER. Does not the last
sentence of section 44 on page 12
rather strike down the possibility of
commercial use of atomic power?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Will the
Senator restate the last part of his
question?
Mr. KEPAUVER. I refer to the
last sentence of section 44 of the old
report.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Oh, yes; it
clearly states that the Atomic Energy
Commission is not to go into the busi-
ness of production of commercial
power. That is clearly established.
However, it is clearly set forth in the
conference bill that the Commission
may build various types and kinds of
reactors experimentally for the pro-
duction of power, but is not to go into
the business of commercially produc-
ing it.
Mr. KEFAUVER. Was it not the
will of the Senate that a limited
amount of commercial power should be
produced by reactors owned by the
Government?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. For the
purpose of research and development;
yes. That authority is amply preserved
in the bill.
Mr. KEFAUVER. Where is it pre-
served in the bill?
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
will the Senator yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. ANDERSON. In part the point
being raised by the Senator from Ten-
nessee was met by the change in lan-
guage which made it possible for the
Atomic Energy Commission to license
other Government agencies by bringing
them under the definition of person.
Therefore, the TVA or the Bonneville
Power Administration, if it got an
appropriation from Congress, could
do it. However, the Atomic Energy
Commission, as such, was not to run
around the country building com-
mercial plants, which had not been
contemplated in the original Johnson
amendment.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. ANDERSON. Could not the
Atomic Energy Commission build any
type of reactor?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Indeed.
Mr. ANDERSON. And carry it all
the way through to learn if the pro-
duction of power were commercially
feasible?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct. Under the bill the Atomic
Energy Commission, if it could get the
money from Congress, could build a re-
actor to produce a million kilowatts of
power. There is no limitation as to
what it could produce under the re-
search and development sections. If it
has excess power from that experi-
mental plant, it can sell it, under pref-
erence, to public bodies and REA's.
Mr. ANDERSON. There is nothing
in the last sentence of section 44 of the
original conference report or in any
other provision in the conference re-
port which would prohibit the Atomic
Energy Commission from selling, for
commercial use, subject to priority or
the preference clause, any excess
power it may produce after its own
needs are taken care of. Is that
correct?
[p. 14604]
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. In connec-
tion with the research and develop-
ment activities. The Senator is cor-
rect.
SEVERAL SENATORS. Vote! Vote!
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Pres-
ident, the conferees, I think, are very
familiar with what we have done in
this second conference report. It is
unanimously agreed to. I shall be glad
to attempt to answer any questions any
Senator may desire to ask, and I am
sure the other conferees will be glad
to answer questions. If there are no
questions
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Iowa yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
421
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Will the Sena-
tor permit me to say that I think he has
done a very fine job in getting this
very controversial bill through confer-
ence, and I wish to pay him a very de-
cided compliment for what he has done.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I thank the
Senator from Arkansas for his gener-
osity, and I only wish I deserved the
full weight of his compliment. There
are 5 conferees on the part of the Sen-
ate, and the other 4 have probably been
more tolerant of the situation at which
we are trying to arrive than I have
been. They have worked hard on the
matter, and four times as much credit
should go to the entire committee than
any possible credit to me.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. If I may say so,
I think the Senate has retained more of
the original Senate bill in this report
than it has in most of the bills which
have been passed at this session of the
Congress.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. There has
been a serious attempt to lay a basis for
an approach to this subject in the fu-
ture which will be one of encourage-
ment. We attempted in the original
bill to protect the rights of public bod-
ies and of such private bodies as REA
and any other private groups to enable
them to get "into the swim," and see
wrhat will happen when we turn Amer-
ican genius, either public or private,
loose in this field.
I think this bill probably gives pro-
tection, safeguards, and opportunities
as much as has any bill I have ever
seen in a pioneering field.
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Iowa yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. HOLLAND. I wish to say to the
distinguished Senator from Iowa that
I join the distinguished Senator from
Arkansas in expressing my compli-
ments to the Senator from Iowa and to
all other members of the conference
committee of the Senate. I think they
have done a fine job.
I wish to be sure that I understand
the situation with reference to patents,
because that was the only matter which
gave me concern at the time we were
considering the previous conference re-
port. Would it be fair to say that un-
der this conference report the situation
is handled in such a manner that the 5
years of nonexclusive time covered by
the original Senate bill appears in the
conference report?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct.
Mr. HOLLAND. Rather than the
10-year period which appeared is the
bill as passed by the Senate?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct.
Mr. HOLLAND. But is it also cor-
rect, as I believe it to be, that the pro-
tective features in the field of patents
written into the bill by the amendment
offered by the distinguished senior Sen-
ator from Oklahoma [Mr. KERR] are
retained in the conference report?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. The Sena-
tor is correct, in my view, and, I believe,
according to the view of the Senator
from Oklahoma. The control prin-
ciples are protected and preserved in
the present conference report.
Mr. HOLLAND. That meets the
only serious objection I had to the orig-
inal conference report, and I certainly
congratulate the conferees upon the
working out of the matter.
Several SENATORS. Vote! Vote!
Vote!
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President,
will the Senator from Iowa yield?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Were any
changes at all made in the interna-
tional-activities section as a result of
the conference?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. None.
Mr. HUMPHREY. In other words,
the language is the language contained
in the Senate bill?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Yes.
Mr. HUMPHREY. In reference to
the power commission regulations, of
which there was considerable discus-
sion during the debate, were the basic
purposes of that amendment included
-------
422
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
and continued?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. Exactly
the same.
Mr. HUMPHREY. As it passed the
Senate?
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President, if
I may interrupt, the spirit, at least, is
contained in the report.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. There may
have been a grammatical rearrange-
ment, such as "are" for "is," or some-
thing of that kind; but there is no
fundamental change in it. It is not a
matter of dispute.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I wish to say
that after a very long discussion of this
bill, which has been termed many
things, I, too, wish to join my col-
leagues in commending the conference
committee on working out a reasonable
and, I hope, a very effective program of
legislation in this field. While I joined
in the debate and was rather critical of
the Senate bill, I also participated in
getting a few amendments into the bill,
and it is my intention to vote for the
bill as it has been reported by the con-
ference committee, despite my misgiv-
ings about the Ferguson amendment.
I understand the Gore amendment
has been retained in the bill. Is that
correct?
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. That is
correct.
Mr. President, I yield to the Senator
from Oklahoma.
Mr. KERR. Mr. President, in the
judgment of the Senator from Okla-
homa, the two questions at issue which
went to conference following the vote
of the Senate have been handled in a
manner which entitles the conference
committee of the Senate to the con-
gratulations and thanks of every Mem-
ber of the Senate. I wish to express
my appreciation for the able manner
in which the two matters at issue are
handled in the conference report.
Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I thank the
Senator from Oklahoma. He and I
have not quite agreed on the verbiage
of some of these passages, but he has
been most cooperative and most willing
to discuss the question. I think we
have arrived at a period of mutual un-
derstanding and satisfaction as to the
protective features of the bill.
Mr. BRICKER. Mr. President, I
ask for the yeas and nays on the con-
ference report.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The Chief Clerk called the roll, and
the following Senators answered to
their names:
*****
The PRESIDING OFFICER. A
quorum is present.
The question is on agreeing to the
conference report. On this question,
the yeas and nays have been ordered,
and the clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
*****
[p. 14605]
The result was announced—yeas 59,
nays 17, as follows:
* * * * *
[p. 14606]
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
the reading of the statement may be
dispensed with.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, it seems unnecessary to have
read or explained the statement of the
managers on the part of the House on
this conference report. This is the same
matter, substantially, that was before
the House on Monday of last week
when the managers reported to the
House an agreement of the conferences
in respect to the bill amending the
atomic energy law.
Mr. Speaker, you will recall that the
House on that occasion adopted the
House report. Subsequently the report
was considered in the other body and
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
423
was rejected. Apparently the basis for
rejection by the other body was predi-
cated on two principal points: One was
with respect to the so-called preferen-
tial clause, giving preferential rights
to public bodies and cooperatives in the
distribution of whatever electric en-
ergy may be produced by the Commis-
sion. The other point of dispute was
with respect to how patents in the
atomic energy field having nothing
whatever to do with atomic weapons
would be treated.
You will recall that when the bill was
considered by the House an amendment
was offered by the gentleman from
Alabama [Mr. JONES] to require the
Commission at all times—and I empha-
size those words "at all times"—to give
preference to public bodies and cooper-
atives in the distribution of the electric
energy. That was accepted by the
committee and adopted by the House.
A similar amendment was adopted by
the Senate.
The House conferees accepted the
principle of preference, because we
recognized that that is the established
policy of the Government with respect
to electric energy generated from
water-power, and could see no reason
why that same principle would not ap-
ply to electric energy generated from
atomic fission by the Atomic Energy
Commission. However, the conferees
were disturbed by the requirement that
this preference should apply "at all
times," because it was conceivable that
there might be instances where it would
be impractical to grant the preference.
The conferees therefore wrote in the
expression that the preference clause
should apply "insofar as practicable."
When the conference report was
considered by the other body that
phrase "insofar as practicable" was
considered by some Members of the
other body as being some sort of
threat to the principle of Federal pref-
erence to cooperatives. They envi-
sioned that it represented a hidden
ogre that was somehow going to
[p. 14867]
strangle and destroy the preferential
clause. Of course, there was nothing
to that fearful fantasy; it was com-
pletely imaginary; it had no substance
to it at all. At any rate the Senate
rejected that phase of the conference
report.
The conferees have held a further
conference and have agreed to the elim-
ination of the expression "insofar as
practicable."
I think it should be understood that
in the elimination of those "three little
words" it is not intended by any
stretch of the imagination that the
Atomic Energy Commission, in grant-
ing preference to a Rural Electrifica-
tion Administration cooperative or to
any other public body, should grant
that preference even though it is im-
practicable to do so. I think we recog-
nize that our governmental agencies
and governmental commissions are ex-
pected to do the practical, efficient, eco-
nomic, proper thing; and so it should
not be construed or considered in the
future that the elimination of that ex-
pression authorizes or directs the
Commission to do the impossible, im-
practicable thing in granting a prefer-
ence to public bodies.
The other point in dispute was of
much greater substance and far
greater importance. That has to do
with the question of how to deal with
patents in this new field. You will
recall that as the bill was reported by
the joint committee to the House it con-
tained a provision requiring the com-
pulsory licensing of patents for a
period of 5 years. That provided in
substance that any person who may de-
vise a new scheme or a new method of
applying atomic energy in its many,
many thousands of opportunities, the
owner of the patent would be required
to share the patent with anybody who
may ask for it upon a royalty, fixed,
not by the owner of the patent, but by
the Government.
When the matter was considered by
the House an amendment was offered
and adopted by the House eliminating
-------
424
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
the provision requiring the compulsory
licensing of patents, and substituting
instead an amendment which would
declare to be public property any in-
vention in this field conceived during
the course of any relationship with the
Government, whether it be as a direct
employee of the Government, as an
employee of a contractor of the Gov-
ernment or of a subcontractor. That
was based on the theory that a princi-
pal acquires the benefits of his agent's
efforts. The effect of that amendment
would have protected the public inter-
est in all phases in this problem of
preventing undue enrichment of those
concerns and those individuals who
have been operating in this field under
Government sponsorship for the past
10 years. In all other respects it would
have left the patent opportunities in
this field open to the normal processes
of the patent laws.
It is inconceivable, and without justi-
fication, that the Government should
have any claim whatever on the dis-
covery of an invention made by an in-
dividual who has no connection with
the Government whatsoever.
The Senate and House conferees
originally accepted the elimination of
the compulsory feature of the patent
system and retained the amendment
which was adopted by the House by a
very substantial vote of 203 to 159, a
majority of 44. When it was reported
to the other body the conference report
was rejected by a very, very narrow
margin and they insisted upon the Sen-
ate amendment principally with re-
spect to the patent features.
The conferees were reappointed by
the House on yesterday and we met
with the Senate conferees yesterday
afternoon. We were confronted with
a very difficult, unpleasant, distasteful
situation. It can be reported factually
that a majority of the conferees, all of
them Republicans, representing both
bodies were willing to eliminate the
provision for compulsory licensing;
however, it was pointed out that there
was in the other body a group of per-
sistent and defiant individuals who
threw out a warning that if the com-
pulsory licensing feature was not re-
stored there would be a renewal of
what has been politely characterized
in the other body as a "talkathon" or
as a process of education. Having en-
dured that performance in connection
with this bill once, and now anticipat-
ing an imminent adjournment, the con-
ferees were faced with the choice of
two alternatives, either of insisting on
the principle which the majority of
the conferees felt to be proper and
thereby postponing the anticipated ad-
journment of the Congress, or of ac-
cepting the highly distasteful principle
of compulsory licensing and thereby
avoiding a threatened filibuster, speed-
ing this bill to early enactment, and
hastening the date of adjournment. It
was with the greatest of reluctance
that the majority of the House man-
agers consented to yield. It is not
pleasant to be forced to recede in a
matter of principle because of expedi-
ency. The position of the House was
yielded by your representatives finally
only upon an understanding and upon
the express condition, clearly accepted
and understood by all of the conferees
at that meeting—and all 10 of the con-
ferees were there, that at the very
earliest opportunity at the next ses-
sion, the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy would give full, and complete
study to the potent problem. On my
own responsibility, if I am returned as
a Member of this House, the very first
bill that I shall introduce will be one
to repeal what is now sections 153 and
154, the Senate provisions with respect
to patents.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield to
the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. DINGELL. I just want to make
an observation and ask a question of
my distinguished friend from New
York. We have been hearing and talk-
ing about profits and patents, about the
uses of fissionable material, and the
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
425
control of the atom. Now, of late I
have been reading about the problem
which, if true and unsolved, means any-
thing up to destruction of all human-
ity. In the control and disposition of
the unspent force in the tailings of fis-
sionable material of the atom there
remains a deadly danger. What provi-
sions are we making or what are we
going to do about the final disposition
of the unspent force of this fissionable
material which remains? They tell me
that the residue will plague us for a
thousand years. It will pollute our
streams; it will make radio-active food
and fish and the animals on the ranges.
Unless something is done, this matter
concerning us now is the greatest men-
ace that has ever been brought to the
attention of the people. I am wonder-
ing what this great committee is going
to do about that.
Mr. COLE of New York. The gen-
tleman has not made himself com-
pletely clear because there are two
types of deleterious tailings, as the
gentleman calls them, from atomic
energy.
Mr. DINGELL. I am not an expert.
Mr. COLE of New York. When un-
controlled nuclear reaction sets in, it
develops deleterious and dangerous
particles in the air, and it was that con-
sequence that caused the episode of the
unfortunate damage to the Japanese
fishermen.
Mr. DINGELL. I am not talking
about the Japanese fishermen.
Mr. COLE of New York. Then there
is also the possible danger to public
health and safety in the refinement of
raw uranium into plutonium and the
process of nuclear reaction, fissionable
reaction—that is, the controlled reac-
tion. In addition, there are the radio-
active wastes which are the unused end
products of the controlled reaction.
Ample provision is made in the bill for
the Commission to protect the health
and safety of the public. This, of
course, includes adequate treatment of
and control of these wastes.
The only thing I can assure the gen-
tleman is that to date there have been
no harmful consequences from this
controlled reaction; and that is what
the peacetime uses of atomic energy
would involve. There have been no
harmful effects. As a matter of fact,
the health and safety record of the
great atomic energy works up at Han-
ford far exceed the best of the indus-
trial records in this country. So we
do have that as a problem. It is some-
thing that is not in this bill and we
cannot discuss it too much.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield for one other brief
question?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. DINGELL. If these tailings are
unspent and for that reason dangerous,
is there not some means or method that
should be found to spend them com-
pletely so that they will become abso-
lutely harmless?
Mr. COLE of New York. I am not
sure that I understand what the gentle-
man has in mind when he speaks of
tailings that are not completely spent.
Material which has been exposed to
radiation is not altogether consumed
in that process. That material, that
waste material, is stored underground
and eventually reworked.
Mr. DINGELL. Yes, but that is the
final disposition of it, is it not?
Mr. COLE of New York. No; that is
only temporary. Eventually it is
reworked.
[p. 14868]
Mr. DINGELL. I think the Amer-
ican people are interested in that phase
of the question, I will say to my dis-
tinguished friend.
Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield to
the gentleman from New York.
Mr. KEATING. I should like to say
to the gentleman that it is my intention
to support the conference report. I
think the committee has done a com-
mendable job. This is a very construc-
tive piece of legislation, one of the most
-------
426
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
constructive it has ever been my privi-
lege to vote for.
However, I am greatly disturbed, as
I am sure the gentleman is, too, about
the constitutionality of any provisions
for compulsory licensing. But there
is, as I understand it, in this bill a sev-
erability clause. That would mean
that if the courts should hold that that
part of the bill was unconstitutional,
that would not interfere at all with the
other parts of the bill having to do
with the setting up of this atomic
stockpile and all of the other salutory
parts of the bill.
Mr. COLE of New York. The gen-
tleman is entirely correct.
Mr. KEATING. It is only for that
reason that I feel I can support the bill
because I have such a strong feeling
about the unconstitutionality of pro-
viding for compulsory licensing.
Mr. WALTER. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. WALTER. I, too, am concerned
over one section of this bill, the com-
pulsory licensing section, and I am
wondering whether or not the confer-
ees did not have in mind the possibility
sometime in the near future, of chang-
ing that provision so that the objec-
tions, the substantial objections that
have been made by so many people
would be met?
Mr. COLE of New York. That is ex-
actly what the conferees had in mind
when it was made a condition of the
acceptance of this compulsory licens-
ing that at the very earliest opportu-
nity next year the committee will
take up this question of compulsory
licensing.
Mr. MEADER. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE of New York. I yield.
Mr. MEADER. When this bill was
before the House for consideration I
supported the amendment of the gen-
tleman from New York [Mr. COLE] to
the patent section and expressed my
views to the House. I was pleased
when the conferees originally accepted
the provisions with respect to patents
which had been adopted in the House
by a substantial margin. I had hoped
that the House provisions would prevail
in the final legislation. But appar-
ently Members of the other body who
have the opposite view with respect to
patent policy would be willing to block
the passage of the bill rather than to
yield to the House version of the patent
section.
Under these circumstances, although
he fought valiantly for this important
principle, the gentleman from New
York could do little else than to make
concessions to insure the passage of
the legislation. I commend him and
his colleagues of the conference com-
mittee for the hard work and effective
effort they have put forth in writing
this historic statute.
As a member of the Judiciary Com-
mittee of the House, I have been
somewhat disturbed about legislation
dealing with patents emanating from
other committees. Patent lawyers and
some of my colleagues on the Judiciary
Committee have expressed grave doubts
over the constitutionality of the Senate
version of the patent section. They
have likewise pointed out that compul-
sory licensing is a major departure
from our longstanding patent policy.
I believe it is in the interest of orderly
processes and consistent legislation to
have proposed legislation in the patent
field referred to the Judiciary Com-
mittee, considered by that committee,
and adopted by the parent body after
thorough consideration of our national
interests in the patent field.
No one wants to write unconstitu-
tional legislation and no one should
want to make a rash change in a fea-
ture of our system of government
which is so basic as the exclusive right
of inventors to the use and discovery
of their inventions contemplated by the
Constitution.
Because of the novelty and mystery
surrounding nuclear fission, insofar as
we laymen are concerned, there is a
temptation to consider this field as
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
427
something apart from other fields of
legislation. I submit that this attitude
is essentially unsound and if it pre-
vails over a long period of time, will
lead us to confusion and inconsistency.
Even if compulsory patent licensing
is constitutional, I think it is a grave
mistake as a matter of policy. The
principles of private ownership and
individual freedom are closely allied
to the principle that the imaginative
inventor and the ingenious craftsman
may derive benefits from the products
of their discoveries. The new methods
which have led to the mass production
system in America, which is the foun-
dation of our abundance, stem from
these freedoms and these rights in in-
dividual citizens.
Now we are on the threshold of a
new field of human endeavor—the de-
velopment and utilization of this won-
derful new source of atomic energy for
commercial and industrial purposes in
peacetime. If we are to match the per-
formance of the American people in
other fields of human endeavor, their
ingenuity, their inventiveness, and
their enterprise should be encouraged,
not stifled.
The House version of the patent sec-
tion would have been adequate to
prevent windfalls to firms who have
enjoyed contracts with the Atomic En-
ergy Commission. I am opposed to
such windfalls and I believe all of my
colleagues are of like mind. But com-
pulsory licensing even though it be for
a limited time, applies not only to firms
and individuals who have heretofore
engaged in the atomic energy program
financed with Federal funds, but to all
inventors in the atomic energy field.
I sincerely hope that the Congress in
its next session will reexamine the
semisocialistic patent section of this
legislation and work out a method for
stimulating and encouraging the de-
velopment of atomic energy for peace-
time processes in line with our historic
patent policy.
Mr. COLE of New York. The gen-
tleman has made a very fine statement.
I can assure him and you, Mr. Speaker,
that had we not faced the prospect of
imminent adjournment of this body
your House conferees would have
stayed in conference until the regions
in the center of the earth were frozen.
But this, we could not do.
It should be known that this group
of persistent persons represents a phi-
losophy of government which is quite
foreign to our normal system of Gov-
ernment. There have been organiza-
tions that have been bitterly opposed
to this bill, no matter how it might
have been amended. The CIO has been
strong and bitter and vitriolic against
this bill. The ADA has been opposed
to it. The National Rural Electric
Cooperative Association, a reputable
and respected organization although
in this instance misguided by the rec-
ommendations of its lobbyist, has been
bitterly opposed to it. That lobbyist in
open session said that this bill no mat-
ter how it might be amended would not
be acceptable to his organization. The
American Public Power Association
has been opposed to it. Those persons
who entertain the philosophy of public
ownership, the ultimate of socialism,
by advocating the principle of compul-
sory licensing of patents, are insistent
upon a fatal step in the direction of
socialism.
The ironical part is that those per-
sons who were so insistent upon the
adoption of this initial step of compul-
sory licensing, even though we had
yielded to them, on the record vote last
evening over in the other body, in spite
of the fact that they had everything
they had asked for and demanded, still
voted against the bill. That is very,
very revealing.
My apprehension, my criticism, my
opposition to compulsory licensing is
not based only on its doubtful legality.
I am more concerned about its conse-
quences. Here we are for the first time
making available this new energy for
the good of mankind, away from weap-
ons, away from destruction, away from
devastation, opening up the door to the
-------
428
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
opportunity of individuals and groups
to apply their thoughts and their fi-
nances and their resources and their
energies to find new ways of putting
this to work; and immediately the lid is
put upon their efforts. What induce-
ment is there for people to find new
ways if the Government is going to con-
fiscate their discoveries? To the ex-
tent that we apply the principle of
compulsory licensing by even 5 years
we delay the full opportunity of ex-
ploiting this new energy. Upon the
shoulders of those persons who were
so insistent upon compulsory licensing
must rest the consequences of the delay
of these 5 years in the full exploitation
of this new force for nonmilitary
purposes.
It is my fervent hope that the Con-
gress next year will be persuaded to
repeal this highly distasteful, highly
un-American provision, which is so con-
trary to our tradition and which, if
[p. 14869]
continued in practice, will eventually
spell the doom of our great industrial
prosperity.
Mr. Speaker, there have been many
factors which have entered into the
decision to get private enterprise into
the atomic energy field. This country
cannot continue to pay the kind of
sums it has paid out of its public treas-
ury for the development of atomic
weapons. This is particularly true of
the development of facilities which are
not primarily weapons. Where this
country has utilized private industry
in the development of other arms such
as in radar and in the airplane many
ideas have come from the private com-
panies which have been used not only
in the weapons field but have been of
great value in promoting the civilian
progress of this country. Through
having private industry participate,
these ideas have been developed with-
out the expenditure of Federal funds
to the extent which would otherwise
have been necessary.
We have also had to keep our eyes
upon the developments in other coun-
tries. The Russians have brought in
atomic weapons years before our ex-
perts thought they would be able to.
While some espionage played a part
in this, native Russian skill was of
great importance. Will the Russians
be able to bring in peacetime reactors
before we can? We cannot lose this
race. Under the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 it is hoped that we will not.
While the Government and the Com-
mission will be able to make the expend-
itures for the same types of research
and development that they have in the
past, it is hoped that industry will be-
come established and will make the
normal contributions to private indus-
try under the normal incentives.
Of course we all know how far we
are ahead of other countries in the de-
velopment of many technological fields,
radios, telephones, automobiles, elec-
trical appliances and the chemical in-
dustry, to name a few. These and
many more have flourished and grown
great under the normal American ways
of promoting new ideas. The thing
that I want to emphasize at this point
is that in order to win the race for
world peace, this country must have
new ideas in the field of atomic energy.
It must have the extremely important
ideas which make the difference be-
tween economical and uneconomical
atomic energy—the new ideas which
make the difference between the ability
to use many byproducts in many new
ways and industries and in many new
medical ways, and in having no prog-
ress in these fields.
It is my position that each and all of
these new ideas should be guarded and
protected so that each may develop and
flourish to the extent it deserves. This
is the time for us to break the shackles
on this new industry and to let it
grow under the minimum of necessary
control.
I have already addressed myself to
the constitutional problem so I need do
no more than to refer to that. Let me
then go on to discuss what a patent is.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
429
It is a right given by the Constitution
—the exclusive right—given for a lim-
ited time for an invention or discovery.
It is a right granted by the United
States as a reward and as an induce-
ment to inventors. What is rewarded
is not something which is common or
ordinary or easy to learn. In order to
obtain a patent there must be some-
thing beyond ordinary skill to produce
an invention. In the 1940's the Su-
preme Court had gone to the extent of
requiring that patents be given only
for "flashes of genius." Congress re-
vised the standard of inventions needed
for a patent in July of 1952 when it
reestablished the standard as being for
those ideas which were above the
knowledge of the persons skilled in the
art. A patent then is issued for new
ideas, new thoughts, inventions that
this country has not had before.
A patent is property and as such is
treated as any other property, tangible
or intangible, but then a property right
in any other item is the right which is
specified in the Constitution for pat-
ents, namely the exclusive right.
When I buy a house or a farm I buy the
right to exclude others from that house
or farm. When I buy a car I buy the
right to exclude others from that car.
Under the principles of compulsory
licensing the Government would per-
mit anybody else to use my car, my
house, and my farm on terms which
would be prescribed by the Govern-
ment. If I explored for and found an
oil field, the principle of compulsory
licensing would require me to permit
others to drill in that oil field and ex-
tract the oil from it on terms that
would be set by the Government.
When you strip away the coverings of
compulsory licensing it is socialism in
its barest form. It removes the very
protection which is needed in the start
of the period when new ideas are being
formed. I would like to quote from the
testimony of Mr. Frederick P. Fish
when he spoke in 1913 before the Old-
field committee in opposition to a bill
for compulsory licensing.
He said:
The whole history of industrial development
shows that it is only through the prospect of
special gain that men will devote attention to
inventing or to inventions. Without adequate
hope of unusual returns neither the man of in-
ventive capacity nor the businessman and the
capitalist can be induced to take the chances
and go to the great trouble and expense neces-
sary to work out inventions or to establish new
industries or reorganize industrial methods so
as to utilize inventions. As a class, they are
wise enough to recognize that the chances of
success are not so great as to justify the risk.
Inventors, and businessmen who develop in-
ventions and introduce them to the service of
man, to exactly the same degree and for the
same reasons are stimulated by the protection
afforded by a patent, to efforts which they
would never otherwise make. Each class would
be helpless without the other. It is only when
both are encouraged and protected, as they are
by the grant of a patent, that the progress of
the useful arts is promoted.
When we consider the chances of failure
that inventors, capitalists, manufacturers, and
investors take and the trouble, expense, energy,
and intelligence required to bring a new idea
or even an improvement into commercial use,
involving as is the case, extensive experiments
before and after the invention is made, the de-
termination of the exact field for the invention,
the overthrowing of habits, the education of
the consumer, the discovery of how he can be
induced to take up the new invention, and ulti-
mately, in many instances, the scrapping of
machinery and the modification of manufac-
turing methods, it would seem that the least
encouragement adequate to keep men at such
work would be an absolutely free hand for a
short term of years, such as is given by the
patent laws of the United States.
The encouragement of patent protection does
not alone stimulate the inventor to intellectual
effort; it excites to strenuous endeavor a long
line of intermediaries, capitalists, investors,
business administrators, licensees, and users
who work with or under the patent and whose
cooperation is vitally necessary that the inven-
tion may not be confined to a paper description,
but may actually be used.
Instead of leading to harmful mo-
nopolies, patents in themselves form
the basis for real competition since it
is the new and difficult kind of compe-
tition which requires the competitor
not to mimic what has already been
-------
430
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
done, but to go out and find new things
to sell, new ways of doing things.
In forcing the competitors to seek
these new ideas it is as much benefit to
the science and the useful arts as it is
in the reward of royalties from the
right to use patented inventions. The
normal antitrust safeguards against
unlawful use of patents have been built
into the bill in provisions other than
those dealing with compulsory licenses.
These have been emphasized and
strengthened so that there will be little
chance of the vicious type of monopoly
growing in this field.
The Senate believes that compulsory
licensing is needed because this, of all
fields, has been born and raised with
Federal funds. Mr. Speaker, I don't
think that this is a proper basis for
selecting this field. If you single out
this field for this requirement, then
why have you not singled out the elec-
tronics fields? The automotive field—
the airplane field—or the chemical
fields? All of these have had tremen-
dous sums spent on them by the Fed-
eral Government. Yet there is no
compulsory licensing in those fields. If
there were compulsory licensing in
those fields, then why would not it be
proper for other fields beyond them
where the Federal expenditures shaded
off. This is not right. While it is the
popular opinion that this field arose
solely because of the expenditure of
Federal funds, I must point out the
fact that there was a field of nuclear
physics long before the Federal Gov-
ernment ever expended a cent in the
field. Indeed, one of the basic patents,
the Fermi patent, on which the owners
agreed to accept a Government pay-
ment of $300,000 last fall, was con-
ceived in the middle 1930's and pat-
ented in 1940. This patent is basic to
the field and had not a single cent of
Federal funds put into it before it was
condemned by the Government for war
purposes.
Of course, I do not mean to minimize
the importance of the expenditure of
Federal funds, but there were many
seeds in this field that were planted
long before the first Federal funds
[p. 14870]
were ever spent. Now the Federal
funds have been spent, I would like to
progress a step further and point out
to you that of the $12 billion between
a half billion and one billion is the
amount that was spent for research
and development. From this expendi-
ture the Atomic Energy Commission is
at this very moment, according to the
report made by the Research and De-
velopment Subcommittee of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy, plan-
ning to construct under contract five
different types of peacetime reactors
in order to test them—to try them out.
All of the rights to those reactors now
belong to the United States. There are
five different types, Mr. Speaker, that
list has been read here before and I
need not repeat it. What the types are
does not matter as much as the fact
that there are five different types al-
ready. Those with intimate knowledge
in the field who appeared before our
committee when it was gathering in-
formation for H. R. 9757 testified that
in the present art there is room for
many possible types of reactors. This
is, then, not like the start of any other
field. Mr. Speaker, this is a field in
which there is already a broad base—
in which already there are different
kinds of facilities that can be built and
which the Government is proceeding to
build as fast as it can. How can any-
body get a monopoly in this field with
this as the starting point and with
Government funds promised for con-
tinuing research?
It is said that there will be but few
opportunities. Yet if that is so, why
should the Federal Government force
its views on the new field. It will com-
bine the techniques of generating
equipment manufacturers, of chemical
plants, and of public utilities. Why
should all be forced into the same eco-
nomic mold when they are not so now?
Some say that cross-licensing works in
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
431
the automotive field, yet that is not yet
parallel to this field.
It has been said that there are but a
limited number of big companies. This
is not fully accurate. It is true that
there are a limited number of big com-
panies which have operated reactors,
but these are not the only companies
with which the Commission has dealt.
It has had 1,500 prime contractors and
50,000 subcontractors in the atomic en-
ergy field, drawing virtually on every
industrial organization in the country.
Each one of these organizations has, to
a very limited extent and under Gov-
ernment control, tried to apply its
knowledge and information to the par-
ticular problems for which it was
brought into the program. The pro-
gram will flourish much better if they
are.given an opportunity to tackle the
many thousands of problems which are
present in the atomic field in the nor-
mal ways in which problems are ordi-
narily solved in our modern world. It
is only when many of these problems—
each one small in itself—are cumula-
tively solved that the field will progress
rapidly and quickly.
During the Senate debates on this
bill, there has been much discussion
about conserving our national re-
sources, and promoting their use in the
interest of all of the people. I believe
that there is only one natural resource,
and that is the brains and ingenuity of
our people. Without them we would
not be turning falling water to elec-
tricity which can be transmitted many
miles. Without the brains and inge-
nuity of our people we could not turn
coal and fossil fuels to energy or to
make rare chemicals from them. Since
it is the brains and ingenuity of our
people which are of primary impor-
tance, let us foster them as national
resources, and encourage all new ideas
in this field as in all other fields.
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding my
abhorrence of the compulsory licensing
provisions of the conference report, I
shall vote for its acceptance and I urge
every Member of the House to do
likewise.
I shall vote for the acceptance of the
conference report because I believe the
passage of this bill at this session is
urgently necessary to our well-being as
a Nation both in our domestic affairs
and in our international activities.
As I have said, I do not like the pat-
ent provisions of the conference report.
I believe particularly sections 153 and
154, which require compulsory licens-
ing of all patents of primary impor-
tance in the atomic-energy field that
are conceived in the next 5 years, will
be shown to be a serious deterrent to
the widespread and vigorous attack on
the problem of competitive atomic
power by private industry—a basic ob-
jective of the bill.
Yet, I am compelled today to urge
my colleagues to support this confer-
ence report. The report contains vital
corrective measures in our domestic-
security programs. I can assure you
that day by day the need—the urgent
need—for these measures becomes
more apparent. The bill contains leg-
islative mechanisms which will enable
us to deal equitably in the peacetime
application of atomic energy with our
loyal friends overseas whose efforts,
both during the war and afterwards,
in the supplying of uranium to the
common defense of the free world have
meant the difference between peace
and war. The bill contains provisions
which enable us to tell our military
allies information on the effects and
utilization of atomic weapons so that
we may, in our common effort, reflect
prudent planning against an aggressor
who may utilize such weapons in an
attempt to overrun freedom's borders
and expand outward the sphere of in-
fluence of atheistic communism.
The bill also provides the President
with encouragement and legislative
means of bringing to reality his plan
for the international pooling of atomic
energy for peaceful purposes—the
plan which has so dramatically cap-
tured the minds and given expression
to the hopes of men everywhere.
-------
432
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
These objectives of the bill are, to
me, of such transcendent importance
as to outweigh my dislike—both on con-
stitutional grounds and on the prin-
ciple involved—of the compulsory
licensing features in the patent section.
I have noted that when H. R. 9757
was considered in the House the Mem-
bers by record vote of 203 to 159 clearly
stated their rejection of the principle
of compulsory licensing. If it were
possible to isolate this problem of com-
pulsory licensing from the larger is-
sues which involve our very national
survival, I would urge the House to
reject any compromise. But this is
not possible. Recognizing that, your
managers in reluctantly accepting the
insistence of the other body that com-
pulsory licensing be included, made it
a condition of their acceptance that the
problem be reexamined at the begin-
ning of the next session of Congress.
In good conscience I sincerely urge
my colleagues to support overwhelm-
ingly, as a token of our recognition of
these large and vital issues, the accep-
tance of the conference report.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. PRICE].
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, as one of
the House conferees, I signed this re-
port. We went into conference to re-
solve the differences between the other
body and the House and in the second
conference, I think, the managers on
the part of the House and the man-
agers on the part of the Senate satis-
factorily resolved the issues and the
points in dispute to the point where we
have an opportunity this afternoon to
consider a better bill than the one
which went into conference. I would
not impugn the motive of any Member
of either body for whatever position
they took on this bill, whether they
opposed it or favored it. I think it is a
subject which requires considerable
thought and study. Unfortunately,
few Members of either body had the
personal opportunity to give this the
close study and thought required to
fully understand its many provisions.
I think the House should know that by
accepting the position of the other
body on the patent provision, we are
merely going back to the original
patent provision which was in the bill
which came to the floor of the House
for our consideration just a little over
a week ago. We are asked, today, to
accept almost the identical language
which came to the House from the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy.
True, it was amended in the House and
it was amended on a rollcall vote, but
this compulsory licensing provision
was originally approved by the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy, by al-
most unanimous vote. It became the
position of the other body, and I might
say, it is also the position that was
recommended in a message to the Con-
gress from the President. I think
anyone can support the position of the
conferees in full justification. I can see
no way in which this amendment could
hold back the program. The President,
himself, foresaw a period in which the
participation would be so limited that
a few companies might be in a position
to set up a patent monopoly. He rec-
ommended safeguards, and I, per-
sonally, have the feeling that the
conferees, in this last action, have pro-
vided those safeguards which the
President recommended. It is for that
reason that I, as one of the managers
on the part of the House, signed the
conference report.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. PRICE. I yield.
Mr. JAVITS. I heard, with great in-
terest, the gentleman from New York
on the question of so-called compulsory
licensing. But, is it not a fact that the
courts, themselves, have, when they
[p. 14871]
saw a monopoly, enforced compulsory
licensing, and if memory serves me,
that is true in the field of radio tubes.
Therefore, it is not such a horrible
proposition, but it is used where they
run into a situation which is conducive
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
433
to monopoly such as this one.
Mr. PRICE. I might say in reply,
that the Atomic Energy Act on the
books today contains a compulsory li-
censing provision, and certainly the
constitutionality of it has not been
questioned, at least not in court.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield myself just a minute.
Of course, the constitutionality of
the provisions of the McMahon Act has
not been in question for the reason that
that very law prohibits anybody from
getting a patent and nobody has been
in a position to test the constitution-
ality of the law. As to the point raised
by the gentleman from New York [Mr.
JAVITS], it is true that the courts have
required compulsory licensing, but only
after it has been established in a court
of law that the patent was used as a
basis of a monopoly, and that provision
is in the bill which was presented to
the House and adopted by the House.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from North Carolina [Mr.
DURHAM].
Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Speaker, it is
late in the afternoon, but I want to say
I think the chairman has given a very
fine and explicit review of what the
conferees adopted. Personally, I do
not agree with it altogether, but I do
urge this body this afternoon to adopt
this report. I want personally to
thank this body on this side of the
Capitol for the patience and the kind-
ness they have exhibited toward this
committee who are trying to rewrite
the Atomic Energy Act so that private
enterprise would be able to enter this
field and thus do what we have done
so successfully in the past 175 years in
this country. That was our main ef-
fort. Unfortunately, some things
crept into our deliberations which in
my opinion should never have been
brought in, because of the importance
of this measure, because of the neces-
sity for adopting some beginning, at
least, in international cooperation;
also, in regard to the cooperation of .our
allies from a military and security
standpoint in their own countries. I
feel we have brought a measure to the
House which every Member of the
House can feel confident that at least
we have made a beginning. If this
committee will continue to do as it has
in the past—and that has been the in-
tent and purpose since the adoption of
the first act—that the atoms should
eventually be used for the benefit of
humanity and not to destroy the whole
world, as so many people talk and write
about today, then great progress will
be made.
Of course we are apprised of the
inherent dangers involved in the re-
lease of this energy, if and when trou-
ble begins. I think the gentleman from
Michigan [Mr. DINGELL] was con-
cerned with one of the problems that
exists today in the control of radioac-
tive material. Not only is the commit-
tee concerned about how we are going
to control it, because it is absolutely
necessary that we do control it, because
if and when it is released it is more
dangerous than atomic weapons.
Speaking of course of what we ordi-
narily refer to as "tailings" in the op-
eration we only recover a very small
percentage of the energy today from
the material that is fissioned. If and
when the time comes, and I believe it
will come, when the scientists of this
country will recover 95 percent of the
energy instead of 4 or 5 percent, then
the world can expect benefits to come to
humanity which probably never have
been heard of or dreamed of in the his-
tory of our country.
Again I want to thank this body for
allowing us to write a measure that
we think will be a start in the proper
direction. We have brought to you a
conference report which will carry on
and further develop our atomic pro-
gram, as well as provide weapons for
the security of this country.
Mr. GROSSER. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURHAM. I yield.
Mr. GROSSER. Has the committee
given any consideration to the subject
-------
434
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
of controlling the natural resources to
prevent a monopoly at the source?
Mr. DURHAM. I can say to the gen-
tleman and I have a very high regard
for him—that I believe that under
present circumstances when the Fed-
eral Government, under this measure,
will control every grain of material
that fissions, we will not permit any
individual under this law to buy 1
ounce of uranium, that there is no fear.
Further to allay any fears of the gen-
tleman from Ohio, we own and control
completely 730 basic patents which are
the fundamental patents of the whole
process. I have never been worried
much about the patent provision creat-
ing a monopoly because the Govern-
ment owns and will continue to own
and control the basic patents.
Under the present law and under
this act the Federal Government can
confiscate any patent by any individual
which has anything to do with the de-
velopment of weapons under this
program.
In my opinion it is still a Govern-
ment-controlled monopoly completely.
Mr. GROSSER. I understand from
the gentleman, then, that the country's
fissionable material itself is sufficiently
in the hands of the Government.
Mr. DURHAM. Yes, that is a cor-
rect statement. My chief objection to
the bill is it does not let private enter-
prise come in and do the job as fully
and freely as I would like it to be done.
I am just as much concerned as any-
body not to let private enterprise or
any one come in and create a monopoly.
It is necessary to put private enter-
prise into this program, unless we want
to let the Government continue to hold
a monopoly from now on, since we must
control the weapons production for our
own and our allies security. Your
committee will continue to study as we
have since 1946 the advancement of
this program in all of its phases, that
we may continue to lead the world as
we have before.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for the adoption
of the conference report with confi-
dence that we will still lead and share
with those of our allies that want to
remain a free people.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from California [Mr. HIN-
SHAW].
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I
think it is quite evident that the con-
ferees on both sides of the table faced a
condition and not a theory. This was a
shotgun wedding. There was section
152; there was the Cole amendment;
and there was section 153 which was
the original bill. They are both in here,
and if the original section as it was
presented to the House is declared un-
constitutional, then the Cole amend-
ment remains in the bill as a backstop.
I think that that is all that need be
said except I want to say to my friend
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
JAVITS] that if he will read section 158
of the bill he will find that the matter
he referred to is already taken care of,
and it is already taken care of in exist-
ing law.
Mr. Speaker, I think we ought to ap-
prove the amendment.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentle-
man from Pennsylvania [Mr. VAN
ZANDT].
Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, as
a member of the joint committee, I have
participated in the many days, weeks,
even months of intense deliberation on
this bill. It has received the most care-
ful consideration. In fact the manner
of preparing this bill and working out
the problems it involved has to me been
almost a model of the legislative
process. I have been proud to be a
member of the group which has seen
this through. It was for this reason
that the conference on the bill yester-
day was all the more painful for me, as
I know it was for my colleagues on this
side of the aisle who were with me.
Seldom has any piece of legislation
come before the Congress which
touches upon so many vital issues for
our national well-being. We have had
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
435
no illusions that the product of our
labors v/ould prove to be perfect, but it
was our best effort and a good one.
The Members of the House showed
their true understanding of the signifi-
cance of this bill when they gave such
careful consideration to the arguments
presented here so ably by our esteemed
chairman, the gentleman from New
York [Mr. COLE], concerning patents.
Your House managers were forced to
compromise on this matter despite the
conviction shown by the overwhelming
House vote to reject compulsory licens-
ing. That compromise was made only
after having been assured that the en-
tire patent problem will be the first
order of business in January before
the joint committee.
I deeply regret that we were unable
to convince our colleagues in the other
body of the wisdom and necessity of
the House version of the bill. We
bring back to you the best compromise
we have been able to obtain. The pace
of atomic progress will not permit our
law to go unrevised. I, therefore,
recommend adoption of this conference
report—and urge the House to have
[p. 14872]
confidence that future amendments on
this bill can undo or relieve whatever
proves to be unsound.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
revise and extend my remarks and that
other members who have spoken on the
conference report may revise and ex-
tend their remarks.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Mr.
Speaker, I am much pleased that the
conferees have agreed to removing the
words "insofar as practicable." I very
reluctantly voted for the House bill
upon the assurance that public and co-
operative bodies were without question
retaining their preference rights to
public power. Our rural electrification
associations are very much interested
in the preference clause as has been
law for many years. I congratulate
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
COLE] and the other House conferees
in accepting the Senate provisions and
thereby insuring without question the
prior rights of public bodies and REA's
to the power when it is available.
Mr. COLE of New York. Mr.
Speaker, much as I am opposed to this
one phase of this conference report, it
contains so many other elements of a
highly desirable nature that I urge the
adoption of the conference report.
Mr. Speaker, I move the previous
question on the conference report.
The previous question was ordered.
The conference report was agreed to,
and a motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
*****
[p. 14873]
-------
436 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
l.lc AMENDMENTS TO ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954
July 14,1956, P.L. 84-722, 70 Stat. 553
AN ACT
To amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, to permit the negotiation of commer-
cial leases at atomic energy communities, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 161
e. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, is amended by
striking therefrom the words "section 174;" and substituting in
lieu thereof the words: "section 174: Provided, however, That in
the communities owned by the Commission, the Commission is
authorized to grant privileges, leases and permits upon adjusted
terms which are fair and reasonable to responsible persons to op-
erate commercial businesses without advertising and without
securing competitive bids, but taking into consideration, in addition
to the price, and among other things (1) the quality and type of
services required by the residents of the community, (2) the
experience of each concession applicant in the community and its
surrounding area, (3) the ability of the concession applicant to
meet the needs of the community, and (4) the contribution the
concession applicant has made or will make to the other activities
and general welfare of the community;".
Approved July 14, 1956.
#*####*
[p. 553]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 437
l.lc(l) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
H.R. KEP. No. 2431, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956)
AMENDING THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954 TO
PERMIT THE NEGOTIATION OF COMMERCIAL LEASES
AT ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITIES
JUNE 25, 1956.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
ME. DEMPSEY, from the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 11926]
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, having considered
H. R. 11926, an original committee bill, to amend the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 to permit the negotiation of commercial leases
at atomic energy communities, and for other purposes, do unan-
imously report favorably thereon, and recommend the bill do pass.
BACKGROUND
The atomic energy products at Oak Ridge, Tenn., Richland,
Wash., and Los Alamos, N. Mex., are carried on in towns which,
as of this moment, are all owned by the Federal Government.
These towns comprise residences for their employees at the proj-
ects and commercial shopping centers. Under the Atomic Energy
Community Act of 1955 a program was set up for the sale of the
properties in Oak Ridge, Tenn., and Richland, Wash., to the
citizens of the towns. The actual sales program at these two
towns, which has been in preparation for nearly a year, has not
yet been officially started.
Meanwhile, there are commercial leases in these towns and in
the town of Los Alamos, N. Mex., which have not yet been brought
under the terms of the Atomic Energy Community Act of 1955,
which are expiring. The Commission is not renegotiating leases
of these people who have formed an integral and beneficial part of
the communities, but instead is reletting the concessions on a
straight advertised-bid basis. In coming to the Commission com-
munities to start needed commercial enterprises at those com-
[P- 1]
munities, the commercial lessees uprooted themselves from their
-------
438 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
former surroundings and have now made major contributions to
the success of these three new towns.
In letting these renewals out on a strictly bid basis, the Com-
mission states that it is bound by the strict requirements of the
advertising statutes, and therefore cannot consider the desirability
of continuing the growth of the citizens in these towns.
The authority to operate and maintain these towns is incor-
porated in the chapter on the general authority of the Commission
in subsection 161 e. This section now provides:
SEC. 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS.—In the performance
of its functions the Commission is authorized to—
e. acquire such material, property, equipment,
and facilities, establish or construct such buildings
and facilities, and modify such buildings and facil-
ities from time to time, as it may deem necessary,
and construct, acquire, provide, or arrange for such
facilities and services (at project sites where such
facilities and services are not available) for the
housing, health, safety, welfare, and recreation of
personnel employed by the Commission as it may
deem necessary, subject to the provisions of section
174;
The reference to section 171 is merely a reference to the section
requiring that the Attorney General approve title to real estate
acquired under the act. Most of the powers of the Atomic Energy
Commission are based on declarations, findings and purposes set
forth in sections 1, 2, and 3 of the act, most of which relates to the
common defense and security. The operations of these towns are
indeed vital to the defense of our country in doing the research
and manufacturing which is needed for atomic weapons. From
these towns, too, spring the development of the peaceful uses of
atomic energy. It is of the utmost importance to this program
that the citizens of the towns not suffer undue dislocations. Thus,
in the Atomic Energy Community Act of 1955, in establishing a
program for the sales of the communities of Oak Ridge and Rich-
land to the residents, section 11 c finds:
To that end, it is desired at each community to—
c. provide for the orderly sale to private pur-
chasers of property within those communities ivith
a minimum of dislocation.
Section 12a of the same act has the finding:
The continued morale of project-connected persons is
essential to the common defense and security of the
United States.
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 439
Section 13a states as a purpose of the act that it is to provide
for—
a. the maintenance of conditions which will not impede
the recruitment and retention of personnel essential to
the atomic energy program;
These purposes and policies are further amplified in the section
of the Atomic Energy Community Act relating to the priorities
for the sale of property. In this section, the Commission is re-
[P. 2]
quired to establish rules and regulations for priorities for the
sale of the property based on:
(1) The retention and recruitment of personnel es-
sential to the atomic energy program;
(2) The minimization of dislocation of persons within
the community * * *.
The local offices of the Atomic Energy Commission at each of the
three communities are thoroughly acquainted with how the com-
mercial lessees have been serving the communities and the extent
to which the lessees have contributed to the life in those com-
munities. It is proposed in this bill to give the Commission the
authority to consider all of these contributions in deciding on the
lessee while the Commission still owns the towns.
In a field which is less important to the national defense than
atomic energy the Congress has permitted the negotiation of
commercial leases. The Secretary of the Interior has given the
following statutory grant with respect to entering into leases for
commercial services on lands under the jurisdiction of the Na-
tional Park Service:
He may also grant privileges, leases and permits for
the use of land for the accomodation of visitors in the
various parks, monuments or other reservations, pro-
vided for under section 2 of this title, but for periods
not exceeding twenty years; * * * and provided further,
that the Secretary of the Interior may grant said priv-
ileges, leases and permits and enter into contracts re-
lating to same with responsible persons, firms or
corporations without advertising or securing competitive
bids: * * *
The policies of the National Park Service are set forth in the state-
ment of October 13, 1950.
In order to encourage concessionaires to make contributions to
the communities, to remain in the communities, and to put invest-
ments into their stores, their trade and the community, the Joint
Committee recommends the passage of this bill. Under its pro-
-------
440 LEGAL COMPILATION—EADIATION
visions the Commission may negotiate leases based not only on the
return from the leases to the Government, but also on quality and
type of services required by the residents—and in some instances,
such as drug stores, the services required and 24-hour availability
at the community—the experience of the concession applicant at
this community or in its immediate area, the ability of the ap-
plicant to meet the needs of the community and the overall con-
tributions he has made, or will make, to the community.
We are still providing for obtaining competitive proposals, but
provide reasonable flexibility from formal advertising require-
ments.
The letter from the Atomic Energy Commission setting forth its
position in not being able to base its consideration on the leases on
these points is set forth below:
[P. 3]
MARCH 8,1956.
HON. JOHN J. DEMPSEY,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Communities,
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
Congress of the United States.
DEAR MR. DEMPSEY: This letter will answer Mr. Norris' letter
of December 15, 1955, asking the advisability of the Commission's
general policy to advertise concessionaire leases upon expiration.
It will also answer questions related to the Los Alamos situation
which you raised in your telephone call to the Director of Military
Application of January 4, and in your subsequent conference with
Mr. Wampler and General Starbird on January 17. As a result
of our subsequent discussion on this subject, the AEG has looked
into the general policy question again. The following information
is the result of that review.
In 1954 the Commission reviewed its policy with respect to
leasing of concessions and decided that-the terms of existing and
future leases should be extended only for programatic reasons
which support a conclusion that the extension by negotiation is
necessary for the housing, health, safety, welfare of recreation of
Commission and contractor personnel. The Commission's di-
rectives relating to the matter stated that negotiated extension
was to be regarded as exception to the Commission's general policy
of obtaining competition and that the programatic reason for any
such exception must be clearly shown.
In reaching their policy decision, the Commission was influenced
primarily by the general policy and practice of the Federal Gov-
ernment as exemplified by section 3709 of the Revised Statutes,
which requires advertising for supplies and services. It was felt
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 441
that the policy assured fair treatment to all interested members of
the public and most favorable economic return to the Govern-
ment for the facility and opportunity the Government provided.
Additionally, it provided a means for meeting changing com-
munity needs (where Government facilities were limited) by
bringing into existence higher priority types of services. The
Chairman of the AEC forwarded the detailed statement of policy
to the chairman of the JCAE by letter of January 29, 1954.
As to the Los Alamos situation, original leases under the Man-
hattan District and for several years thereafter were generally
of short duration and renewed by negotiation. When the move
to permanent areas became possible and in recognition that lessees
would be involved in added expense if best service were to be pro-
vided, the Commission offered all incumbents extension to a lease
of 10-year total duration. Thereafter, all accepted. At the pres-
ent time, we have 40 major concessions leased at Los Alamos in
Government facilities, all of a duration totaling 10 years. A
large number are scheduled to expire in the next 2 years. The
first of the 10-year expirations will be that of the Ferris Cleaners.
As General Starbird explained in the conference of January 17,
various alternate solutions to that of readvertising the Ferris
Cleaner lease have been proposed and investigated. As requested,
I shall describe these briefly.
The first suggestion was that in view of the satisfactory service
performed by the Ferris Cleaners, a negotiated extension be made.
[P. 4]
As explained in my letter of December 22, the circumstances in-
dicate no programatic necessity for negotiated extension. Other
cleaners serve Los Alamos and could handle the load during any
temporary interruption. Negotiation in this first case would
naturally lead all concessionaires to expect similar treatment, and
in fairness would have to be given.
The proposal was then reviewed from the point of view of rec-
ommending the Commission permit negotiation at Los Alamos for
all lessees. Neither my staff nor I believed such a course should
be followed. It would, of course, depart from the basic principle
of competition which was the basis of the Commission's decision.
It would preclude others interested in competing for the oppor-
tunities available at Los Alamos. In this connection, a very large
number of individuals and concerns have expessed a desire to
compete on expiration of present leases.
A proposal has been made that the present leaseholders be given
credit for the good will and investment they have made and be re-
tained if their bid after advertisement is sufficiently close to that
-------
442 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
of the high bidder. Such a procedure would be, in my opinion,
impossible to administer fairly and could be objected to stren-
uously by those who have expressed a desire to compete in the
future. Using the alternate approach of allowing negotiations
after bid opening and awarding to incumbent if he then met the
bid of the highest responsible bidder would lessen the interest of
others in submitting a bid. Further, it would, to all intents and
purposes, relieve the incumbent of the necessity of making an
original bid to be entered in the competition to establish fair Gov-
ernmental return.
You also asked that we comment on the price to be set on
equipment taken over by a future lessee but owned by the former
leaseholder. Specifically, the questions involved the advisability
that AEC appraise the equipment's worth, and require the new
tenant to pay the amount concerned. I feel that this action would
be an unwarranted interference with the natural negotiation of
the buyer and seller. The former lessee does, of course, have the
right to remove his equipment if he so desires. On occasion such
removal may not be desired, and there is the definite possibility
that the owner may be willing to sell at a reduced price. On the
other hand, if the equipment is needed by the new lessee for satis-
factory operation and is in satisfactory condition, it normally
would be to his advantage to pay a fair value to avoid the neces-
sity of procuring and installing new equipment.
It is the AEC's policy to assure that any concessionaire show
ability to handle adequately the promised service prior to his re-
ceiving an award. This is necessary so as to provide best services
to the communities that support our technical programs. It is
our policy also to assure that the concessionaire knows exactly
what he will be furnished and what he is to expect of the Gov-
ernment, for only thus will he receive fair treatment and be able
to program his operation and costs. Subject to meeting these
two objectives, it is our further effort to assure maximum return
for the Government's investment in the facilities concerned.
Under these circumstances, I consider I must reaffirm the earlier
decision that concessions, upon completion of termination of the
lease agreement, be readvertised for competitive bids.
[p. 5]
For your information, we have been informed by the Los Alamos
area office that although the Ferris Cleaners had a full year re-
maining on their lease, they gave the AEC a 60-day notice of
termination on February 1, 1956, and indicated an intention to bid
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 443
on the concession when it was advertised by the AEC.
Sincerely yours,
R. W. COOK,
Acting.
K. E. FIELDS,
General Manager.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the
bill accompanying this report are shown as follows (new matter
is printed in italics):
SEC. 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS.—In the performance of its
functions the Commission is authorized to—
e. acquire material, property, equipment, and facilities, es-
tablish or construct such buildings and facilities, and modify
such buildings and facilities from time to time, as it may deem
necessary, and construct, acquire, provide, or arrange for such
facilities and services (at project sites where such facilities
and services are not available) for the housing, health, safety,
welfare, and recreation of personnel employed by the Com-
mission as it may deem necessary, subject to the provisions of
[section 174;] section 174: Provided, however, that in the
communities owned by the Commission, the Commission is
authorized to grant privileges, leases and permits upon ad-
justed terms which are fair and reasonable to responsible per-
sons to operate commercial businesses without advertising
and without securing competitive bids, but taking into con-
sideration, in addition to the price, and among other things
(1) the quality and type of services required by the residents
of the community, (2) the experience of each concession ap-
plicant in the community and its surrounding area, (3) the
ability of the concession applicant to meet the needs of the
community, and (4) the contribution the concession applicant
has made or will make to the other activities and general ivel-
fare of the community;
[p. 6]
-------
444 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
l.lc(2) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
S. REP. No. 2384, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956)
AMENDING THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954 TO
PERMIT THE NEGOTIATION OF COMMERCIAL
LEASES AT ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITIES
JUNE 28, 1956.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. ANDERSON, from the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 11926]
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, having considered H.R.
11926, to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to permit the
negotiation of commercial leases at atomic energy communities,
and for other purposes, do unanimously report favorably thereon,
and recommend the bill do pass.
BACKGROUND
The atomic energy products at Oak Ridge, Tenn., Richland,
Wash., and Los Alamos, N. Mex., are carried on in towns which,
as of this moment, are all owned by the Federal Government.
These towns comprise residences for their employees at the proj-
ects and commercial shopping centers. Under the Atomic Energy
Community Act of 1955 a program was set up for the sale of the
properties in Oak Ridge, Tenn., and Richland, Wash., to the cit-
izens of the towns. The actual sales program at these two towns,
which has been in preparation for nearly a year, has not yet been
officially started.
Meanwhile, there are commercial leases in these towns and in
the town of Los Alamos, N. Mex., which have not yet been brought
under the terms of the Atomic Energy Community Act of 1955,
which are expiring. The Commission is not renegotiating leases
of these people who have formed an integral and beneficial part of
the communities, but instead is reletting the concessions on a
straight advertised-bid basis. In coming to the Commission com-
munities to start needed commercial enterprises at those com-
[p. 1]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 445
munities, the commercial lessees uprooted themselves from their
former surroundings and have now made major contributions to
the success of these three new towns.
In letting these renewals out on a strictly bid basis, the Com-
mission states that it is bound by the strict requirements of the
advertising statutes, and therefore cannot consider the desirability
of continuing the growth of the citizens in these towns.
The authority to operate and maintain these towns is incor-
porated in the chapter on the general authority of the Commis-
sion in subsection 161 e. This section now provides:
SEC. 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS.—In the performance
of its functions the Commission is authorized to—
e. acquire such material, property, equipment, and
facilities, establish or construct such buildings and
facilities, and modify such buildings and facilities
from time to time, as it may deem necessary, and
construct, acquire, provide, or arrange for such facil-
ities and services (at project sites where such facil-
ities and services are not available) for the housing,
health, safety, welfare, and recreation of personnel
employed by the Commission as it may deem neces-
sary, subject to the provisions of section 174;
The reference to section 174 is merely a reference to the section re-
quiring that the Attorney General approve title to real estate ac-
quired under the act. Most of the powers of the Atomic Energy
Commission are based on declarations, findings and purposes set
forth in sections 1, 2, and 3 of the act, most of which relates to the
common defense and security. The operations of these towns are
indeed vital to the defense of our country in doing the research and
manufacturing which is needed for atomic weapons. From these
towns, too, spring the development of the peaceful uses of atomic
energy. It is of the utmost importance to this program that the
citizens of the towns not suffer undue dislocations. Thus, in the
Atomic Energy Community Act of 1955, in establishing a program
for the sales of the communities of Oak Ridge and Richland to the
residents, section 11 c finds:
To that end, it is desired at each community to—
c. provide for the orderly sale to private purchas-
ers of property within those communities ivith a
minimum of dislocation.
Section 12 a of the same act has the finding:
The continued morale of project-connected persons is
essential to the common defense and security of the
United States.
-------
446 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
Section 13 a states as a purpose of the act that it is to provide
for—
a. the maintenance of conditions which will not impede
the recruitment and retention of personnel essential to
the atomic energy program;
These purposes and policies are further amplified in the section of
the Atomic Energy Community Act relating to the priorities for
the sale of property. In this section, the Commission is required
[P. 2]
to establish rules and regulations for priorities for the sale of the
property based on:
(1) The retention and recruitment of personnel es-
sential to the atomic energy program;
(2) The minimization of dislocation of persons within
the community * * *.
The local offices of the Atomic Energy Commission at each of
the three communities are thoroughly acquainted with how the
commercial lessees have been serving the communities and the
extent to which the lessees have contributed to the life in those
communities. It is proposed in this bill to give the Commission the
authority to consider all of these contributions in deciding on the
lessee while the Commission still owns the towns.
In a field which is less important to the national defense than
atomic energy the Congress has permitted the negotiation of com-
mercial leases. The Secretary of the Interior has given the fol-
lowing statutory grant with respect to entering into leases for
commercial services on lands under the jurisdiction of the Na-
tional Park Service:
He may also grant privileges, leases and permits for
the use of land for the accomodation of visitors in the
various parks, monuments or other reservations, pro-
vided for under section 2 of this title, but for periods not
exceeding twenty years; * * * and provided further,
that the Secretary of the Interior may grant said priv-
ileges, leases and permits and enter into contracts
relating to same with responsible persons, firms or cor-
porations without advertising or securing competitive
bids: * * *
The policies of the National Park Service are set forth in the state-
ment of October 13, 1950.
In order to encourage concessionaires to make contributions to
the communities, to remain in the communities, and to put invest-
ments into their stores, their trade and the community, the Joint
Committee recommends the passage of this bill. Under its pro-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 447
visions the Commission may negotiate leases based not only on the
return from the leases to the Government, but also on quality and
type of services required by the residents—and in some instances,
such as drug stores, the services required and 24-hour availability
at the community—the experience of the concession applicant at
this community or in its immediate area, the ability of the ap-
plicant to meet the needs of the community and the overall con-
tributions he has made, or will make, to the community.
We are still providing for obtaining competitive proposals, but
provide reasonable flexibility from formal advertising require-
ments.
The letter from the Atomic Energy Commission setting forth its
position in not being able to base its consideration of the leases on
these points is set forth below:
[p. 3]
MARCH 8, 1956.
HON. JOHN J. DEMPSEY,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Communities,
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
Congress of the United States.
DEAR MR. DEMPSEY: This letter will answer Mr. Norris' letter
of December 15, 1955, asking the advisability of the Commission's
general policy to advertise concessionaire leases upon expiration.
It will also answer questions related to the Los Alamos situation
which you raised in your telephone call to the Director of Military
Application of January 4, and in your subsequent conference with
Mr. Wampler and General Starbird on January 17. As a result
of our subsequent discussion on this subject, the AEC has looked
into the general policy question again. The following informa-
tion is the result of that review.
In 1954 the Commission reviewed its policy with respect to
leasing of concessions and decided that the terms of existing and
future leases should be extended only for programatic reasons
which support a conclusion that the extension by negotiation is
necessary for the housing, health, safety, welfare of recreation of
Commission and contractor personnel. The Commission's direc-
tives relating to the matter stated that negotiated extension was
to be regarded as exception to the Commission's general policy of
obtaining competition and that the programatic reason for any
such exception must be clearly shown.
In reaching their policy decision, the Commission was in-
fluenced primarily by the general policy and practice of the
Federal Government as exemplified by section 3709 of the Revised
Statutes, which requires advertising for supplies and services. It
-------
448 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
was felt that the policy assured fair treatment to all interested
members of the public and most favorable economic return to the
Government for the facility and opportunity the Government pro-
vided. Additionally, it provided a means for meeting changing
community needs (where Government facilities were limited) by
bringing into existence higher priority types of services. The
Chairman of the AEC forwarded the detailed statement of policy
to the chairman of the JCAE by letter of January 29, 1954.
As to the Los Alamos situation, original leases under the Man-
hattan District and for several years thereafter were generally of
short duration and renewed by negotiation. When the move to
permanent areas became possible and in recognition that lessees
would be involved in added expense if best service were to be pro-
vided, the Commission offered all incumbents extension to a lease
of 10-year total duration. Thereafter, all accepted. At the pres-
ent time, we have 40 major concessions leased at Los Alamos in
Government facilities, all of a duration totaling 10 years. A large
number are scheduled to expire in the next 2 years. The first of
the 10-year expirations will be that of the Ferris Cleaners.
As General Starbird explained in the conference of January 17,
various alternate solutions to that of readvertising the Ferris
Cleaner lease have been proposed and investigated. As requested,
I shall describe these briefly.
The first suggestion was that in view of the satisfactory service
performed by the Ferris Cleaners, a negotiated extension be made.
[p. 4]
As explained in my letter of December 22, the circumstances in-
dicate no programatic necessity for negotiated extension. Other
cleaners serve Los Alamos and could handle the load during any
temporary interruption. Negotiation in this first case would
naturally lead all concessionaires to except similar treatment, and
in fairness would have to be given.
The proposal was then reviewed from the point of view of rec-
ommending the Commission permit negotiation at Los Alamos for
all lessees. Neither my staff nor I believed such a course should
be followed. It would, of course, depart from the basic principle
of competition which was the basis of the Commission's decision.
It would preclude others interested in competing for the oppor-
tunities available at Los Alamos. In this connection, a very large
number of individuals and concerns have expressed a desire to
compete on expiration of present leases.
A proposal has been made that the present leaseholders be given
credit for the good will and investment they have made and be re-
tained if their bid after advertisement is sufficiently close to that of
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 449
the high bidder. Such a procedure would be, in my opinion, im-
possible to administer fairly and could be objected to strenuously
by those who have expressed a desire to compete in the future.
Using the alternate approach of allowing negotiations after bid
opening and awarding to incumbent if he then met the bid of the
highest responsible bidder would lessen the interest of others in
submitting a bid. Further, it would, to all intents and purposes,
relieve the incumbent of the necessity of making an original bid
to be entered in the competition to establish fair Governmental
return.
You also asked that we comment on the price to be set on equip-
ment taken over by a future lessee but owned by the former lease-
holder. Specifically, the questions involved the advisability that
AEC appraise the equipment's worth, and require the new tenant
to pay the amount concerned. I feel that this action would be an
unwarranted interference with the natural negotiation of the
buyer and seller. The former lessee does, of course, have the right
to remove his equipment if he so desires. On occasion such re-
moval may not be desired, and there is the definite possibility that
the owner may be willing to sell at a reduced price. On the other
hand, if the equipment is needed by the new lessee for satisfactory
operation and is in satisfactory condition, it normally would be to
his advantage to pay fair value to avoid the necessity of procuring
and installing new equipment.
It is the AEC's policy to assure that any concessionaire show
ability to handle adequately the promised service prior to his re-
ceiving an award. This is necessary so as to provide best services
to the communities that support our technical programs. It is
our policy also to assure that the concessionaire knows exactly
what he will be furnished and what he is to expect of the Govern-
ment, for only thus will he receive fair treatment and be able to
program his operation and costs. Subject to meeting these two
objectives, it is our further effort to assure maximum return for
the Government's investment in the facilities concerned.
Under these circumstances, I consider I must reaffirm the earlier
decision that concessions, upon completion of termination of the
lease agreement, be readvertised for competitive bids.
[p. 5]
For your information, we have been informed by the Los Alamos
area office that although the Ferris Cleaners had a full year re-
maining on their lease, they gave the AEC a 60-day notice of
termination on February 1, 1956, and indicated an intention to bid
-------
450 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
on the concession when it was advertised by the AEC.
Sincerely yours,
R. W. COOK,
Acting.
K. E. FIELDS,
General Manager.
The committee has also received a letter from one of the leading
citizens at Los Alamos with respect to this situation. That letter
is:
Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON,
United States Senate,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: It has been a matter of considerable
concern to a number of residents of Los Alamos that the method of
granting concessions at Los Alamos has created an undesirable sit-
uation relative to the stability of the community. It has been gen-
erally indicated that no other policy would be adopted under the
existing law and for that reason many of us have recommended
that action be taken to provide for a better procedure in granting
concessions. I am writing this letter as a private, and (recently)
nonpartisan, citizen in support of the proposed legislation to
grant the AEC authority to negotiate concession contracts similar
to the authority existing in other Government agencies.
Some of the reasons for my support of that legislation are the
following:
1. Whenever concessions are put out on bid, it is necessary for
the AEC to accept the highest qualified bidder, and as a result the
selected concessionaire often is required to pay a fee to the gov-
ernment far in excess of the value of the facility in which the con-
cession is operated. Although this might appear to be of benefit to
the Government, as a practical matter it is not. The purpose of
the construction of the facility was to provide services to the
people so that Los Alamos would approach a normal community
as an inducement to the necessary personnel for the operation of
the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. Obviously a concessionaire
who overpays for a facility will either provide inadequate services
or, more likely, will pass the increased costs on to the consumer,
thus penalizing the very people for whom the facilities were con-
structed. Obviously the Government is not in the practice of
establishing facilities of the private enterprise type to make money
in lieu of taxes.
2. The merchants of Los Alamos as a group have made stren-
uous efforts to become integrated in the overall operation of Los
Alamos and the contractor-operated Government programs. Be-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 451
cause of State laws and the United States Constitution, the mer-
chants are essentially the only commercial taxpayers in Los
Alamos and provide a major source of income in the Government-
owned Los Alamos County. Furthermore, because all other op-
erations in Los Alamos County are Government reimbursed, the
merchants have been solicited as a major supporter of most com-
munity enterprises. They have wholeheartedly cooperated and
[P. 6]
have created much good will. It is therefore disturbing to the
community that these individuals who have done so much for Los
Alamos should be forced to sacrifice the position that they have
established in the community over so many years, by reason of
open bidding on the termination of their original contracts. It
further provides a general feeling of instability in the community,
not only to the residents generally but to the employees of the
concessionaires.
It is submitted that the AEC has full access to information as to
the satisfactory performance of the existing concessionaires, as
well as the value of the facilities and their reasonable rental value.
Some of the concession facilities at Los Alamos have been granted
on flat rent-basis without bid, and an extension of that program is
not unreasonable or too difficult to administer. The percentage-
of-gross-rental method has been particularly bad and the recent
changeover has not come too soon. Inasmuch as the AEC and
Congress are considering the opening for sale of certain lands at
Los Alamos, the exclusiveness previously granted to concession-
aires will no longer apply because others may build their own fa-
cilities on such lands.
Very truly yours,
RALPH CARLISLE SMITH.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the
bill accompanying this report are shown as follows (new matter
is printed in italics):
SEC. 161. GENERAL PROVISIONS.—In the performance of its
functions the Commission is authorized to—
e. acquire such material, property, equipment, and facilities,
establish or construct such buildings and facilities, and modify
such buildings and facilities from time to time, as it may deem
necessary, and construct, acquire, provide, or arrange for such
facilities and services (at project sites where such facilities
-------
452
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
and services are not available) for the housing, health, safety,
welfare, and recreation of personnel employed by the Com-
mission as it may deem necessary, subject to the provisions of
[section 174:] section 174: Provided, however, that in the
communities owned by the Commission, the Commission is
authorized to grant privileges, leases and permits upon ad-
justed terms which are fair and reasonable to responsible
persons to operate commercial businesses ivithout advertising
and without securing competitive bids, but taking into con-
sideration, in addition to the price, and among other things
(1) the quality and type of services required by the residents
of the community, (2) the experience of each concession ap-
plicant in the community and its surrounding area, (3) the
ability of the concession applicant to meet the needs of the
community, and (4) the contribution the concession applicant
has made or ivill make to the other activities and general wel-
fare of the community;
[p. 7]
l.lc(3) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 102 (1956)
l.lc(3)(a) June 26: Passed House, pp. 11004-11005
AMENDING THE ATOMIC ENERGY
ACT OF 1954
Mr. DEMPSEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent for the immediate
consideration of the bill (H. R. 11926)
to amend the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, to permit the negotiation of com-
mercial leases at atomic energy com-
munities, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Mexico?
Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Speaker, reserv-
ing the right to object, and I am not
going to object, I understand this is a
unanimous report.
Mr. DEMPSEY. It is a unanimous
report from the committee; yes.
Mr. MARTIN. I withdraw my res-
ervation of objection, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Mexico?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the bill, as follows:
Be it enacted, etc.. That section 161 e. of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, is
amended by striking therefrom the words "sec-
tion 174;" and substituting in lieu thereof the
words: "section 174: Provided, however. That
in the communities owned by the Commis-
sion, the Commission is authorized to grant
privileges, leases and permits upon adjusted
terms which are fair and reasonable to responsi-
ble persons to operate commercial businesses
without advertising and without securing com-
[p. 11004]
petitive bids, but taking into consideration, in
addition to the price, and among other things
(1) the quality and type of services required
by the residents of the community, (2) the ex-
perience of each concession applicant in the
community and its surrounding area, (3) the
ability of the concession applicant to meet the
needs of the community, and (4) the contribu-
tion the concession applicant has made or will
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
453
make to the other activities and general welfare
of the community;".
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, was read the
third time, and passed, and a motion
to reconsider was laid on the table.
* * * * *
[p. 11005]
l.lc(3) (b) July 3: Passed Senate, p. 11719
NEGOTIATION or COMMERCIAL
LEASES AT ATOMIC ENERGY
COMMUNITIES
Mr. BIBLE. Mr. President, I move
that the Senate proceed to the consid-
eration of calendar No. 2407, House
bill 11926.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
bill will be stated by title for the infor-
mation of the Senate.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A
bill (H. R. 11926) to amend the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 to permit the nego-
tiation of commercial leases at atomic
energy communities, and for other
purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion
of the Senator from Nevada.
The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
the bill (H. R. 11926) would give an op-
portunity for the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, in those areas where it makes
commercial leases, to follow the prac-
tice other Government agencies have
followed in giving continuity to the
operation of concession facilities.
At the present time the requirement
has been that the Atomic Energy Com-
mission can enter into a lease for sev-
eral years with a concessionaire. At
the end of that time, if a concessionaire
has given to the community and to the
Atomic Energy Commission completely
satisfactory service, he still may lose
his concession if someone else bids a
fraction of a percentage below what he
bids.
These concessions are not based on
flat payments, but generally are based
upon a percentage above the sales cost.
That money goes to the Federal Gov-
ernment, and therefore for a few
hundred dollars the Atomic Energy
authorities in the particular commu-
nity are forced to displace someone who
has given extremely satisfactory ser-
vice over a long period of years, and
give a concession to someone who
would cash in on perhaps 5 years of
very fine service by the previous
concessionaire.
After a considerable hearing of the
subject by the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy, we thought it was a
bad practice, and agree with the
Atomic Energy Commission that it
should be stopped. The committee
therefore proposes this legislation.
The House very promptly passed the
bill, and I hope the Senate will likewise
promptly pass it.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
bill is before the Senate and open to
amendment. If there be no amend-
ment to be proposed, the question is on
the third reading of the bill.
The bill (H. R. 11926) was ordered
to a third reading, read the third time,
and passed.
[p. 11719]
-------
454 LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
l.ld 1956 AMENDMENTS TO THE ATOMIC
ENERGY ACT OF 1954
August 6, 1956, P.L. 84-1006, §§2, 3, 4,12, 13, 70 Stat. 1069, 1071
AN ACT
To amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 11
u. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, is amended to
read as follows:
"u. The term 'United States' when used in a geographical
sense includes all Territories and possessions of the United
States, the Canal Zone and Puerto Rico."
SEC. 2. Section 31 a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, is amended by inserting after the word "development"
in the first sentence thereof the words "and training".
SEC. 3. Section 31 b. and section 31 c. of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended, are amended by redesignating the sections as
sections 31 c. and 31 d. respectively and by adding a new section
31 b. reading as follows:
"b. The Commission is further authorized to make grants
and contributions to the cost of construction and operation of
reactors and other facilities and other equipment to colleges,
universities, hospitals, and eleemosynary or charitable insti-
tutions for the conduct of educational and training activities
relating to the fields in subsection a."
SEC. 4. Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following
new subsection:
"r. The Commission is authorized and empowered, under
such terms and conditions as are deemed advisable by it, to
grant easements for rights-of-way over, across, in, and upon
acquired lands under its jurisdiction and control, and public
lands permanently withdrawn or reserved for the use of the
Commission, to any State, political subdivision thereof, or
municipality, or to any individual, partnership, or corporation
of any State, Territory, or possession of the United States, for
(a) railroad tracks; (b) oil pipe lines; (c) substations for
electric power transmission lines, telephone lines, and tele-
graph lines, and pumping stations for gas, water, sewer, and
oil pipe lines; (d) canals; (e) ditches; (f) flumes; (g) tun-
nels; (h) dams and reservoirs in connection with fish and
wildlife programs, fish hatcheries, and other fish-cultural im-
provements; (i) roads and streets; and (j) for any other pur-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 455
pose or purposes deemed advisable by the Commission:
Provided, That such rights-of-way shall be granted only upon
a finding by the Commission that the same will not be incom-
patible with the public interest: Provided further, That such
rights-of-way shall not include any more land than is reason-
ably necessary for the purpose for which granted: And pro-
vided further, That all or any part of such rights-of-way may
be annulled and forfeited by the Commission for failure to
comply with the terms and conditions of any grant hereunder
or for nonuse for a period of two consecutive years or aban-
donment of rights granted under authority hereof. Copies of
all instruments granting easements over public lands pursu-
ant to this section shall be furnished to the Secretary of the
Interior."
*******
[p. 1069]
SEC. 12. Section 103 a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, is amended by inserting the word "use," between the
words "possess," and "import,".
SEC. 13. Section 103 d. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, is amended by inserting the words "an alien or any" be-
tween the words "issued to" and the words "any corporation".
*******
[p. 1071]
l.ld(l) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
S. REP. No. 2530, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956)
AMENDING THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954, AS
AMENDED
JULY 11, 1956.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. ANDERSON, from the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany S. 4203]
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, having considered the
subject of various problems relating to the Atomic Energy Com-
-------
456 LEGAL COMPILATION — RADIATION
mission and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, report favorably on
an original committee bill, S. 4203, and recommend that the bill
do pass. This bill takes care of many minor problems on which
it has been found necessary or desirable to have legislative action
in order to clear up minor points of difficulties in the operations of
the Atomic Energy Commission.
The original statement of the Atomic Energy Commission on the
bill, as proposed, and comments of the Atomic Energy Commission
on the bill are annexed to the last. There is also annexed the letter
of the Department of Defense requesting the amendment taken in
section 14 and a letter from the Central Intelligence Agency sup-
porting this request.
SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1 modifies the definition of "United States" specifically
to include Puerto Rico and eliminate any question or doubt that it
is covered by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
Section 2 and section 3 together, amend section 31a of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and add a new section 31b. These
sections are designed to give the Commission authority to engage
in training programs. In addition, they give the Commission the
authority to make grants to universities and hospitals for educa-
tional and training activities which are related to the fields of re-
search in section 31a and also to permit the Commission to make
contributions to the cost of construction and operation of re-
actors which are used for educational and training activities.
* * % % % * *
[P- 1]
Sections 11 and 12 make perfecting amendments to sections 101
and 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, by adding "use" as one
of the activities for which facilities license is required. This has
been implicit in the language and operation of the statute.
Section 13 makes a perfecting amendment to section 103 d. in
forbidding the issuance of a facility license to an "alien" as well
as any corporation owned by an alien.
*******
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
DISCUSSION OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
Sections 2-3. Assistance to universities for training nuclear sci-
entists and engineers
This amendment is proposed to clarify the authority of the Com-
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 457
mission to meet a critical shortage in the atomic energy program—
the shortage of trained scientists and engineers. At present the
Commission is doing everything possible within its existing statu-
tory powers to help our educational institutions alleviate this
shortage. In addition to on-the-job training for Commission and
contractor personnel, it is conducting the Oak Ridge and Argonne
schools of reactor technology, and it is now negotiating contracts
with two universities for courses which will supplement training
given at Argonne. It is planning an expanded fellowship pro-
gram. It has offered to waive fuel use charges to assist univer-
sities in acquiring research reactors and subcritical assemblies.
*******
[p. 3]
UNITED STATES
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION,
Washington, D. C., July 10, 1956.
Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON,
Chairman, Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
Congress of the United States.
DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: This is in response to a letter to me
from Mr. James T. Ramey, dated July 7, 1956, forwarding a copy
of the omnibus bill as reported by the Subcommittee on Legislation
to the full committee. Mr. Ramey indicated that the full Joint
Committee would be considering this proposed legislation on July
10, 1956, and requested that the Commission provide the commit-
tee with an expression of its position on the legislation by that
time. Except to the extent indicated by the following comments,
the Commission favors enactment of the omnibus bill in its pres-
ent form.
Section 3 of the bill would add a new subsection 31 b. to the act
to authorize the Commission to make grants and contributions to
the cost of construction and operation of various facilities by cer-
tain institutions for educational and training activities. We con-
strue this language as authorizing the Commission to make
contributions of equipment to the institutions specified. Subject
to the accuracy of this construction, we also favor the enactment
of the amendment in its present form.
Section 11 of the bill provides an amendment to section 101 of
the act which the Commission does not believe is needed. By reg-
ulation the Commission has prohibited the "use" of any production
or utilization facility "except as authorized by a license issued by
the Commission" (sec. 50.10, pt. 50, 10 CFR). We believe that
the Commission has authority to adopt such a provision under the
-------
458 LEGAL COMPILATION—KADIATION
various provisions contained in sections 101, 103, 104, and 106 of
the act when read together with the rulemaking authority vested
in the Commission by section 161 (b) (i) and (q) of the act. This
enumeration is not, of course, intended to be exclusive. We would
also like to call your attention to the fact that the addition of the
word "use" to section 101 would seem to expand very substantially
the applicability of section 222. For example, if a facility licensee
were to use a facility in any manner constituting a violation of
any of the Commission's regulations, the effect of the proposed
amendment would seem to make the violation an offense under
section 222.
Consequently, the Commission does not favor the amendment
contained in section 11 of the bill. However, if you conclude that
the word "use" should be added to section 101, we suggest that you
consider also the addition of the word to sections 57 (a) 1, 62, and
81. On the other hand, if you conclude that "use" should not be
added to section 101, it should similarly not be added to section
103a as provided for in section 12 of the bill.
Finally, we should like to point out that the amendment pro-
posed by section 13 of the bill provides for the insertion of the
word "any" which duplicates a word already in section 103d of the
act.
Sincerely yours,
K. E. FIELDS,
General Manager.
[p. 8]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
459
l.ld(2) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
H.B. EEP. No. 2695, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956)
NOTE : The House Report follows the Senate Report.
l.ld(3) CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 102 (1956)
l.ld(3)(a) July 18: Passed Senate, pp. 13255-13256
AMENDMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY
ACT or 1954
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident, I ask unanimous consent that the
unfinished business be temporarily laid
aside and that the Senate proceed to
the consideration of Calendar No. 2569,
Senate bill 4203.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore.
The bill will be stated by title, for the
information of the Senate.
The CHIEF CLERK. A bill (S.
4203) to amend the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended, and for other
purposes.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is
there objection to the present consid-
eration of the bill?
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Pres-
ident, I ask that the Senator from New
Mexico make a brief explanation of the
bill.
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President,
with reference to the bill on which the
distinguished majority leader asked for
an explanation, I wish to say that the
bill contains 14 sections, none of which
is extremely important in itself, but
each one of which deals with some
minor problem which needs attention
in the operations of the Atomic Energy
Commission.
Very briefly, the bill does the follow-
ing things:
First. Amends the definition of
"United States" to be sure that Puerto
Rico is included.
Second. Gives the Commission au-
thority to embark upon training pro-
grams for the training of scientists
and engineers who are so badly needed
in the construction program.
Third. Assists in the construction
of reactors at universities and hos-
pitals; educational and training
activities.
Fourth. Grants right-of-way over
Atomic Energy Commission property.
Fifth. Changes the requirement
with respect to oaths on Commission
applications so that the oaths are man-
datory for reactors and optional for
other licenses.
Sixth. Adds new criminal sanctions
against trespass on Commission prop-
erty and photographing on Commission
property.
Seventh. Makes conforming changes.
Eighth. Brings all of the land at
Los Alamos under the jurisdiction of
the Atomic Energy Commission.
Ninth. Brings the land at the Wei-
don Springs site—formerly used by the
Weldon Springs Ordnance Works—un-
der the Atomic Energy Commission.
Tenth, Retrocedes exclusive juris-
diction of the Paducah project back to
the State of Kentucky.
Eleventh. Inserts the word "use"
between the words "possess" and "im-
port," with respect to facility licenses.
Twelfth. Prohibits issuance of a
facility license to an alien as well as
any corporation owned by an alien.
Thirteenth. Clarifies Department of
Defense clearances along the lines that
the Congress has already approved.
The Atomic Energy Commission has
asked for this bill. The Department of
Defense and the Central Intelligence
Agency have asked for one section on
this bill. So far as I know, there is no
-------
460
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
objection to it. I thank the able ma-
jority leader for an opportunity to
explain the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
LEHMAN in the chair). The question
is on the engrossment and third read-
ing of the bill.
The bill (S. 4203) was ordered to be
engrossed for a third reading, read the
third time, and passed, as follows:
;;; & # Jfc >|; :!; #
[p. 13255]
l.ld(3) (b) July 26: Passed House, pp. 14888-14891
AMENDMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY
ACT OF 1954
Mr. DEMPSEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent for the immediate
consideration of the bill (H. R. 12215)
to amend the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Mexico?
Mr. COLE. Reserving the right to
object, Mr. Speaker, and I shall not
object, because I feel that this is a bill
that should be adopted by the Con-
gress, however, I take this opportunity
to give expression to what I feel to be
a most discouraging, destructive, dis-
illusioning, and disappointing situa-
tion. For over a month two bills have
been on the calendar of the House
which would do more to remove the
logjam of reactor development of
peacetime uses of atomic energy than
anything else conceivable that the Con-
gress can do. It appears that no action
is going to be taken on those bills.
That is to my mind tragic. The re-
sponsibility for the failure of this Con-
gress to do the things that it should do
to promote the development of peace-
time uses of atomic energy must rest
squarely on the persons having the re-
sponsibility for this Congress.
Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
[p. 14888]
Mr. COLE. I yield to the gentleman
from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARTIN. I want to say to the
gentleman from New York that the
President is very anxious about this
bill and has been constantly urging its
passage. He joins in the expression
the gentleman from New York has
given here tonight. This is a bill that
should be passed before we leave, and
I hope it will be passed.
Mr. VAN ZANDT. Is it not true
that the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy held lengthy hearings on the
bill to provide Federal public liability
indemnity program for atomic energy
plants and the industry as well as
spokesmen for the insurance companies
of this country came before our com-
mittee and joined in our effort to pro-
vide through the bill the necessary re-
lief for the great utilities of this coun-
try who are spending millions of dol-
lars in the development of atomic
power?
Mr. COLE. The gentleman is en-
tirely right. This bill was reported by
the joint committee unanimously with
one exception. It determines and fixes
the liability of the persons who are
expected to own and operate these re-
actors. Here the Congress by law has
called upon private capital to move into
this field. Private capital has shown
its readiness to do so, but it has hesi-
tated to do so until its liability, when it
does so, is determined by law. That is
what this bill is designed to do and is
intended to do.
-------
Mr. PHILLIPS. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. COLE. I yield.
Mr. PHILLIPS. What concerns me,
Mr. Speaker, and I rise to ask the gen-
tleman from New York if I am not
right, is that we will not only lose 6
months or more of very valuable time
in the race for leadership in atoms for
peace, but we may have a tendency to
discourage the industrial groups that
are planning to help us carry the load
of that research and leadership.
Mr. COLE. The gentleman is en-
tirely right. The reactor development
program will be delayed just so long as
the Congress fails to measure up to its
responsibility.
Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reser-
vation of objection.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the present consideration of the bill?
There was no objection.
Mr. DEMPSEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to substitute the
Senate bill (S. 4203) to amend the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, and for other purposes, and
ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the present consideration of the Sen-
ate bill?
Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr.
Speaker, reserving the right to object,
is this the same bill that the gentleman
said was thrown out earlier in the day?
Mr. DEMPSEY. No; I did not say
that. This has never been thrown out
so far as I know.
The SPEAKER. This bill has not
been before the House.
Is there objection to the present con-
sideration of the Senate bill?
There was no objection.
* * * * *
[p. 14889]
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous consent to extend by
remarks at this point in the RECORD.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, the
gentleman from New York and his col-
leagues, the gentleman from Massa-
chusetts [Mr. MARTIN] and the
gentleman from California [Mr. PHIL-
LIPS] come before the House at this
late date pleading for legislation which
they claim is necessary for the Presi-
dent's atoms for peace plan.
Where were the gentlemen on Tues-
day, July 24, when we had a bill before
the House that would have accelerated
the atomic-powered reactor program
by supplying $400 million for the pur-
pose of actually building large power
reactors? The gentlemen were in this
Chamber cutting the bill to pieces and
opposing and voting against the
legislation.
The record can be found on page
14288 of the July 24 CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD, where the vote plainly shows
that almost the solid Republican Party
membership voted against House bill
12061, the power reactor acceleration
bill. Regardless of how much the gen-
tlemen accuse the Democrats for block-
ing the atoms for peace program—
they can never erase that vote. That
vote was the showdown.
Private industry has failed to make
good for the past 2 years on their
promises and it is my opinion that
they will continue to fail for the next
2 years.
They will first ask for subsidized lia-
bility insurance.
They then will ask for special tax
amortization for their capital plant
investment.
The utilities will raise their power
rates to their consumers to cover these
uneconomic investments.
The private companies who have so
far failed to build power reactors will
also request many other Government
subsidies in the form of long-range
contracts paying them high prices for
plutonium. They will want the Fed-
eral Government to furnish fuel for
their reactors at prices lower than
Government cost.
-------
462
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
They will want their used fuel rods
processed by the Government at lower
than cost and they will want the deadly
radioactive waste disposed of by the
Government free or at subsidy prices.
Yes they will find many reasons why
they cannot proceed. They will come
back to the Congress again and again
for special legislation for their selfish
benefit and for their private profits.
In the meantime we will lose the
international race for leadership to
either England or Soviet Russia. This
prediction will not come true if we face
the fact and proceed in the next 4 or 5
years as we have in the past and con-
tinue the development of atomic energy
for peacetime uses of all kinds.
When we get through the uneco-
nomic phase of research and develop-
ment, which I predict will continue for
several years, then the economic tech-
niques can be made available on a fair
and equal basis to all the people of
America and the free world.
I append hereto two newspaper edi-
torials from the Washington Post and
Times Herald:
[FROM THE WASHINGTON POST AND TIMES
HERALD OF JULY 24, 1956]
ATOMIC POWER BY EXAMPLE
Prospects for prompt and meaningful Ameri-
can leadeiship in atomic power development
are wiapped up in the Gore-Holifield bill now
before the House. This bill, which has been
appioved by the Senate, would authoiize the
construction of woiking demonstration power
reactors to sei ve Atomic Energy Commission
installations. We hope that the House will
pass it. Several weeks ago, before the Senate
had acted, we expressed the view that it might
be prefeiable to have top nuclear scientists and
engineeis first recommend the reactor types
that offered the most promise for pilot models.
We are now persuaded that the program for
building a number of different types, as indorsed
by AEG Commissioner Muiray, affords more
hope for the perfection of techniques that will
be of use to a power-shoit world.
Indeed, this seems to us the most important
consideration. Were the question simply one
of furnishing power to AEC plants this un-
doubtedly could be done more cheaply by other
means. The United States as a country rich in
fossil fuels and with plentiful and relatively
cheap electiic power, has less incentive than
many other nations to develop nuclear power
promptly. Moreover, certain nucleai techniques
now seem more promising than others, and on a
basis of strict economics the construction of a
number of different types of reactoi s might
seem wasteful.
But the proposal must be judged on more
than its immediate economic merits. The
principal question is: How much importance
does the United States attach to a practical
nuclear power program that will safeguard its
own future interest and stimulate development
abroad in the fashion envisaged by President
Eisenhower? This newspaper regards such a
progiam as of tremendous importance, not only
as the most significant kind of technical assist-
ance, but also as a much needed and dramatic
diveision from nuclear war. It is on this point
that Government leadership is imperative.
It is no reflection on the efforts of private
industiy to say that the outlook for eaily private
development of economic nuclear power is not
bright. One pressurized water icactor is under
construction at Shippingport, Pa., and others
are in the advanced planning stage. But it is
unlikely that private industry can affoid to
experiment with new techniques that are now
expensive but ultimately may piove more eco-
nomical. Atomic development by private in-
dustry ought by all means to be encouraged,
and in this connection passage of the bill to
provide governmental insurance for atomic
powerplants seems to us imperative. But the
hope of private participation is not a substitute
for Government initiative as the House Appro-
priations Committee recognized in its report
blasting A EC Chairman Sti auss for duplicity
in opposing the program.
Heie the formula in the Gore-Holifield bill
seems an ideal one. The power will be pro-
duced for a governmental puipose not in com-
petition with private industry, and the process
will afford practical expeiience with actual
operating plants. This experience with reactor
types is essential in order to afford a lealistic
test and ultimately reduce the cost, and it
cannot be obtained through mere pilot plants.
The role is an entirely pioper one for the Gov-
ernment, and its assumption now should hasten
the day when the bright dreams of plentiful
atomic power will become a reality.
[FROM THE WASHINGTON POST AND TIMES
HERALD OF JULY 26, 1956]
ATOMIC POWER DEFERRED
Defeat in the House of the Gore-Hoi in eld
bill for the construction of atomic power
reactors is a tribute to the obstructionism of
Lewis Stiauss. The Chairman of the Atomic
Energy Commission mesmerized the admin-
istration into opposing the bill on the ground
that the job of developing atomic power can
be handled adequately by private industry.
This is the same sort of soft soap Admiral
Strauss has consistently handed out respecting
radiation hazards fiom nuclear weapons. His
begging of the essential questions on the status
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
463
of atomic power development so infuriated the
House Appropriations Subcommittee that it
accused him of "duplicity" and "fraud."
In point of fact the private versus public
power issue was wholly extraneous. The re-
actors to have been built by the Government
would have provided power for the Atomic
Energy Commission only—and as an incidental
to their main purpose, of demonstrating the
feasibility of various types of reactors. Only
one privately constructed reactor is now in the
building: stage. Additional plants have been
proposed, but because of the cost of atomic
reactors and the availability of plentiful cheap
power from other sources, there is little incen-
tive for private industry to build on a scale
necessary to test new reactor techniques. There
will be very little incentive at all unless the
House passes a separate bill to provide govern-
mental reinsurance for private atomic power
reactors.
The pity of all this is that the administration
through the Strauss influence, was placed in
the position of sabotaging President Eisen-
hower's own bright dream of plentiful atomic
power for the world. What the House has
[p. 14890]
said, with administration blessing, is that this
country will take no practical step to advance
American leadership in atomic power develop-
ment. In other words, we leave the initiative in
underdeveloped areas to the Russians.
Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, I
rise to speak in favor of sections 2 and
3 of H. R. 12215, now under considera-
tion.
As you will note, these sections
amend the existing section 31 a of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, which authorizes the Atomic
Energy Commission to "exercise its
powers in such manner as to insure the
continued conduct of research and de-
velopment activities in the fields spec-
ified below, by private or public
institutions or persons, and to assist in
the acquisition of an ever-expanding
fund of theoretical and practical
knowledge in such fields. To this end
the Commission is authorized and di-
rected to make arrangements (includ-
ing contracts, agreements, and loans)
for the conduct of research and devel-
opment activities relating to." The act
then continues to outline the areas in
which authority in this section is to be
exercised.
As you know, one of the pioneers
among the educational institutions of
the United States in perceiving the
great necessity to train engineers in
the field of nuclear physics was the
Penn State University. Realizing this
obligation on the part of educational
institutions, the Penn State University
on its own arranged for the financing
and construction of a research reactor
which is now in operation on its cam-
pus at State University.
Likewise, the University of North
Carolina at about the same time under-
took on its own a similar project. The
foresight and initiative of these institu-
tions deserve the highest commenda-
tion.
The Atomic Energy Commission has
felt for some time that the existing lan-
guage of the Atomic Energy Act was
not sufficiently clear and, therefore, it
has been understandably hesitant to
enter into all the various types of ar-
rangements which is felt were neces-
sary to assist universities and other
nonprofit institutions in providing
them with the facilities to carry forth
this important training and research
work. For this reason they have re-
quested the clarifying language which
appears in section 2 and 3 of S. 4112.
Mr. Speaker, I am heartily in favor
of this amendment. Based upon the in-
formation I have accumulated as a
member of the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy, I realize full well that
an ever-expanding program for the
construction of training facilities at
universities and nonprofit institutions
must be undertaken. I am sure the
Commission is in favor of such a pro-
gram and it should be given this clar-
ifying language to permit it to proceed
without delay.
As the amendment is now drafted it
would permit the Commission to assist
not only in the initial setting up of fa-
cilities, but also to assist in the con-
tinued operation thereafter. It is
heartening to note that it is the clear
intent of this amendment to permit the
Commission to assist the early pioneers
in this field in the continued operation
-------
464
LEGAL COMPILATION—RADIATION
of facilities already constructed by
their own initiative. I, therefore, urge
each and every member to lend his sup-
port to the adoption of this amend-
ment.
The bill was ordered to be read a
third time, was read the third time,
and passed, and a motion to reconsider
was laid on the table.
A similar House bill (H. R. 12215)
was laid on the table.
[p. 14890]
l.le 1957 AMENDMENTS TO THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT
OF 1954
August 21,1957, P.L. 85-162, Title II, §§201,204, 71 Stat. 410
SEC. 201. Section 161 e. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, is amended by adding after the words "adjusted terms
which" in the proviso thereof, the following: "(at the time of the
initial grant of any privilege grant, lease, or permit, or renewal
thereof, or in order to avoid inequities or undue hardship prior to
the sale by the United States of property affected by such grant)".
SEC. 204. Section 161 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, is amended by adding the following new subsection:
"s. Under such regulations and for such periods and at such
prices the Commission may prescribe, the Commission may sell or
contract to sell to purchasers within Commission-owned com-
munities or in the immediate vicinity of the Commission commu-
nity, as the case may be, any of the following utilities and related
services, if it is determined that they are not available from an-
other local source and that the sale is in the interest of the national
defense or in the public interest:
" (1) Electric power.
"(2) Steam.
"(3) Compressed air.
"(4) Water.
"(5) Sewage and garbage disposal.
" (6) Natural, manufactured, or mixed gas.
"(7) Ice.
"(8) Mechanical refrigeration.
"(9) Telephone service.
"Proceeds of sales under this subsection shall be credited to the
appropriation currently available for the supply of that utility or
service. To meet local needs the Commission may make minor ex-
pansions and extensions of any distributing system or facility
within or in the immediate vicinity of a Commission-owned com-
munity through which a utility or service is furnished under this
subsection."
Approved August 21, 1957. [p. 410]
-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 465
l.le(l) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
H.R. REP. No. 978, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957)
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE ATOMIC
ENERGY COMMISSION
AUGUST 2, 1957.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. DURHAM, from the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 8996]
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, having considered H.
R. 8996, an original committee bill, to authorize appropriations for
the Atomic Energy Commission in accordance with section 261 of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, reports favorably
thereon and recommends that the bill do pass.
[p. 1]
-------
466 LEGAL ^ _. __
l.le(2) JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
S. REP. No. 791, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957)
NOTE: Senate Report follows House Report.
l.le(3) COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
H.R. REP. No. 1204, 85th Cong., 1st Sess. (1957)
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE ATOMIC EN-
ERGY COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION
261 OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954, AS
AMENDED
AUGUST 20, 1957.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. DURHAM, from the committee of conference, submitted the
following
CONFERENCE REPORT
[To accompany H. R. 8996]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 8996)
to authorize appropriations for the Atomic Energy Commission in
accordance with section 261 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, and for other purposes, having met, after full and free
conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their
respective Houses as follows:
That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments
of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment.
[p. 1]
The conference committee adopted subsection 111 a. (3) as
contained in the Senate bill.
The Senate added sections 201, 202, 203, and 204 to the bill re-
lating to community problems on which there was no disagree-
ment. The House conferees agreed that these four sections might
be included in the bill.
# $ * * * * *
[P- 12]
US KnviroDirior^jil Protection Agency
H .yiori V. LiL-wry
23<) South Dearborn Street ,,--"'""
.
* U. S. GOVERlJMElW 'PftMTWG OFFICE : iSTf'Q - 469-517 (VOL. I)
-------
-------
------- |