SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Make the Space Council an effective agency for managing the national space program. 2. Establish a single responsibility within the military establishments for managing the military portion of the space program. 3. Provide a vigorous, imaginative, and technically competent top management for NASA, including: (a) Administrator and deputy administrator (b) i. A technical director for propulsion and vehicles ii. A technical director for the scientific program iii. A technical director for the non-military space applications iv. A technical director for aerodynamic and aircraft programs. 4. Review the national space program and redefine the objectives in view of the experience gained during the past two years. Particular attention should be given the booster program, manned space flight, the military uses of space, and the application of space technology to the civilian activities of the country. 5. Establish the organizational machinery within the Government to administer an industry-government civilian space program. The CHAIRMAN. One Wiesner Report was a published document, but the other one wasn't. Secretary GILPATRIC. You are correct. There was a portion of Dr. Wiesner's committee findings which related to classified areas and that was left out of the published report. As far as we are concernedwe didn't put the report out, it was put out by his committee-I think it is just a matter of how you handle classified materials and I would think that would be a subject for your staff to talk to Dr. Wiesner about. The CHAIRMAN. We would like to have a copy of the available report for this record. That would show to what extent you relied upon the Wiesner Report in working out your present organizational set-up. (The classified version of the Wiesner Report contains other material pertinent to these hearings but cannot be printed in this record.) The CHAIRMAN. As I understand it from what you say, you have a working agreement with NASA through Mr. Webb, the Administrator, so that there will be coordination, and I want to commend you for that working agreement. Do you have agreement that you will not enter into a new space program that NASA might be interested in, without getting NASA's approval? Secretary GILPATRIC. We deal by specific project. We have an agreement that Jim Webb and I signed in February that covers just launch vehicles, the boosters. (The document referred to above is as follows:) MR. JAMES E. WEBB, Administrator, THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, Washington, D.C., February 23, 1961. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION, DEAR MR. WEBB: It is the purpose of this letter to confirm and record our understanding concerning the maintenance of a National Launch Vehicle Program. This program comprises in its totality the development and procurement of launch vehicles for space purposes, some of which are the responsibility of the DOD and some of the NASA and all of which taken together comprise an integrated space booster program consistent with national space objectives and requirements. It is understood that boosters developed for weapons purposes are not automatically considered to be part of the National Launch Vehicle Program, although certain missile boosters, particularly the Thor and Atlas, are widely used in combination with upper stages as part of the National Launch Vehicle Program. It is not unlikely that similar dual applications will evolve in the future. The Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board has the responsibility for accomplishing the necessary interagency planning for the National Launch Vehicle Program. The Launch Vehicle Panel of the AACB will accomplish working level_coordination and maintain a current publication summarizing the National Launch Vehicle Program. Planning, coordination, and the publication reflecting these will describe forward thinking and possibilities entertained by NASA and the DOD in addition to describing current status. It is hereby agreed that neither the DOD nor the NASA will initiate the development of a launch vehicle or booster for space without the written acknowledgment of the other agency that such a new development would be deemed consistent with the proper objectives of the National Launch Vehicle Program. Such written agreements will be accomplished between our respective agencies upon the recommendation of the cochairman of the AACB. Sincerely, Agreed to by /s/ ROSWELL L. GILPATRIC, Deputy Secretary of Defense. (s) JAMES E. WEBB. Date: February 23, 1961. Secretary GILPATRIC. We also have an agreement covering how we will handle new projects in the communications satellite area. Now, as we get into other areas where there may be some common interest or some possible conflict to be avoided, we will have similar agreements. And then we have an over-all agreement which provides for a coordinating board which takes up the day-to-day problems when it meets between the two agencies. The CHAIRMAN. Do you have copies of those agreements? Secretary GILPATRIC. I will be glad to supply them for the record. (The documents above-referred to are as follows:) NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION, Hon. JAMES H. DOUGLAS Washington, D.C., 18 August 1960. DEAR MR. SECRETARY: It is the purpose of this letter to confirm the understanding reached in our conversation of August 9, 1960 concerning joint NASA and DOD policy with respect to satellite-based communication activities. In November of 1958, discussions were held between Dr. Killian and representatives of ARPA, NASA, and the BOB. At that time and for the fiscal year 1960 budget year, it was agreed that ARPA would continue its work in the active communications satellite field while NASA would concentrate on the passive type. In effect, this represented a continuation of the main lines of effort then under way in the two agencies and was intended to avoid duplication. It was also agreed that, at an appropriate time, NASA would undertake the research and development necessary to the development of components and prototypes of an active communications satellite system for nonmilitary purposes, making full use of the information derived from DOD experience with military systems. To provide close coordination, each agency was given repre sentation on the technical committees of the other for purposes of keeping abreast of progress. Subsequently, a particular type of passive satellite system was proposed by another organization, and NASA, limited in its ability to fund additional projects, agreed in writing that the DOD might support that particular project, even though it clearly fell within the purview of NASA under the informal agree ment mentioned above. In the nearly two years which have elapsed since the initial discussions concerning the division of effort in the communications satellite field, a number of new factors have evolved which alter the circumstances governing decisions concerning the disposition of our current and near-term projects. Great strides have been made in the field of space technology generally. Many new techniques have evolved in the electronics field which facilitate the accomplishment of certain space missions. A great deal of interest has developed on the part of industrial concerns in the development and operational use of communications satellites for commercial purposes. International interest has developed, and it appears necessary not only to take technical initiative with respect to the extension of newly available techniques but to prepare to deal effectively with policy questions both domestic and foreign. Accordingly, in view of the new technical developments and the demonstrated interest of private industrial organizations in participation in the development of both the passive and active systems for civil use, NASA proposes to move forward in the active satellite-based communication field. While the precise character of NASA's activity in this regard has not yet been determined, it is to be concerned primarily with the development of those techniques and prototypes that promise an early demonstration of feasibility. The chief intent of such activities will be to exploit to the maximum extent, and on a timely basis, the new potentialities made available by recent technological advances and rendered of particular importance because of their scientific, domestic, and international applications and implications. NASA further proposes that during the forthcoming months representatives of NASA and the DOD work out a more detailed assessment of the division of responsibilities for active satellite-based communication systems "in the large." It is suggested that both NASA and DOD set forth their proposed programs in detail sufficient for such an assessment including plans for associated ground support facilities. NASA recommends that the exchange of programs and initial policy recommendations be accomplished through the mechanism of the NASA/DOD Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board for subsequent consideration by the Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of NASA. Your agreement to the actions proposed above is requested. Sincerely, Agreed to by JAMES H. DOUGLAS Date: August 27, 1960 s/ T. Keith Glennan, t/ T. KEITH GLENNAN, Administrator. (Promulgated 13th day of September, 1960) AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION CONCERNING THE AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS COORDINATING BOARD I. Policies and Purpose. (a) It is essential that the aeronautical and space activities of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Defense be coordinated at all management and technical levels. Where policy issues and management decisions are not involved, it is important that liaison be achieved in the most direct manner possible, and that it continue to be accomplished as in the past between project-level personnel on a day-to-day basis. (b) It is essential that close working relationships between decision-making officials within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Defense be developed at all management levels. Where policy issues and management decisions are involved, it is important that the planning and coordination of activities, the identification of problems, and the exchange of information be facilitated between officials having the authority and responsibility for decisions within their respective offices. (c) To implement the foregoing policies it is the purpose of this Agreement to establish the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board. II. Establishment of the Board. There is hereby established the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board, which shall be responsible for facilitating (1) the planning of activities by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Defense to avoid undesirable duplication and to achieve efficient utilization of available resources; (2) the coordination of activities in areas of common interest to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Defense; (3) the identification of problems requiring solution by either the National Aeronautics and Space Administration or the Department of Defense; and (4) the exchange of information between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Defense. III. Composition of the Board. (a) The Board shall be headed by the Deputy Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Director of Defense Research and Engineering as Co-Chairmen. (b) The other Board members shall consist of Chairmen of panels as hereinafter established, and a minimum number of additional members as may be required to insure that each military department is represented and that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Department of Defense have an equal number of members. (c) The members of the Board, other than the Co-Chairmen, shall be appointed by the Administrator and the Secretary of Defense, jointly. IV. Principles of Operation. (a) Panels of the Board shall be established by the Administrator and the Secretary of Defense and, initially, shall include the following: (1) Manned Space Flight *(2) Spacecraft (3) Launch Vehicles (4) Space Flight Ground Environment (5) Supporting Space Research and Technology (6) Aeronautics (b) Terms and reference shall be prescribed for each panel by the Co-Chairmen of the Board. The members of each panel shall be designated by the CoChairmen of the Board. (c) The Board shall meet at the call of the Co-Chairmen, at least bi-monthly, and the Co-Chairmen shall alternately preside over the meetings. Only Board members, and such others as the Co-Chairmen specifically approve, may attend meetings. (d) The Co-Chairmen shall establish a small secretariat to maintain records of the meetings of the Board and of its panels and to perform such other duties as the Co-Chairmen may direct. (e) The Board, its panels, and the secretariat shall make full use of available facilities within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Defense, and all elements of the Administration and the Department of Defense shall cooperate fully with the Board, its panels, and the secretariat. (f) Actions based on consideration of matters by the Board may be taken by individual members utilizing the authority vested in them by their respective agencies. FOR THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION: FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE: /s/ T. KEITH GLENNAN Administrator /s/ JAMES H. DOUGLAS Deputy Secretary of Defense Promulgated this 13th day of September 1960. The CHAIRMAN. You will consult with NASA before entering into specific projects there, but other than those specific projects Secretary GILPATRIC. We have this board to resolve any questions that come up. There are three agreements, one for the board which covers the general scheme of coordination and one covering communications satellites and one covering launch vehicles. *For purposes of clarity, the name of this Panel was changed to Unmanned Spacecraft by the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board at the 2nd meeting on July 26, 1960. Those are two special agreements that deal with specific areas. The CHAIRMAN. Other than that, you can go ahead with the program without reference to NASA? Secretary GILPATRIC. In the military area only. The CHAIRMAN. Who decides what is a military area now? Secretary GILPATRIC. Well, if there is any difference, it comes up in these cordinating board sessions and also it is discussed by Mr. Webb and myself. We consult each other quite frequently. The CHAIRMAN. And if it is in the military area and you agree it is a military area, of course, the Defense Department will proceed. Secretary GILPATRIC. Yes, if we are authorized by Congress with funds. As you know we now have Section 412 procedures and we can't proceed without authorization by the Congress for missiles, aircraft and weapons. The CHAIRMAN. If NASA determines it is not in the military area, does NASA have the same right to proceed that the military has, if the military determines it is in the military area? Secretary GILPATRIC. Subject to what restrictions are laid upon it by the legislation which set it up. I am not familiar with the Act sufficiently to know what conditions it has to meet. I know it has to be funded, but within its own powers, it can proceed without any The CHAIRMAN. The military has no veto on the projects NASA proceeds with? Secretary GILPATRIC. No. The CHAIRMAN. And NASA has no veto power on the military, is that correct? Secretary GILPATRIC. That is my understanding. The CHAIRMAN. One is set up for peacetime space development and one set up for the defense of the Nation. I think it is proper that each one look out for its own specific needs. You will place those three agreements in the record at this point? Secretary GILPATRIC. Yes, Mr. Chairman. (The documents referred to were carried above.) The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Fulton, do you have any questions? Mr. FULTON. Yes, sir. I will take 5 minutes if that is not too long. The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Mr. FULTON. There have been consultations with the various Services and likewise with various components of the Department of Defense. Outside of the three departments, the Army, the Navy and Air Force heads, what other consultations were there? Secretary GILPATRIC. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mr. Fulton, submitted some comments after he had received the draft directive I referred to. Mr. FULTON. Did the Joint Chiefs unanimously agree to this proposal in the directive? Secretary GILPATRIC. The Joint Chiefs did not act on the directive as a body. The individual Service Chiefs' views, I presume, were reflected by the Service Secretaries. Each military department was given a chance to comment. The Chairman submitted separate comments, some of which were taken into account in the final directive and some of which were not. |