glO HISTORY OF I'lli ( oMMiril 1 <>\ m ll \( l and 1 I CHNOLOG - ^ 



hours and 45 minutes, the committee struggled with controversial 

 amendments to the bill, finally reporting the bill out at 5:45 p.m. 



Fuqua fust offered an amendment to restore greater flexibility for 

 ERDA by eliminating line iteming. In supporting his amendment, 

 Fuqua stated: 



1 might point out, Mr. Chairman, we have $3.2 billion and it contains only 11 

 items in the NASA budget. And this hill has 16 line items tor a sum of only $300 

 million authorization. So 1 think we have reduced this down and it still gives the 

 flexibility that the Administrator of I RDA teds is necessary to carry out a prudent 

 research and development program. * * * Dr. Seamans feels very strongly about 

 not putting him in a strait-jacket. 



Hechlcr replied: 



lr would seem to me that in order to maintain the appropriate oversight, scrutiny 

 and control over the fossil energy authorization that it is necessary to have the line 

 items which the subcommittee unanimously felt necessary. 



Myers spoke against the amendment, while Milford and Mosher spoke 

 for it. On the vote, Hechlcr used six proxies, but only defeated the 

 amendment with the last-minute support of Teague, Winn, and Gold- 

 water, who switched their votes from "Present" to "No." 



Hechler then offered a 3/^-page amendment to conform the repro- 

 graming provisions. As explained by Colonel Gould: 



As Mr Hechler indicates, three of these provisions have been in the NASA bill 

 since 1960 and 1961. One provision was added, that is the broad re-programing 

 section, in fiscal 1964. 



In the opinion of the staff, these provisions have given us a better insight into 

 what NASA is doing. It forces notification of the committee, thereby giving each 

 Member an indication as to what NASA is doing with regard to us re-programing 

 activities. 



It gives us a 30-dav period in those cases where funds are being transferred which 

 permits the chairman of the committee, if the committee decided to disagree, to so 

 notify them. 



Although the amendment was adopted, Teague was upset with the 

 number of afterthoughts the subcommittee was having. Teague asked: 



Was this amendment considered in subcommittee? Do you think it good legisla- 

 tion after the subcommittee is through to come into the full committee and offer a 

 V 2-page amendment? 



Hechler responded: "I think it is an excellent idea." 



The Hechler and McCormack subcommittees had jointly agreed on 

 authorizing ERDA to undertake R. & D. on the reuse and disposal of 

 coal mine wastes, a section of the bill which aroused the ire of the 

 Bureau of Mines on the grounds it was already doing this work. This 

 prompted Hechler and McCormack to agree on an innocuously worded 

 new section which simply stated: "The Administration shall conduct 



