g46 HISTORY OF THl COMMITTE1 ON SCIENC1 AND TECHNOLOGY 



Fuel cells are electrochemical in nature, major departure from heat engine systems 

 for their power generation, and the technical challenges to development are in lower 

 temperature materials. This activity should be assigned to the McCormack 

 subcommittee. 



Moshcr and Colonel Gould, in a March 9, 1978 memorandum 

 to Teaguc set forth the complete details of the Dugan compromise. 

 Teague immediately dispatched the terms of the compromise to both 

 Flowers and McCormack. He wrote them each a blunt letter giving 

 them 24 hours to file any objections to the plan. Neither objected, the 

 compromise was praised by both subcommittee chairmen at a subse- 

 sequent full committee meeting, and the issue was settled. The jockey- 

 ing for position continued, but the major points of disagreement were 

 imposed through the process of binding arbitration. 



LOAN GUARANTEES IN 1377 



The loan guarantee issue boiled up again in the spring of 1977. 

 Once more, Ottinger led an effort to try and stave off authority to use 

 loan guarantees for huge coal gasification and oil shale operations. He 

 supported the use of loan guarantees for biomass and geothermal 

 development. On May 10, 1977, during a full committee markup of the 

 ERDA authorization, Goldwater and Ottinger both endorsed language 

 to encourage loan guarantees for geothermal projects. Ottinger told 

 the committee: 



Language has been worked out to my satisfaction, at any rate, but I would like 

 to see language in the report making it quite clear that this is not to be a back door 

 means of financing through loan guarantees either coal gasification or nuclear or 

 other energy resources. 



Goldwater responded: "I would concur with the gentleman." 



On May 12, the committee debate suddenly took an acrimonious 

 turn. Flowers offered an amendment reviving the authority which the 

 House had rejected in 1975 and 1976. Teague commented: 



I would like for the committee to know that there has been much conferring with 

 the administration over this amendment. * * * I went into the other room there and 

 called Dr. Schlesinger and asked whether I could say to the committee that this was 

 the administration position, that he was for the amendment. Dr. Schlesinger said: 

 " You may say that and you may use my name as being in support of it." He also 

 called this morning and said the administration is not for any commercialization of 

 technology. They would not ask for a penny to be used for commercialization of 

 technology (through loan guarantees.) 



Ottinger protested vigorously that the committee and the House 

 had gone through the loan guarantee issue "ad nauseam" in 1976. 

 Fuqua, Frey, Myers, Watkins, and Wydler all spoke for the Flowers 

 amendment. Ottinger said it wouldn't improve the bill's chances on 

 the floor "if I am steamrollered." The big difference in the 1977 



