350 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



its members produced an amazingly different reaction: Without any 

 comment whatsoever, the motion to cut $10 million from the tracking 

 authorization was unanimously adopted by the full committee 



The Subcommittee on Aeronautics and Space Technology had been 

 reviewing NASA tracking and data activities for a dozen years, and 

 most members had personally visited tracking stations to enable them 

 to become fully briefed on most aspects of the program. But the twin 

 shocks of the Johannesburg floor fight and the brouhaha during the 

 authorization hearings in 1973 convinced the subcommittee that more 

 drastic action was necessary. In a letter to NASA Administrator 

 Fletcher on June 18, Hechler outlined plans for an intensive oversight 

 hearing on the tracking network. He reminded Dr. Fletcher that he 

 expected monthly progress reports from NASA in improvements in 

 the Johannesburg area stations, adding: 



It is our intention to examine closely the status and progress of the Johannesburg 

 Tracking Station. I urge you to do everything you can in working with the South 

 Africans to accelerate improvements related to working conditions and opportunities 

 for Black South Africans at the station. Action in the past has been very slow. 



Dr. Fletcher responded affirmatively on June 29, promising to deliver 

 the first report on Johannesburg "in early July." 



That report, when hand delivered on July 10, proved to be a real 

 shocker. After persuading the committee leadership how vital the 

 South African tracking facilities were to the entire space program, 

 NASA announced they had decided to close down their operations in 

 South Africa. It did little good to protest after the fact that NASA 

 should have maintained better lines of communication concerning its 

 plans for the South African facilities. Hechler told his colleagues: 

 "If they can communicate with deep space, they ought to be able to 

 communicate better with us." Obviously, the strong opposition ex- 

 pressed during the 1973 authorization debate influenced NASA's deci- 

 sion. The action had no visible adverse effect on the reliability of the 

 tracking network. The tracking station in Spain took up the slack. 



Proceeding with the general oversight investigation, Hechler ob- 

 tained permission from Chairman Teague to borrow personnel from 

 the General Accounting Office and Department of Defense. To help 

 cement better understanding in the other subcommittees, a July 31 

 memorandum to Teague indicated: 



I would welcome the participation of Don Fuqua and Jim Symington in the con- 

 duct of the Tracking and Data Acquisition review because of the close relationship 

 of this program to their areas of interest. 



During extensive hearings and field trips throughout the summer of 

 1973, including well attended public hearings in October 1973 and 

 January 1974, the Hechler subcommittee examined each tracking sta- 

 tion, its role, its manpower, and activities of supporting contractors, 



