\l RON \i riCS AND l RANSPOR1 



'55 



and persistently advocated increased suppon for aeronautics. We have also advocated 

 itei status foi aeronautics within the administrai i ve structure of \ \S \ 



The hearings attracted overflow crowds of interested officials, 



.representatives of aerospace companies, and the general public — 90 

 percent of whom came early and staved late. Hechler convened the 

 hearings every day at 9 a.m. .in<\ they ran frequently past 5 and 6 p.m. 

 (one did not adjourn until 6:45 p.m.) with only a break for lunch. 

 Attendance and participation of subcommittee members was unusuallv 

 high. 



HEWN \ME FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE 



He also read a January 14 letter from NASA Administrator 

 Fletcher, announcing that the name of the Advanced Research and 

 Technology Office had been changed to Office of Aeronautics and Space 

 Technology. Hechler then announced his subcommittee's name change 

 to Subcommittee on Aeronautics and Space Technology. 



Miller and Mosher, chairman and ranking minority member of 

 the full committee, dropped in on the hearings. Miller warned glumly: 



Unfortunately, this matter is one that falls into the jurisdiction of several com- 

 mittees here on the Hill, as you know. Our committee interest is by virtue of the fact 

 that NASA is the successor to N'ACA, anJ the scientific phases of this succession are 

 ours. We have to bear very seriously in mind that we cannot overlap the fields of 

 other committees. 



Mosher was a little more optimistic: 



I am sure that I speak for all the Members on our side of the aisle when I say that 

 we are pleased to see what we see here and feel what we feel here. Frankly, I am a little 

 bit surprised at this standing room only crowd, the fact that Jim Gehrig from the 

 Senate (Aeronautical and Space Sciences) committee is over here with us, and the 

 unusually excellent attendance of members of the subcommittee. This all bodes very 

 well, I think, for the hearings that you have initiated 



The hearings did prove to be very productive. In volume alone, 

 the record extended to 942 pages. As a followup to the hearings, the 

 subcommittee issued a massive 283-page report. Hechler's letter of 

 transmittal stated: 



There is little doubt that the civil aviation industry continues to be a vital 

 segment of the U.S. economy. However, unless we, as a Nation, make a determined 

 effort to solve the problems identified in the CARD study and earlier reports of this 

 subcommittee, the future success of the civil aviation industry could be placed in 

 jeopard y. 



Public interest in the hearings continued to run high, and they were 

 crowded daily with aviation enthusiasts. The preparation for the 

 hearings and the report which was published constituted a model of 

 effective and efficient staff work by Bill Wells, Joseph Del Riego, and 



