182 



mediate and deep drilling for scientific purposes; (3) provide from the beginning 

 a vessel capable of supporting the ultimate equipment required for the mantle 

 penetration, thus avoiding the necessity of constructing two expensive vessels 

 for the deeper drilling; (4) give assurance to all concerned that piercing of 

 the mantle remained a firm objective not contingent on a later decision to build 

 a second full-scale vessel; (5) in my opinion, minimize the cost of the mantle 

 piercing program. 



In addition, he was prepared to recommend a "supplementary- 

 drilling program not part of Project Mohole, utilizing a much smaller 

 vessel of, say, 5,000 or 6,000 tons." This would be used for "drilling 

 in the unconsolidated sediments and into the immediately adjacent 

 rock." It would require a modest capital investment, of the order of 

 $1 million." 



The recommendations of Dr. Haworth before the Senate hearing 

 were supported by testimony from William B. Heroy, Chairman of 

 the Panel on Drilling Techniques of AMSOC. He favored the "crustal 

 program" but believed that it should not be considered as an integral 

 part of the whole project. Both should proceed on their own merits. 

 He said : 



I believe that the Mohole project should go forward as vigorously as possible, 

 not as an "engineering stunt" but as a highly important and challenging scien- 

 tific program. The geology of the earth beneath the sea may well prove to be as 

 complex and varied as that upon the continent. A Mohole vessel will, like a 

 cyclotron or a radiotelescope, be an apparatus that should be useful for many 

 years in the investigation of the vast submarine areas." 



In the House hearing, Dr. Haworth was supported by a delegation 

 from Brown & Root, whose principal spokesman was Dr. William H. 

 Tonking, deputy ]3roject manager. Dr. Tonking summarized the 

 technical progress that had been achieved in the design of the drilling 

 platform, the drilling system, other major components, and site selec- 

 tion. He set the cost of the total program at $68 million and fore- 

 cast its completion by September 1969. As to the controversy over 

 intermediate ship or intermediate drilling program, he said the plan 

 was to "walk before we run, but we think that we can do this with one 

 vessel rather than with two." Subsequently, he added : 



The time to accomplish the prime objective, as reflected in our critical path 

 planning, is controlled by the design, construction, and operation of the Mohole 

 platform. Any delay in this plan would prolong the accomplishment of this prime 

 objective. If an intermediate ship were added to the program and designed and 

 constructed concurrently with the Mohole platform, costs would be considerably 

 higher and time to reach the mantle would not be shortened.** 



The alternatives described by Dr. Haworth had also been con- 

 sidered, early in 1963, by an advisory panel organized by Dr. Water- 

 man at the suggestion of the Wliite House. This Panel, under the 

 chairmanship of Dr. E. R. Piore, a vice president of IBM and formerly 

 a member of AJVISOC, was asked to review NSF plans for the second 

 phase of Mohole. A principal purpose of the panel was to help re- 

 solve the controversy over the intermediate versus the ultimate drill- 

 ing vessel.^^ The preliminary findings of the Panel, expressed in a 

 memorandum for the chairman of the National Science Board and 

 dated July 18, 1963, was presented to the Senate committee by Dr. 



« Ibid., pp. 2358-2364. 

 « Ibid., p. 2372. 



*8 House. Mohole project. Hearings, op. cit., pp. 107-160, especially pp. 131-132. 

 *'' Other members of the committee were Drs. Francis Birch, Jacob P. Den Hartog, John 

 D. Isaacs, A. B. Klnzel, Konrad B. Krauslropf, and William W. Rubey. 



