281 



to stand out like sore thumbs at the time they are authorized, the annual rate at 

 which the money is spent, even for the next generation, will be only a modest 

 fraction of the annual spending rate of the total program. 



Indeed, to use these accelerators it now costs from a third to a half the con- 

 struction cost, to use them properly. That is, each year it costs a third or half of 

 the total construction cost to use them properly.® 



Panel discussion hy senior Government o-fftcials 



An interesting experiment conducted by the JCAE subcommittee 

 at the close of the 1965 hearings was a "panel to discuss organization 

 for management of proposed large accelerators." Those participating 

 in the panel consisted of the President's science adviser, Dr. Hornig ; 

 NSF Director Haworth ; Chairman Seaborg of AEC ; AEC Commis- 

 sioner Tape; and the AEC research director, Dr. McDaniel. The 

 problem was set forth by Dr. Seaborg : 



* * * Because of the large expense of these accelerators [and] also because 

 of the available scientists, there are going to be only one or two * * * built in 

 the next 15 or 20 years. 



Therefore * * * these accelerators should be under some sort of national man- 

 agement that makes them equally available to all competent high-energy 

 physicists.^ 



He endorsed the proposal of the 1965 AEC report, Policy for National 

 Action in the Field of High Energy Physics, m the section on manage- 

 ment. This called for a corporation of universities with active high 

 energy physics programs to operate under contract the proposed 200- 

 Bev. facility. He brought out the further point that the Lawrence 

 Radiation Laboratory at the University of California at Berkeley 

 was "almost completely integrated" into the university, and "prob- 

 ably" had less use by outside groups, in consequence of this integration, 

 than did other of the AEC national laboratory accelerators. 



In response to an inquiry by Representative Price, subcommittee 

 chairman. Dr. Hornig agreed as to the desirability of broadening the 

 base of high-energy physics research to 40 or 50 universities, if it could 

 be done "* * * without in any way cutting back on the levels of achieve- 

 ment and excellence that we have obtained already in the best 

 centers." ^^ However, he cautioned : "We can't advance as a country in 

 any field purely by spreading things out." 



On the other hand, Dr. Haworth pointed out that in setting up a 

 university consortium, the university representatives should not con- 

 sider themselves merely as representatives of their institutions, but as 

 spokesmen for all scientists. Thus, they should not intercede on behalf 

 of personnel from their own institutions. 



The only time that I know of that a physicist requested a trustee from his 

 university to intervene on his behalf, to get him a little better chance to do an 

 experiment (at the Brookhaven National Laboratory), he was so roundly spanked 

 that it never happened again so far as I know.^ 



Another management approach, suggested by Commissioner Tape, 

 was that of a national corporation working with a contractor, as a 

 kind of joint venture during design and construction. Once the facility 

 was built, the corporation would assume responsibility for operation 

 and research. 



Representative Hosmer suggested that in the consideration of how 

 to provide for the management of a very large new accelerator labora- 



» Ibid., p. 24. 

 ^Ibld., p. 276. 

 ^ Ibid., p. 378. 

 =« Ibid., p. 382. 



