WEATHER MODIFICATION

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1966

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,

Washington, D.C.

The committee reconvened at 10 a.m., in room 5110, New Senate Office Building, Hon. Howard W. Cannon presiding.

Senator CANNON. The committee will come to order.

This morning's hearing on the weather modification is the fifth of the current series. At yesterday's hearing, the committee heard testimony from representatives of the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of Defense. Part of the discussion was about the correlation between weather prediction and weather modification, and about the role of the commercial operators.

It is significant that these points were raised and today's witnesses will be able to elaborate on these and other topics. Today, we will hear testimony from representatives from the Department of Commerce and the Department of the Interior.

The first witness today is Dr. J. Herbert Hollomon, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology, Department of Commerce.

STATEMENT OF DR. J. HERBERT HOLLOMON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; ACCOMPANIED BY DR. ROBERT WHITE, ADMINISTRATOR, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, AND GORDON CHRISTENSON, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Dr. HOLLOMON. Senator Cannon, I have with me this morning Dr. Robert M. White, who is the Administrator of the Environmental Science Services Administration, and Mr. Gordon Christenson, who is Assistant General Counsel for the Department of Commerce.

I have a statement, sir, which I would like to submit for the record, if I may, and then try to make its key points more briefly in the tation.

presen

Senator CANNON. Very well. You may proceed as you so desire. Dr. HOLLOMON. I am pleased to be here today to have the opportunity to present the views of the Department of Commerce on weather modification, S. 23 and S. 2916, bills on this subject.

The question these hearings can illuminate and help answer is how we shall achieve a coherent national policy for weather modification. The Department of Commerce strongly supports sound steps toward such a policy, including needed legislation and favors the purposes of S. 2916.

The President said last week in his transmittal message to Congress on the annual weather modification report:

Two sets of problems face us, and both are difficult. One consists of finding out how to modify the weather and climate, and the second consists of determining how best to utilize this knowledge for the benefit of mankind once it is achieved.

The first of these requires an expanded and redirected effort in the science and technology of weather modification itself. This should proceed without delay, with major reliance upon the resources of the Environmental Science Services Administration in the Department of Commerce.

Senator CANNON. Do you mind if I interrupt as you go along? Dr. HOLLOMON. No.

Senator CANNON. What do you mean by a redirected effort, and why do you say there should be a redirected effort?

Dr. HOLLOMON. We believe there needs to be very much more concentration on broad field experiments, which I will try to make clear later, and there should be a more intense evaluation of both the benefits and the possible harmful consequences of weather modification efforts. We should examine in a broader way how to modify severe storms, for example, so that there is some redirection toward what I consider more developmental kinds of application rather than as it has been largely in the past, toward basic sciences. This is what I mean by redirected.

Senator CANNON. In other words, more in the operational area? Dr. HOLLOMON. More applied research and development directed toward operational applications than in the basic sciences.

The second problem the President presented requires thorough considerations of public policy of economic, legal, and social consequences, when the scientific results are put to use privately or by the Government. It means thoughtful study, dialog, and debate on questions of public law and organization.

These considerations should begin at once, though there are immediate steps which can be taken in support of the expanded Federal research program. Before long, however, we must decide what kinds of future policies and regulatory controls are desirable for public and private activities seeking to modify the weather or climate.

In my statement I give a brief review of the bills before you, which I don't think is necessary verbally. Thereafter I would like to describe the need for redirection of the national effort in weather modification and try to outline what we believe are the elements and scope of this redirection. Then I shall discuss the capabilities of the Department of Commerce and other agencies.

Finally I think it is appropriate to spell out our recommendations for needed legislation to support the immediate research effort and suggest some legislative questions for the consideration of the Con

gress.

S. 23 directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a program in five geographic areas of the United States to increase usable precipitation. The Department of the Interior already has underway a program similar to that proposed in the bill.

It has certain mission responsibilities concerning the Nation's water resources, and we support its efforts in using weather modification to

assist in carrying out its mission. But we do not believe that legislation is necessary for this purpose. For this reason, we do not recommend enactment of S. 23.

S. 2916 would transfer to the Secretary of Commerce the authority now in the National Science Foundation to carry out a weather modification program, including applied research, development, and experimentation.

It would restate such authority, but in greater detail than the Foundation's existing statutory authority. It also would limit the research authorized to that for applied research, development, and experimentation.

It would provide authority for the transfer of personnel, property, and appropriations and would repeal existing statutes authorizing the Director of the National Science Foundation to conduct a weather modification program.

It would make clear that the National Science Foundation would continue to have authority for scientific studies in weather modification as part of the atmospheric sciences.

Further, S. 2916 would authorize the Secretary of Commerce to issue regulations affecting any operation of commercial enterprises engaged in weather modification which conflict with or impede any authorized activities. It would require a report to Congress, within a year after enactment, or recommendations for additional legislation concerning the enforcement of such regulations.

The authority now in the National Science Foundation to hold hearings and obtain information also would be placed in the Secretary of Commerce.

The bill specifically would authorize international cooperation under the policy guidance of the Secretary of State and would require the Secretary of Commerce or his designee to be a member of the U.S. delegation at intergovernmental meetings and conferences relating to weather modification and climate control.

We fully support the purposes of S. 2916, although we believe that it is premature and that the aspects of this bill which relate to reorganization in the executive branch can be accomplished best through an executive reorganization. A Presidential reorganization plan along these lines is now under active consideration.

We do not agree, however, that the authority in the Secretary of Commerce should be limited to applied research since there are many scientific investigations of a fundamental nature which would be carried out in any large scale weather modification research or experimentation program.

Also, if legislation on this subject is enacted, it should contain effective authority to limit private weather modification activities providing they are in direct conflict with the research or experiments carried out by the Department of Commerce.

Authority to issue regulations governing these conflicts would be of little significance to any large-scale research effort if there is no enforcement mechanism.

Senator CANNON. What do you have in mind there, the types of things that would be in direct conflict?

Dr. HOLLOMON. Let me give you an example. Suppose you have laid out in a certain area of the country a very major program of cloud

seeding or other kind of modification activity, which required large amounts of field equipment and in which there had been planning of a very substantial kind, and then inadvertently, due to a private activity, this whole area was contaminated by seeding by private parties. This would be a conflict between the research and development effort of the Federal Government, it would obviously waste the taxpayer's money and might make the results of these experiments completely invalid.

Senator CANNON. Has there been any evidence of conflicts up to the present time in the limited areas that we have been going ahead in, that is, between the commercial operators and the funded Government research programs?

Dr. HOLLOMON. I personally do not know of any. One of the difficulties, of course, is that we have not had adequate reports of what actual activities were taking place in the private sector of the economy, and therefore it has been somewhat difficult to know when this kind of contamination is possible.

There is another technical problem which I think is interesting and that is that we have not been adequately monitoring condensation nuclei throughout the country, to see what the persistence is, how long it persists after someone has put them in the atmosphere, and over what regions. And it has therefore been difficult to tell exactly what the possible contamination might be.

I can't explicitly answer the question. Dr. White may be able to. Dr. WHITE. Yes. During the Santa Barbara project in 1957-59, there was some doubt cast upon the results of this project because of possible contamination by other seeding activities.

Senator CANNON. Now you say there has been no cataloging up to the present time? Would the NSF requirement now in effect, giving them notice, would that help bring this into proper perspective?

Dr. HOLLOMON. It certainly would. We have been discussing it at some length. As you know, the recent regulations the National Science Foundation has issued under their authority do require notification of experiments. We think this is essential, if we are going to take advantage of the work of other people. We can learn from them. On the other hand, we can assure that there won't be contamination either by Federal experiments affecting theirs or conversely.

I think this notification is an essential element of any national program.

While it is too early at this time to write comprehensive legislation on weather modification, in our view such legislation may be necessary and certainly deserves thoughtful study.

Sound legislation can strengthen any Presidential action and may well be necessary for an orderly achievement of national objectives in weather modification and climate control.

I have three general comments to make before discussing the scope of the new national effort. The substance of these comments may already be familiar to you-thanks to the studies and reports issued over the past year by the Weather Bureau, by the Panel on Weather Modification of the National Academy of Sciences, by the Special Commission on Weather Modification of the National Science Foundation-established after recommendation by the Interdepartmental

Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, of which I am chairman-and by the statements which this committee has heard in the course of these hearings.

My first comment concerns the importance of weather modification. We must keep in mind at all times the vast potential benefit of weather modification to the people of the United States-in fact, to all mankind.

If we can develop the capability to blunt and weaken the thrust of hurricanes, tornadoes, and other severe storms, to increase, lessen, or redistribute precipitation, to suppress hail in crop areas, to cope with lightning discharges in forest areas, and to dissipate all types of fog, we would have a notable scientific and technological achievement which would provide enormous economic benefit.

If we can ever develop the ability to modify weather and climate on a large scale to effect slight increases or decreases in the average annual rainfall or temperature over a particular locality-we would have a truly staggering achievement. I need only cite here the implications of such an achievement for world food production.

My second comment is that modern science and technology have now brought us to the stage at which it is possible to carry out a broad program of scientific research to determine what types of weather modification are feasible and under what conditions. In this respect, the National Science Foundation, in supporting research, has laid a scientific foundation, and we are now ready for more extensive field tests and experiments.

Our understanding of the physical and chemical processes of the atmosphere and our theories of atmospheric phenomena, while still deficient in many respects, provide a strong base from which to pursue new knowledge about weather modification.

Using the high-speed electronic computer, we have been creating mathematical models for the simulation of atmospheric phenomena. Soon we will be able to experiment with the atmosphere under "controlled" conditions in a computer and seek a deeper scientific understanding of the greater forces affecting weather and climate. And we will be able, we hope, to predict what it means to interfere with these dynamic forces.

We now have a new capacity for observing the atmosphere and gathering the raw data that the research scientist must have. For example, we now are considering an international effort to bring the total global atmosphere under proper observation using satellites and other new technological developments which will be vital to any exploration of large-scale weather modification.

Also, we now have systems to place manmade materials into the atmosphere more effectively, that were unavailable to us a few years ago. These developments-if taken all together-have brought weather modification out of the realm of speculation and have made it possible for the scientists for the first time to determine what types of weather may be modified and controlled. It will take many years of hard work-decades of work in the case of the larger forces of weather. But the point is that we can now develop the scientific and technological capacity to explore how to affect many different kinds of weather conditions.

59-528-66-pt. 1—12