benefits in the not too distant future, and I would also think of im porting water.

Senator DOMINICK. Let me ask you about the regulatory features of proposals that we have had before us. You heard Dr. Riehl's testimony and Dr. Chamberlain's testimony. What is your concept of what role the Federal Government should play in this?

Mr. GRANT. I concur with them completely that there should be regulatory powers associated with the qualifications of the seeders. since this does affect large segments of the atmosphere and a lot of interests.

I also feel that there should be coordination of efforts.

Now, our work would be at least 2 or 3 years further advanced if after it started we had had some mechanism for regulating activities so that it could have continued and gotten these answers.

Our program has been inactive somewhere around half of the time during this period because of lack of coordination with other groups. Dr. RIEHL. You mean other activities in the immediate area where we work in central Colorado?

Mr. GRANT. Right.

Dr. RIEHL. But not hundreds of miles distant. On the order of 30 to 50 miles distant?

Mr. GRANT. This is correct.

Dr. RIEHL. That distance scale. It is not a question of California but of the Colorado Rockies.

Mr. GRANT. My interests are primarily in the applied area, and I would like to emphasize that I feel these other activities are also important but that there should be a coordinating agency who, at least in the final analysis if it gets down to a question of this or that, could resolve not whether it should go on by a group but which was in the primary national interest.

Senator DOMINICK. Colorado State University is a member of NCAR, is it not?

Mr. GRANT. Yes; it is.

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes, sir; it is.

Mr. GRANT. We work very closely with a number of individuals at NCAR.

Senator DOMINICK. Are they acting, Dr. Chamberlain, as a coordi nating agent for activities in this area?

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. From our vantage point the answer is "No." There is coordination in the sense of communication among the dif ferent professional staff of both the university and their other counterparts, but so far as program coordination for field seeding activities I believe that the answer would have to be "No."

Dr. RIEHL. That is correct.

Senator DOMINICK. But as far as research efforts are concerned and the equipment and facilities for it, they do act within the staff level? Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. Not in terms of coordination, whether something is or is not done. But if you mean coordination in the sense of each professional person knowing what the other is doing so they are taking advantage of each other's knowledge, then the answer would be "Yes."

Senator DOMINICK. That is what I was referring to; yes.

At the present time, Dr. Chamberlain, I am informed by my staff that the Federal Government is expending $7.2 million per year in weather modification research and programs. Do you think that this level of expenditure is sufficient in order to justify the formation of a special Commission on Weather Modification?

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. Well, Mr. Chairman, I am not conversant on the proposed makeup that you have in mind of the proposed Federal Commission on Weather Modification.

Senator DOMINICK. I am not sure that we have anything in mind. We are looking for ideas.

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. I see. Well, I have supported the premise that there should be a considerable increase above the $7.2 million level for the total national program in weather modification. And if that growth were to be contemplated, I do feel that there is strong need for coordination capability at the Federal level.

And under different auspices than the one under which I am testifying, a different hat than today, I have supported the idea that there should be a coordination mechanism throughout and established at the Office of Science and Technology level of the executive branch of Government.

I have further stated that I felt it would be in the national interest, in order to provide adequate technical advice to both the executive and legislative branches of the Government, that the National Academy of Sciences in cooperation with the National Academy of Engineering establish a standing committee to render advice when requested on this field.

A "special commission" as such is a term that does not automatically convey to me an image of what it might be or do. And, like some of my professional colleagues, I am opposed to just creating new entities every time a little problem comes along rather than trying to utilize certain of the machinery that already exists.

Senator DOMINICK. I am happy to hear that, Doctor.

Your feeling then is that we can have further efforts through NSF and the establishment of an agency under the Executive in the Office of Science and Technology?

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. The entity under the Office of Science and Technology should not be an operating agency in my judgment. It should be a policy and coordination function performed at that level.

Existing Federal agencies with missions to perform, such as the Department of Interior in water supply, the Department of Agriculture in the conservation and management of our forest resource and protection of our agricultural crops, the Department of Commerce in relation to needs for weather prediction, forecasts, and so on, all of these agencies, should actually be authorized to continue the research and development that is needed to fulfill their missions.

I have not personally supported the idea that a completely new Federal agency devoted solely to weather modification was justified at this time. Perhaps in future years the overall problems of our enviroment and weather particularly would justify such a separate agency, but I have not personally supported that the time was ready

now.

Senator DOMINICK. Do you feel that the Interdepartmental Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, ICAS, is therefore not acting at the present time in an adequate manner as far as coordination between the agencies and their programs is concerned?

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. Well, from the vantage point of my position as vice president at Colorado State University, I feel it a little inpertinent on my part to even make a comment on this.

I would say, though, from what experience I have had, it will take an entity at a higher level-that is, in OST-to get this job done adequately.

I happen to be of the personal conviction that ICAS cannot get this done.

Senator DOMINICK. Who would then do the licensing of the oper ators under your system?

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. If there are only 10, it should not require much of a new enterprise, wherever located within the Federal Establishment, to get this done.

But because there is also the feasibility I believe that information gathering and resolution of minor coordination problems is a function that could be done by perhaps the same group doing this limited amount of licensing, I feel that this can be arranged for as a subentity within some existing department of the Federal Government.

Senator DOMINICK. Do you agree with Dr. Riehl's statement that there should be a minimum of regulation?

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. Oh, I certainly do. I do not feel that we know enough from the scientific point of view to justify a very complex regulatory establishment.

Senator DOMINICK. Do you agree, therefore, that there would be no reason for trying to analyze in advance proposed weather modification programs?

Dr. CHAMBERLAIN. Well, I feel that there should be a requirement for reporting in advance the plans for any contemplated weather modification operation in order that there can be coordination and so that there can be a maximum effort to avoid such complications as, say. Professor Grant has experienced, where just nearby projects can contaminate and perhaps ruin a particular experiment.

Advance information and a little coordination, with the possible ultimate power to actually stop certain ones in order to maximize the national benefit, should exist.

But I do not feel that that is the type of thing that, except in rare cases like a whole watershed basin project, should require Dr. Riehl's hearings, committees, and so on, that he objects to.

I also do not feel that it is that complex a problem at this time. Senator DOMINICK. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. This has been very helpful testimony. Thank you for giving us your time. I might ask the remaining witnesses now whether there are any of them that feel that they want to get away before lunch or whether it is agreeable that everybody stay on.

(No response.)

Senator DOMINICK. Well, then we will continue in our regular order. We will have Dr. Archie Kahan, Chief of the Office of Atmospheric Water Resources of the Bureau of Reclamation.

STATEMENT OF ARCHIE M. KAHAN, CHIEF, OFFICE OF ATMOSPHERIC WATER RESOURCES, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Dr. KAHAN. Mr. Chairman, may name is Archie M. Kahan. I am a meteorologist employed by the Bureau of Reclamation in Denver, Colo.

It is a privilege to appear for the second time before this committee, as it seeks to find legislative requirements for progress in the field of weather modification.

Having attended the recent Washington hearings on S. 23, S. 2916, and S. 2875, I feel impelled to express admiration, appreciation, and gratitude for the patience, interest, and insight demonstrated by Members of the Senate as a long list of witnesses have sometimes presented divergent advice as to the nature of the legislative needs of this important area of developing science and technology.

The Department of Interior's position relative to S. 23 and S. 2916 has been previously presented to this committee by Thomas F. Bates, science adviser to the Department of Interior. It should suffice here to state that the Bureau of Reclamation supports that position which can be briefly paraphrased as believing that the objectives of S. 23 are being adequately met and that S. 2916 as written does not encourage progress in weather modification in the most effective manner. It would serve no useful purpose to lengthen the record of these hearings by repetition of the points already presented as part of the Department of Interior's position.

A useful purpose may be served, however, by including in the record of these hearings a description of the Bureau of Reclamation's Atmospheric Water Resources program.

The Bureau of Reclamation's Atmospheric Water Resources program came into being as a result of an insertion in the 1962 public works appropriation bill by the conference committee which read as follows:

Increased rainfall by cloud seeding, $100,000. The committee recommends allowance of $100,000 to be used for research on increasing rainfall by cloud seeding. This amount would be utilized in cooperation with the National Science Foundation and the Weather Bureau, which are expected to contribute funds and participate in this research.

Funding of the program continued at the $100,000 level in fiscal year 1963. In fiscal year 1964 funding was increased to $175,000. The appropriation for fiscal year 1965 was $1.1 million and $2.98 million in fiscal year 1966.

Experience has shown that this latter amount, which is about threesevenths of the current annual national expenditure for weather modification research and development, is sufficient to pay for only a beginning on the work and facilities required. The importance of the problem under attack justifies higher funding levels. More money and more manpower will permit more rapid progress toward understanding the myriad complexities, some of which differ from region to region, but no matter how much money is made available there will remain a considerable time requirement. It would be a mistake to expect too much learning too soon. Too much money too soon could result in waste unless great wisdom is applied to its investment.

The Bureau of Reclamation is conducting an operationally oriented program of engineering research aimed initially at learning the cr cumstances under which it is feasible to use weather modification techniques to increase inflow into its reservoirs. The end products of its research program will be practical operating systems which wi include (1) decisionmaking as to whether or not to attempt the use of weather modification techniques; (2) the means of recognizing suitable opportunities; (3) means of treating those opportunities: and (4) procedures for evaluating accomplishment.

While some of what remains to be accomplished to make these systems a reality involves meteorologists acquiring new knowledge of the behavior of the atmosphere, a major portion of the total job requires the application of available skills, knowledge and experience of engineers, hydrologists, social scientists, economists, and technicians who may not have been previously concerned with weather modification.

The Bureau of Reclamation sees as an important asset its past experience in bringing a variety of disciplines to bear on the solu tion of complex water resource problems as it tackles the problem of developing atmospheric water resources. Its approach has been to staff primarily for planning and monitoring. Once it is able to identify requirements, it contracts for their fulfillment with private industry, research organizations, consultants, universities, and other governmental agencies. It is free to seek answers where they can best be found.

While there will be a need for continuing improvement in these operating systems, early application of available and nearly available knowledge is the goal of the Bureau of Reclamation. That there is a need for considerable empiricism in learning what needs to be known is a basic concept of our program. It is in the country's best interest to learn by doing rather than to postpone action awaiting the development of complete understanding of all aspects of this complex problem.

The program requirements necessary for the creation of practical operating systems include:

(1) Better observational facilities;

(2) Improved knowledge of local storm precipitation and storm-flow climatology;

(3) Improved seeding equipment;

(4) Improved operational know-how;

(5) Better evaluation procedures.

The Bureau of Reclamation has in effect contracts or subcontracts with seven educational institutions, five private meteorological organizations, and one State agency.

In addition to these contracts, memoranda of understanding have been completed with the Geological Survey, the Soil Conservation Service, the Forest Service, the Weather Bureau, and the U.S. Naval Ordnance Test Station, China Lake, Calif. The Bureau is also receiving cooperation from the National Science Foundation and the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

At the University of Wyoming, the Natural Resources Institute is studying cap clouds at their Elk Mountain Observatory, an isolated