have had plenty of opportunity to discuss their views with the technical people in Brown & Root. But, as I say, the final decision has to be made by the Foundation and the instructions to the prime contractor have to come from the Foundation.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. My question is a very broad question, and, based on your testimony and your answers to my specific questions and on your overall feeling, you feel that the Mohole project is proceeding satisfactorily in general; you have no problems that are not being met and coped with as time moves on, and you are very happy with the progress that is being made.

Dr. WATERMAN. I think the setup is a good setup in principle. That is, the Foundation has the responsibility to secure the funds from the Congress and to receive advice from the Amsoc Committee. On bringing their recommendations to the attention of Brown & Root, the plans can then be formulated and referred back to the Amsoc Committee and then the Foundation is in position to decide on carrying out the plans.

You understand that in any policy matter of this sort, we have a very fine asset in the Foundation in the National Science Board. These are 24 members distinguished in research, education, and public affairs, all appointed by the President for a term of 6 years. The present Chairman is Dr. Detlev W. Bronk, president of the Rockefeller Institute in New York. The Vice Chairman is Dr. Lee Du Bridge, president of the California Institute of Technology, and there are a number of members on the Board with experience in engineering and geophysics so that on policy matters the Board can be a very strong asset to the whole operation.

Now, what we need, of course, is: good communication between all parties here and clear understanding of responsibilities.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. But you have that, you feel?

Dr. WATERMAN. This setup should supply that.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Has it been providing that?

Dr. WATERMAN. Well, the atmosphere has been full of arguments which have become quite strong on occasion, and we want to be sure that, now that we have the plans to go forward, these arguments can be settled and all decisions reached firmly and amicably. That is our present point of view.

I think the time is at hand where this can happen effectively. As you know, scientists have very strong views about what they would like to do. I am sure you have all encountered that. Not all scientists agree either and you always have a chance for a disagreement among the scientists as to what the next steps should be. They feel this very strongly. They not only have their own interests but they see a projcet which they want particularly to do and it may not be quite the same as that of another.

Similarly, on a very tough engineering problem, you are likely to find differences among engineers. They have a central core which they will subscribe to and then there are differences on points that come up of a practical nature. This project has so many different and novel facets that it is quite natural that there should be these disagreements. I have been in Government long enough to know that we must expect them, but, when the time comes that we want to move and have the plans ready, we have to take the steps to go forward properly.

Mr. LENNON. Mr. Casey.
Mr. CASEY. No questions.
Mr. LENNON. Mr. Tupper.

Mr. TUPPER. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. LENNON. Mr. Rogers.

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have just come on this committee so I have a great deal to learn about this project.

I am somewhat familiar with what you are trying to attempt but I have been just a little concerned about this. I have heard about the project, of course, and also the fact that there seems from your testimony to be decisions that I would think would have to be made before contracts would have been let, the different approaches.

I understand you have intermediate steps which you are thinking about which have not yet been decided.

How can a prime contractor come in until basic decisions have been made like this?

Dr. WATERMAN. Well, in this case, the scientific objectives, of course, have to come from the scientific group.

Mr. ROGERS. Yes.

Dr. WATERMAN. And in this particular case, though, getting on with the project itself is not a scientific matter. It is a very tough engineering problem and the scientists can only go so far in analyzing problems of this sort.

Mr. ROGERS. You also have, don't you, in your National Science Foundation, a coordination with engineering groups where these decisions could be made?

Dr. WATERMAN. Yes. My view of the prime contractor's responsibility is that you give him the objective, and since he is expert at carrying out engineering operations he takes into account all the advice that you can give him, and then, since he is in charge of the operations, he should be the one to come up with the best plans as to how one does it.

This is a thing which any organization has to go through, in a contract which involves research and development as this one does. There are so many different components that enter into it that it is the contractor's job, to weigh those in the light of what he feels is practical, what he can get done with such consulting advice as he can get. In short, I think this is quite in order.

Mr. ROGERS. You mean it has not been decided what type of ships are to be used for the apparatus that you have here. This has not been decided yet?

Dr. WATERMAN. The final decision has not been made, no. And the reason is because there have been, interestingly enough, so many views on this subject. The initial suggestion was that there be one ultimate vessel. Then, later consideration brought out that maybe there should be an intermediate stage and a special experimental vessel which would have limited capability but could proceed to make some testing.

On further examination, noboby could say exactly what vessel. One had to look around at what types of vessels could be used. Under the circumstances we felt it was up to the prime contractor to look into these things for us. His job was to get on with the project.

So, we referred these questions to the prime contractor. They have had the different possibilities under very careful study and have been giving us the results of their studies. This is quite in order.

Mr. ROGERS. Now, what funding authority do you have?

Dr. WATERMAN. In the Foundation?

Mr. ROGERS. For this project.

Dr. WATERMAN. General authority for making research contracts. Mr. ROGERS. And the actual funds are allocated for this?

Dr. WATERMAN. Yes; there are funds allocated. This is a line item

in the budget.

Mr. ROGERS. That is what I am trying to get at. What is the amount of your funding?

Dr. WATERMAN. For the current year, $5 million.

Mr. ROGERS. What is projected?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. For 1964, we have in our budget submission now pending in the Congress $15 million for the Project Mohole. Mr. ROGERS. And for the next year?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. We don't have an estimate for that yet, for 1965. Mr. ROGERS. You have no 5- or 10-year plan?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. Yes; we do. We are now discussing with the Budget Bureau our proposed funding for 1965 and thereafter.

If your question, Mr. Rogers, is what is our current estimate of what this project will cost, the best estimate that we have from the contractor right now is that the project will cost ultimately $67,700,000. Mr. ROGERS. Now, with his not knowing, how can this be much of an estimate, not knowing what procedure he is going to use? I presume you are going to allow this decision to be made by the contractor. Mr. ROSENTHAL. Well, in any research and development contract, there are certain unknowns for which you have to forecast and estimate what your costs will be. In the estimate that the contractor developed, he has included costs which would cover either the cost of a conventional ship type hull or drilling apparatus or a platform type hull, depending on how the decision ultimately is made because it will vary

some.

Mr. ROGERS. As you say, I am sure you must have those figures. What would the difference be?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. The contractor estimates the difference between these two types of vessels to be approximately a million dollars.

Mr. ROGERS. I see.

Now, what about the talk of the intermediate ship?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. That is not included in the contractor's estimate. Mr. ROGERS. This would be an additional cost?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. If it were decided that there should be an intermediate ship for Mohole purposes, this would be an additional cost;

yes.

Mr. ROGERS. Who makes that decision? Does the contractor have the right to make that decision?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. No; the Foundation will make that decision. Mr. ROGERS. Will the Foundation make the decision as to which approach will be made or will that be done by the contractor? Dr. WATERMAN. The Foundation will make that decision.

Mr. ROGERS. I misunderstood. I thought you said you allowed the contractor to decide which approach.

Dr. WATERMAN. They will look into all these possibilities and present their views as they see it, but it is up to us to make the decision. Mr. ROGERS. How many personnel are involved in the project from the National Science Foundation?

Dr. WATERMAN. From the Science Foundation?
Mr. ROGERS. Yes.

Dr. WATERMAN. In varing degress, the setup is that we have the contracting officer, Mr. Scherer, who is responsible for that sort of detail working in cooperation with the Comptroller, the scientific officer, Dr. Benson, who is involved with the project and with the earth sciences program in general, and then we also have assistants to these people.

Mr. ROGERS. How many assistants, in overall number perhaps. I want just a general estimate. The specifics could be supplied.

Dr. WATERMAN. Something on the order of 30 get involved. The associate director for research, Dr. Robertson, is in general charge of research activities.

Mr. ROGERS. Now, are these men devoting their full time to this project?

Dr. WATERMAN. No.

Mr. ROGERS. Approximately what amount of their time is devoted to it?

Dr. WATERMAN. It depends entirely on the individuals.

Mr. ROGERS. Is there anyone devoting his full time to it?

Dr. WATERMAN. Three, I believe.

Mr. ROGERS. Three. I see. Who are those three?

Dr. WATERMAN. Mr. Woodward is managing coordinator. He is full time.

Mr. SCHERER. Mr. Shurtleff is his administrative aid in Washington and Mr. Phillips who is handling this as his sole job on contract administration.

Mr. LENNON. Would you give the full names and initials of the gentlemen you are referring to for the record?

Dr. WATERMAN. Mr. Morris Phillips is in the Contracts and Facilities Office and his duty is the Mohole project in that Office.

Mr. C. Don Woodward is managing coordinator of the project and has offices both at the Foundation and in Houston, Tex.

Mr. Miller Shurtleff is assistant to the managing coordinator and his office is here with the Foundation. Ultimately, we would like to have a person full time who would be in charge of the scientific and engineering project itself, and as this now approaches the time where it should move forward, we are anxious to recruit such a person.

Mr. ROGERS. Do you have any time element set for this?

Dr. WATERMAN. As usual, when you are trying to secure top-quality personnel, one wants to succeed at the earliest opportunity, but it is hard to say a deadline other than that.

Mr. ROGERS. But you don't have any prospects?

Dr. WATERMAN. We have prospects, to be sure, but I couldn't set an exact date because we want to get a first quality man as head of the project office for Mohole.

Mr. ROGERS. I see.

On the contract, do I understand that you say it is a fixed-fee contract?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. That is correct; yes.

Mr. ROGERS. Is this for a certain stage, this contract you have entered into?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. This is for the entire contract to complete the drilling.

Mr. ROGERS. The whole project?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. Yes.

Mr. ROGERS. What is the fee?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. The fee is $1,800,000.

Mr. ROGERS. Is this fee negotiable and can go upward?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. No, sir. This is a fixed fee.

Mr. ROGERS. There is no probability of changing the fixed fee for the contract?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. Not unless we change the scope of the contract. In other words, if we should decide to change the contract, then, obviously, the contractor would have the right to come in for a change in fee.

Mr. ROGERS. As I understand, you have the prerogative to say whether it is to be a ship.

Mr. ROSENTHAL. That is within the scope of the project.

Mr. ROGERS. If you decide to put in an intermediate program, with an intermediate ship as I understood your testimony, then I presume that would give the contractor the right to come in and change the fixed fee?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. It could conceivably; yes.

Mr. ROGERS. So there doesn't seem to be too much set yet on the project as far as I can determine. Maybe I have not interpreted what you have said correctly.

I am concerned just knowing what I know about it previously by the fact that it seems to me that basic decisions have not been made. Yet, we have let a contract before we even know what we want the contractor to do and it appears to me that, if it is a worthwhile project, we have got to decide to put some people full time on it to work with it to make these decisions before we get into contracting with people who don't know which way they are going to move themselves.

Mr. ROSENTHAL. May I explain, Mr. Rogers, that the first phase of the contract, is a requirement that the contractor come up with a complete, totally integrated systems plan for proceeding to the Mohole. Mr. ROGERS. When is this to be submitted?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. Sir?

Mr. ROGERS. What is the time in which this must be submitted?
Mr. ROSENTHAL. This has been submitted.

Mr. ROGERS. As of when?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. This came in about 6 weeks ago.

This engineering plan is now being evaluated and it is because of this engineering plan that these decisions now have to be made before the contractor can proceed further in implementing the engineering plan.

But the first phase of the contract was for the contractor to develop this engineering plan including all the systems and subsystems necessary to complete the drilling project.

Mr. ROGERS. Has he given you the plan for the intermediate step? Mr. ROSENTHAL. He has not included any plan for an intermediate ship in his proposal.

Mr. ROGERS. Yes, this is under consideration, I understand.