Markup of S. 1439


Material Information

Markup of S. 1439
Physical Description:
United States -- Congress. -- Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
U.S. Govt. Print. Off. ( Washington )
Publication Date:

Record Information

Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 22409100
System ID:

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page i
        Page ii
    Table of Contents
        Page iii
        Page iv
    Hearing dates, witnesses and statements, and additional materials
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
    Appendix 1. Legislation
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
        Page 131
        Page 132
        Page 133
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
        Page 137
        Page 138
        Page 139
        Page 140
        Page 141
        Page 142
        Page 143
        Page 144
        Page 145
        Page 146
        Page 147
        Page 148
        Page 149
        Page 150
        Page 151
        Page 152
        Page 153
        Page 154
        Page 155
        Page 156
        Page 157
        Page 158
        Page 159
        Page 160
        Page 161
        Page 162
        Page 163
        Page 164
        Page 165
        Page 166
        Page 167
        Page 168
        Page 169
        Page 170
        Page 171
        Page 172
        Page 173
        Page 174
        Page 175
        Page 176
        Page 177
        Page 178
        Page 179
        Page 180
        Page 181
        Page 182
        Page 183
        Page 184
        Page 185
        Page 186
        Page 187
        Page 188
        Page 189
        Page 190
        Page 191
        Page 192
        Page 193
        Page 194
        Page 195
        Page 196
        Page 197
        Page 198
        Page 199
        Page 200
        Page 201
        Page 202
        Page 203
        Page 204
        Page 205
        Page 206
        Page 207
        Page 208
        Page 209
        Page 210
        Page 211
        Page 212
        Page 213
        Page 214
        Page 215
        Page 216
        Page 217
        Page 218
        Page 219
        Page 220
        Page 221
        Page 222
        Page 223
        Page 224
        Page 225
        Page 226
        Page 227
        Page 228
        Page 229
        Page 230
        Page 231
        Page 232
        Page 233
        Page 234
        Page 235
        Page 236
        Page 237
        Page 238
        Page 239
        Page 240
        Page 241
        Page 242
        Page 243
        Page 244
        Page 245
        Page 246
        Page 247
        Page 248
        Page 249
        Page 250
        Page 251
    Appendix 2. JCAE memorandum, dated August 24, 1976 on legislation relative to proposed Nuclear Explosive Proliferation Control Act of 1976
        Page 252
        Page 253
        Page 254
    Appendix 3. Letter dated August 26, 1976, to Chairman Pastore, JCAE, from Administrator Seamans, ERDA, commenting on proposed legislation
        Page 255
        Page 256
    Appendix 4. Letter dated September 13, 1976, to Chairman Pastore, JCAE, from Administrator Seamans, ERDA, with comments and suggested amendments to H.R. 15419
        Page 257
        Page 258
        Page 259
        Page 260
        Page 261
        Page 262
        Page 263
        Page 264
        Page 265
        Page 266
        Page 267
        Page 268
        Page 269
        Page 270
        Page 271
        Page 272
        Page 273
        Page 274
    Back Cover
        Page 275
        Page 276
Full Text
~- I

r'~ / ~










Printed for the use of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy




80-326 0



JOHN 0. PASTORE, Rhode Island. Chairman
MELVIN PRICE, Illinois, Vice Chairman
JOHN V. TUNNEY, California GEORGE E. BROWN, JR., California
HOWARD H. BAKER, JR., Tennessee JOHN B. ANDERSON, Illinois
GEORGE F. MURPHY, Jr., Executive Director
JAMES B. GRAHAM, Assistant Director
WILLIAM C. PARLER, Committee Counsel
JAMES K. ASSELSTINE, Assistant Counsel
FRANCESCO COSTAGLIOLA,Professional Staff Member
NORMAN P. KLUG, Technical Consultant
STEPHEN J. LANES, Technical Consultant
BEVERLY A. BAUGHMAN, Research Assistant



Thursday, August 26, 1976 -------------------------------------------1
Tuesday, September 14, 1976 -----------------------------------------23

Pastore, Hon. John 0., Chairman, Joint Committee on Atomic Energy:
Opening remarks -----------------------------------------------1, 23
Brush, Peter N., counsel, International Office of the General Counsel,
Energy Research and Development Administration ------------------- 34

Amendments to S. 1439 adopted by the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee -------------------------------------------------------11

1. Legislation:
S. 1439 [as reported (S. Rept. 94-875) to the Senate by Mr. Glenn of
the Senate Committee on Government Operations, May 13, 1976]:
"Export Reorganization Act of 1976" ----------------------------54
S. 3770: "Nuclear Explosive Proliferation Control Act of 1976,"
introduced in Senate August 25. 1976 -----------------------------91
H.R. 15273: "Nuclear Explosive P~roliferation Control Act of 1976,"
introduced in House August 25, 1976 ----------------------------123
H.R. 15419 [as reported (H. Rept. 94-1613) to the House by Mr. Price,
the Vice Chairman, JCAE. September 18, 1976] : "Nuclear Explosive
Proliferation Control Act of 1976" --------------------------------156
S. 3853 [as introduced and reported (S. Rept. 94-1336) to the Senate
by Chairman Pastore, JCAE, September 29, 1976] : "Nuclear Explo-
sive Proliferation Control Act of 1976" ----------------------------219
2. JCAE memorandum, (latcd August 24, 1976 on legislation relative to pro-
posed Nuclear Explosive Proliferation Control Act of 1976 -------------252
3. Letter dated August 26, 1976, to Chairman Pastore, JCAE, from Admin-
istrator Seamans, ERDA, commenting on proposed legislation ----------255
4. Letter dated September 13. 1976, to Chairman Pastore, JCAE, from
Administrator Seamans, ERDA, with comments and suggeste(l amen(d-
ments to H.R. 15419 ------------------------------------------------257


Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2013

OF 1976

Washi/gton, D.C.
The Joint Committee met at 1:45 p.m., pursuant to notice, in room
S-407, the Capitol, Senator John 0. Paste (chairman of the Joint
Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Pastore, Jackson, Symington., Baker, and Case;
and Representatives Price, Young, Ronealio, MeCormack., Brown,
Anderson, Lujan. and Horton.
Also present: George Murphy, executive director; James B. Graham,
assistant director; William C. Parler, committee coul1sel : and James
K. Asselstine, assistant counsel.

Chairman PASTORE. First of all, I want to thank the members for
appearing in such large numbers. This is rather extraordinary and
unusual. I am very happy for that because the requirement is that
when we report out any legislation we have to do so by way of a
quorum. I am glad to see that we do have a quorum here.
Gentlemen, the matter before us today is a very simple one to
explain. A bill was reported out by the Government Operations Com-
mittee of the Senate known as S. 1439, which was an amendment that
was entitled the Export Reorganization Act of 1976, but in fact it
encroached to a very large extent on the function and jurisdiction of
this committee as provided for by law. But that was not an nilportant
element for the simple reason that the members of this conuuiittee are
not subject to that kind of sensitivity, especially when it means that
we are dealing with a public interest. But there seems to be a seinsitivity
on the part of some of the members of the Senate Government ()pera-
tions Committee who are quite anxious that whatever legisi atioli passes
bears the mark of that committee insofar as the title is concerned. But
that is not very important to me.
The fact still remains that S. 1439 as introduced in the Government
Operations Committee and as reported out by that committee is a bill
that was strenuously opposed by all the agent ies of tle (ioVe,1ruviient.
I think in that we are in accord. So when we held our hearing s here
we did it in sort of an informal way, but it was a public hearing

whereby we brought in all of the heads of the various agencies to find
out if we couldn't hamnmer out something that was satisfactory here.'
We are on the threshold of adjournment. I hope sine die. I am now
in the twilight of my tenure. But we instructed the staffs to get to-
gether and jut somiietiing together that might be acceptable. We
worked out a plan and we reported it to the committee. We are ready
to report it out. Then some objection was raised by the members of
the Government Operations Committee to the effect that there was
one section in there that had to do with the criteria which specified
after 18 months what the criteria had to be in any of these exports,
plus the fact it gave the President of the United States the power
bv Executive order to make changes with reference to the criteria,
if he saw fit.
If he did make those changes, those changes would have to be re-
ferred back to the Congress and the Congress would have the right of
Now, frankly, I wouldn't want a President who would be stupid
enough to sign that kind of a bill. I never heard of the Congress
vetoing that kind of action. I never heard of the Congress vetoing
the actions of the President of the United States, only by way of
overriding a veto already instituted by the President.
The fact still remains that we talked about this to some extent, and
this is the agreement that we reached, and I hope it would be accept-
able to this group.
The agreement that we reached, I am going to have Bill Parler
explain this. We would still state the criteria in section 15, still make
it subject to the President making some modifications or extensions, if
he saw fit, but instead of giving to the Congress the right of veto, the
President would only be required to notify the Congress, the appro-
priate committees of Congress, exactly what he had done. I think that
would be constitutional.
That is where the matter stands today. So the question that we
have to decide, because we have up to the 31st of August to do some-
thing about the bill, S. 1439, that was referred to us, my suggestion
would be that we would have to report that out unfavorably and that
we would report our compromise as a clean bill.
Now I would like to hear from Mr. Parler, Joint Committee
Did I explain that correctly?
Mr. PARLER. Yes.
Chairman PASTORE. Do yOU want to add anything or elaborate on
it as to what the criteria is and all that sort of thing? Will you do
that for us?
Mr. PARLER. There are two sections in the bill that deal with
criteria. The section that the chairman has been talking about is sec-
tion 15 on page 18 of the draft that is before you.
Representative PRICE. ill you let us know what you are working
from? ? You are not working from S. 1439 ?
1 S. 1439: Export Reorganization Act of 1976, hearings before the Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy, June 22, 1976 (printed as Vol. I; and July 28 and August 31, 1976,
Vol. II.

Ir. l :. I alal workin2t'r,,ll le 1liilea(')1 JllieI copy of i he b ill,
\W ii( i s lie i(Ielit ical ver'siol fl lie l)ri11te( i bill.
I (epreselit at ive 1 l\IA('k. Tliis is ile ole that a vs -,S. )877() a1(
H.L L,)2 ,,. id1Ilt eal oil the tol1) line
Mr. PARTu. That is (,oriect.
Representative MA( '( )Oltri'K. 'I'lis is 11o0w ilie velsiol () f lle bill t1l11a
is before thiscoiiii ttee : isthat co re( t
Mr. P. I.Tlilit is tie versi, ( of the slil ) t-it ue bi I1: yes.
Representative ...( (.OIAC. 'I Tllat is not tlie saulle as We (ceive(l ill
our offices 2 days ago?
Chairman 1asTo1r:. That is riglit. I list got tlrowil) expllaili12.
Mr. Atum11Y. 'I'lat is correctc, it is not. As ilie clia ii-mail explaiiie(I,
the new one has a substitute that Mr. Parler. ttle committee couunsel,
is about to elaborate on.
Representative PRICE. This is a revision of tlat one ?
Mr. Munuly. Yes, sir.
Chairman PASTOn. Only with regard to one element tliat I just
explained. It. is the same bill thlat was 21 veil to you sevei' 1 (1I1Vs ao
excepting that, once We introduced it iio tle Senate le ii eiu bers of
the Governmuent ( )perations Conmumiittee raise(l some oliction as to
this section that we are talking' about now, and this is whiat Mr. I-arler
is going to explain.
Mr. PARLER. The section that we are talkingz about now in the ver-
sion of the bill that, was cil'culated to all members on Akiiust 24 was
in terms of neg'otiating objectives to the President. tile negotia-ting
objectives that he should follow to try to achieve international agree-
ment with the nuclear supplier countries.
The bill that is before you now. on pao I8, includes those neotiat-
ing objectives as licensing criteria wlich slhall become effect ive 1
months after the date of enactment of this act. unless tle President
otherwise decides to waive those objectives.
Now the licensing" criteria in section 15 are addition criteria to
those that are imposed in a new section 112 that would I)e a(lded 1(e
the Atomic Energy Act. That starts out on page 14 of tie draft before
The difference between the two sets of criteria,, that is. the set that
would become applicable immediately upon enactment of ilie aet -.
Representative AkNDERSON. Sect ion 5 ?
Mr. PAnRim. The new section 112, starts on 14.
Representative ANDE-nsoN. That is the second section*
Mr. PI'xn l. That is the first set of criteria tl at is o1 pa1e 1O.
Repre ;entative Hoii'oi That is section 112. right ?
1ir. PRLER. That is
The 18 months criteria on page 18
Representative ANDiESON. They are all ill one section ?
Mr. PARLER. Yes.
Chairman PASTORE. 'Wh y don't you read it .Bill.
Gentlelmietn, this is what it is. Effective S mont his after i li te of
enactment of this act-
Representative AfcCoR~rx ',. Are you on page 14 ?
Chairman PASTORE. Page 18. right at the top.

Except as provided in subsection (b), paragraphs 1 through 6 of section
112(a) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, are amended to read as
And this is the criteria we are talking about-
(1) Assurances shall be received from nonnuclear weapon states that Agency
safeguards shall be applied with re';pect to all nuclear activities in, under the
jurisdiction of, or carried out under the control of that State.
That is the first one.
(2) Assurances shall be received from nonnuclear weapon states that no im-
ported or indigenously developed material, facility, technology, component or
substance, and no special nuclear material produced through the use of any
imported or indigenously developed material, facility, technology, component
or substance will be used for nuclear explosive devices for any purpose or for
research or development of nuclear explosive devices for any purpose.
This is like the India case on the heavy water.
(3) Assurances shall be received that the recipient country will impose and
maintain physical security measures for all of its nuclear activities which are
sufficient to prevent theft or sabotage.
(4) Assurances shall be received that no imported or indigenously developed
material, facility, technology, component or substance, and no special nuclear
material produced through the use of any imported or indigenously developed
material, facility, technology, component or substance, shall be transferred to
the jurisdiction of any other nation or group of nations unless such nation or
group of nations agree to apply the controls set forth in -this subsection.
(5) Assurances shall be received from nonnuclear weapon states that-
And it goes right on and somebody else will have to read it.
There you are gentlemen.
Representative ANDERSON. May I ask a question at this point, Mr.
Chairman PASTORE. Yes.
Representative ANDERSON. With respect to the first subparagraph
that you read under section 15 (a), I take it that this is not limited to
American exports? The language is all embracive and if a country, for
example, were receiving not only reactors or components or fuel from
the United States but also receiving exports of that or a similar nature
from other countries, that they would be covered under this assurance
as well?
Chairman PASTORE. Mr. Parler, what do you have to say?
Mr. PARLER. That is correct. This is one of the differences I was try-
ing to explain between the criteria that would become applicable 18
months after the date of enactment and the criteria which would be-
come effective upon enactment. That is one major difference.
There is one other major difference; 18 months after the date of en-
actment, all nonnuclear-weapons countries would have to forsake the
development of sensitive nuclear technology capability on a national
basis. Such capability could only be furnished under international
management, auspices, and effective international control. Sensitive
nuclear technology means, for this purpose, technology relating to the
production of enriched uranium or for the reprocessing of irradiated
reactor fuel.
Those are the two major differences between the two sets of criteria.
Representative ANDERSON. May I ask another question at this point?
Chairman PASTORE. You may pursue this at any length.

W)l~el) })V'()5sili" Liut'aiiv \v (,I iII the wor 'lI of1 whii, I 11 \iwarBe at Ilpe
j)wes(ill I li Ie. III ( )I 11l( W idIs. WOe ae i I I iII( tI I(lI I I, l I- I I
Il I uItill ( Il [,('('iI)ielll ( lltrv tI hat is iiI(8j) l)I ( at 1ea-t as of 1owv.
of l )(,III f?( lilledI. 8 re e lot ?
Mr1%. I I I." I. 'hi:nt IS IIIV I Ill- 1 1(Iill1 i\r.AI% Avideioli. 'Ind Ihere(
are two rea sons. a I i(fiierst 1(a1 thelim, for this 1Itl roaceh. The fi Fst
p~renlise 1i 1 t11 pI t t i112 t i le aiiQrfle t (ld critei'la to be(olie effect ive after
18 miolitlhm into the nct aus hiel cr(~ itei'i'lN1 v-Ill t II I te dlIeItI-,
and the 5ecretmv of State seeking" ev(,i l()I(, ,i(r 1,-Velv to )btain
international agreenlent.
I think i te t'oil l)1elll-i e I1 thlat -uIlcl iilterl-iatioial 812T'em'ent i-
I1ikelI to be ohtained becratise of ll Im-i 8jol' lii of e'111cieliiiht, ca-
I~aeity wViihI lie I 'nit ed >tite'. no0w18.
The otliel -uluplier 1111s0145 Well 8> the otlier (ollntrles of the
world which look to the United States for uranium enrichment ca-
pacity will have no choice b)ut to fall in line and agree.
Those are i he pienise>. Sir.
RIep)resentiat i ye ANDERI( )N. I '1)IeI to I W one. Mr. Chai man. who
fav ,)S very m11,tl tle (Ireati o 01 II infte i'a tio al el})oein (). facil-
ity. Indeed. I have even written a letter somiie I O Lt ) o. l to) the
W'lite II[o-i(s Inri'jn" t hat siulel: I)llt I do have to iuse a little bit
about tile posililitv of eeiinc that all coniie to pass in 18 il ontlis. and
I woi lei' at the vis(loii. tlielv-ere. of inserting a requirement that i>
certainly .ased on faith and hope and(l (a1itv andt a lot of otleir ttiii ig>
I jst think t1i i a little hard for me to (rax1).
I dout want to belal)or the point but I went over the siuIIiarv tlal
the staff provided us with S. 377 and HII.R. 15"273 and I note 1On
pace 2 and sull))aIaral)ll ( c) (md ((). for example. that it reads that
tie initiatives wlie h the Initel States shall institute imilediatelv to
endeavor in con(.ert-I underline those wordz-in concert with other
nation> to stn'enlchen tile 1l'ectiv(, es- of the IAEA. and so on. initia-
tives which tle Inited States shall inniediatelv instit ute with other
nations to achieve international aorieement on security standartI8;(1 m

When I read this section 15(a) that M[r. Parler has been talking
about tlhat lhe6ins on page IS. it seenied to me that rat-her th(an 1 rovid-
in( that they be effective 1 months after the enactment of the at.
that we ou2'hlt to a(lo1t the same philosophy tft tlese otihe r a i If lt le
bill to which I just referred a1d proviale that they woul(t c romlie into
effect when tlere was a lindling international agreenient wit'Ii oilier
supplier national. and thlat Ihen we charo'e tle adinist ratnit 8m nild lie
executive 1 ranch with tll(. solemn responsil)ility of gettill2 IoLn't hel.
institution) innieoliatelv the etflort. in (10lil001 wilAI th1 ,ilt 1011. to
arliieve aoreenwiit intl atonallv on crierif"a of thlis kind. :(o lof jllst
tile Ui ta es 1t all 0)t l eie coi l lties deal ini in nu r earo p('Ihllf se1t
and nuclear teclmiolo~rv n11( so oil. Nvoilld be 1 oluml I ~v crIio e ill 1
('haillIIan PAs'r )18E. B] (loesnlt thi s ,_o a step furtlier. Mr. Pmrler.
with rear( to 1 irenses frao e(1 fr AnIriauI exports to ('ei 11 oui-
1 See app. 2, p. 252.

tries? After 18 months these will be the predicates of the requirements
upon which a license can or cannot be issued of American exports.
Isnt that true ?
Mr. PARLER. That is true, sir, but--
Chairman PASTORE. In other words, we will have, before we could
grant a license, let us say, to "X" country, we would have to have an
assurance from that country that they come within the purview of
these sections that we have just talked about?
Mr. PARLER. That is correct.
Chairman PASTORE. Otherwise the license cannot be issued?
Mr. PARLER. That is correct.
Chairman PASTORE. Unless the President of the United States modi-
fies any one of these requirements and so notifies the Congress- is that
Mr. PARLER. Yes.
Chairman PASTORE. Gentlemen, you see what we are up against?
It is a terrible pragmatic problem. This bill., the original bill S. 1439,
was reported out on the floor of the Senate and it was referred to
this committee and to the Foreign Relations Committee because it
falls within the jurisdiction of their committees. Now we are up
against the fact that under the order of the Senate. we have to report
this bill back, this S. 1439. we have to report that back by August 31.
That bill I will tell you very frankly goes much. much too far; and
even if we expended any time on it, it would be vetoed. We were told
very distinctly it would be vetoed. The big question is on the
If we don't agree on some alternative apart from S. 1439, the only
thing that will be at our disposal is the ordering out of the bill that
was referred to us, you see, with an unfavorable recommendation.
Now the next question is what will happen on the floor of the
Senate once that happens unless we have an alternative? And that is
what this is all about.
So the point that you raised, John. is a good point but I don't think
we have the time between now and August 31 to work that all out.
Senator SYMINGTON. Would the Chair yield ?
In addition to which Senator Pastore was very firm with the Gov-
ernment Operations Committee that the President should not have
any congressional restraint so long as he declared whatever he did
after 18 months was in the national interest. That is part of the bill.
So that there is a little theory in the 18-month -position which
there was not before this compromise was agreed on. and otherwise our
chairman said he would not go for it.
Chairman PASTORE. You see. the argument that is being made, and
it is a good argument being made by them. this is rather strict, no
question at all about it. but they feel that if we bind ourselves in such
a way that we recognize the p roblem of proliferation and the safe-
guards that are connected with theft, sabotage. and what have you,
that that might be a basis for other nations to come about and co-
operate with us in this regard and make it a universal method of
Now if they didn't come along with us on an international basis
then the President would have this authority at his disposal to act
in the national interest.

In other words, if these restrictions were such that we would lose
competition in the inarket, because other people would take advan-
tage of the fact that we ere,"' tying ollr h1an ds witil strict rii Jes and!
yet at the same time they were at liberty to act any way tiey wantedI
to, the President would still have the right under this bill to make
the modification.
Representative ANDERSON. If I may, there is one other constraint
here that puts us in a very difficult position as a committee. silrely, and
that is, as the chairman knows, we have been promised. I think )v the
middle of September. a report from this interacrency task force set 11)
under Robert Fri. Deputy Administrator of ERM)A. who h)as been
gathering in the opinions, as I understand it, of all the various ajren-
cies that deal with this problem within the executive branch. That
ought to be a very useful report., I would think, to factor into our de-
liberations and evolving the kind of policy guidelines that we want to
put into basic legislation, which is really of fundamental importance to
the country and indeed to the whole world.
Chairman PASTORE. You can do that in the 1lHouse l)v ainendingy the
bill which would be before you.
Representative ANDERSON. I realize that.
Chairman PASTORE. If we reported a bill out. Mv problem is what
do I do about reporting unfavorably a bill reported here without hav-
ing an alternative to it ? And in this day and agre. with the eiiotions
being what they are, I am afraid S. 1439 in that event would have a
chance of passing unless this committee stood up and said we have
something that is better.
Representative MCCOR-MACK. I want to sympathize very much with
the problem you are expressing but I alm curious to know. wouldn't it
be possible to request some additional time from-I the Senate for con-
sideration by this committee of the entire matter, particularly in view
of the study that is being carried out by the administration under the
direction of Bob Fri?
I am -sure that the chairman is sympathetic to the fact that we as
members of the committee, particularly on the Hoiise side. have not
been involved in this matter and we received one version of this bill
the night, before last and another version today. and giving all due
credit and all respect and acknowledgement of the sincerity of the
chairman and everybody else involved, still the Member-s of tHie House
haven't had any opportunity to study or consider or debate this bill
or to understand what its implications may be.
I am sure the chairman is aware of the letter.1 I dont know how
many other members received it. I requested a copy of tlie analysis by
ERDA on this bill. and this is dated today. and I take it that he is
referring to the modificationQ that have been made since the previous
draft that we received. And he is saving- "in our jud!:ment. however.
the August 24 draft bill," which I presume is the draft tlat is before
Does not represent a significant improvement over the earlier draft since it
fails to meet the majority of the concerns which we have reviously expressed.
In particular, the bill would still appear to establish inereasirily figid export
licensing criteria, which, if enacted, woldl result in a (ie facto moratorium on
U.S. exports.
ILetter dated Aug. 26. 1976. from Robert C. Seamans, Jr., ERDA Administrator to
Senator Pastore. See app. 3, p. 255.

Then he said:
Imposition of the imposed criteria in section 14 of the August 24 draft-
which would be effective immediately-as statutory licensing conditions would
make it impossible to license the export of the nuclear reactor or fuel under
many current agreements for cooperation.
Then he talked about the various agreements, whether there would
be partial or total disagreement, but points out this would infringe
upon agreements with Canada, the International Atomic Energy
Agency and Euratom, and then he says another immediately effective
criteria concerning replicated facilities would not be met in any of
our current or proposed new agreements for cooperation.
Then he says export criteria which substantially hinder our ability
to act as a reliable nuclear supplier will serve to call into question the
fundamental basis of the nonproliferation treaty.
I think we all certainly are aware of the fact that the handle that
we have on nonproliferation is the ability to supply nuclear fuel, and
if this bill as Administrator Seamans says in his previous letter, would
impose an effective moratorium on nuclear exports, at the same time
it seems to me it weakens our position with respect to any ability to
impose any sort of cooperation or to obtain any sort of cooperation as
far as nuclear nonproliferation is concerned.
I wonder, therefore, the question immediately raised is whether or
not the bill is not self-defeating as it is drafted.
I don't know what the answers to these questions are. The question
is raised, I put it that way. My point is I think everyone of us wants
to report out a bill, but the fact is we are dealing with something here
that is immensely complicated, on which the administration is pres-
ently doing a study, which will be available in about 2 weeks, that we
have a written letter today coming to us dated today saying this would
be extremely damaging to the position of the United States and call
into question our relationships with the other nations. And quite
frankly, Mr. Chairman, I don't see how I can vote on legislation that
we simply haven't had an opportunity to study and to have hearings
on, and I would like to'most sincerely suggest that the committee
request additional time as is necessary to hear the administration's
report, to have in depth hearings, to understand all the various points
that are presented by the involved agencies and individuals, public or
private, and to then try to resolve this by at least understanding what
the options are and what we can do.
We want to put out a responsible bill but I must say I am sure that
I, in spite of my efforts to get a handle on this with everything else
we are doing, find myself just hopelessly at a loss to treat it intelligently
and responsibly at this time.
Chairman PASTORE. Let me answer you this way. No. 1. on the
extension of time, I was already able to get that extension once,
up to August 31, and that was given to me very reluctantly. The only
way I can get you a new extension is by unanimous consent, and I can't
get it.
The thing I am confronted with, if we follow your plan, is to report
out the bill before us, S. 1439, unfavorably, and let us take our chances
on what happens.
Now, I don't care what you gentlemen decide to do in the House
because that is your prerogative, and I think you have a perfect right

to study the bill and understand all of its parts before youi actually
cast a vote. But. von see, S. 1439 is not b efore thbe Itoiie. S. 14819 is ju1st
before the Senate.
Now, I suppose the answer here would be that iniider the eircuL I-
stances if you wanted mi ore tinle with relation to tilts being reported
out by this conmilittee to the Iouise, allow is to report out 1naliiulmously
on the part of the entire Joint ( 'oniit t ee, S. 1l,11'. if kaxvoraldf vy am1in
allow the Senate, -you see, to suggest what we eaii work out today as a
substitute and then take it front there.
Senator BAKER. wouldl d I say a word before we break for this roilcail
I understand from Senator Symi ngton that Secretary Kissinger
will be before the Forein Relations Coumminittee at his own sugg'Oestion
at 3 o'clock this afternoon. Now, I think that all of us would be well
served to hear what I)r. Kissinger has to say. Obviously all of us aren't
members of the Foreign Relations Comuittee. Pretty clearly I think
we could attend, or some of us could. At least we would know what his
statement is going to be after the 3 o'clock meeting.
Frankly, as far as I am concerned, I think I an not 1prepa red 1o
state any opinion on this subject until I hear what the Secretary has to
say. I don't know what he has got to say. I don't know what attitude
he will take. I know I want to know his point of view.
I would suggest that we postpone any action until after that 3
o'clock meeting.
Senator SYMINGTON. If the chairman will yield.
I am not sure that Dr. Kissinger made a request to come up on this
particular issue. I know that we have requested him to come up a
couple of times in the Foreign Relations Coinmittee that lie hasn't been
able to keep the schedule as originally agreed.
The Foreign Relations Committee passed 8 to 1 the bill that Senator
Pastore is presenting to us today with the two aiiendmets that give
the Foreign Relations Committee knowledge of agreements or treaties
that are made. It has to go there because it is increasingly clear that
there ought to be some formal agreements on this desperate effort to
control nuclear proliferation. Those amendments the committee passed
with one dissenting vote, which was the dissenting vote of 1)r. Kis-
singer on the bill, and we were going to bear him liOis a afternoon.
The time element being so important, at 3 o'clock we will be able to
see what, if anything, he wanted to say on that, although he was com-
ino up on some other matters.
representativee YouNG. Mr. Chairman, I have a long-standing ap-
pointment at 2:30 which will necessitate my leaving.
I simply want to state I concur in the view that this matter ought to
be postponed and I want to associate mnylelf with the reniark made
by Mr. MeCormack. I, too, am not opposed to the bill but I think that
I am not ready to act on it at this time.
Chairman PASTORE. We have to alet on the bill that is before us. that
was referred here, S. 1439. We have to do sometlinr about that. T
cannot be in disobedience of the Senate. Ae have to fish or cut bait on
S. 1439.
Representative HORTON. 11r. Chairman
Chairman P.xs'roIw. We all aIgreel that S. 1-139 we are against.
Representative ANDE.RSON. No. Mr. Chairman

Chairman PASTORE. What am I going to do with it? I have to report
it out.
Senator SYMII-NGTON'. I am certainly not against it.
Senator BAKER. You don't have to do it before 3 o'clock.
Chairman PASTORE. No. The point is time is running short and I
don't think you can get a corporal's iiard here after 3 o'clock and I
know what Kissinger is going to say t)ecause he has already talked to
me on the phone. He is against this provision and so is Bob Fri who
speaks for the White House. They are against this provision.
Representative Ro-NCALIO. If they are against it may I be on record
as being for it?
Representative MIcCoRM:ACK. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that this
committee follow your suggestion and do report S. 1439 unfavorably
but with a statement that we are forced into this position because of
the constraints of time and that we would like to have an opportunity
to prepare an alternate to the bill to be considered. In other words,
meet the requirements set by the Senate to report back on S. 1439 and
say we are reporting unfavorably and that in another 2 or 3 weeks we
will prepare legislation that we will submit to the Senate.
Chairman PASTORE. Well, the only trouble with that, what if any-
body gets up, like Stuart Symington, and says I move to amend S.
1439 by offering this substitute.
Representative MCCORMACK. Then it would be Senate action only.
Chairman PASTORE. What do you say is the intent of the Joint
Representative MCCORM-ACK. Then you can say the Joint Commit-
tee has not taken
Chairman PASTORE. Can I say go see McCormack?
Representative MTCCOR-MACK. Ultimately, yes.
Representative PRICE. May I say in relation to the House, I think the
House Members are justified in the position they are taking because
today is actually the first time we had an opportunity to see this.
Representative HORTON.' Are you going to come back and have more
discussion on this?
Chairman PASTORE. Let's come back.
[A brief recess was taken.]
Chairman PASTORE. All right, gentlemen, the question before you
now is what is your desire on S. 1439 as referred to this committee from
the Government Operations Committee?
Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman
Chairman PASTORE. Mr. Baker.
Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I have listened carefully to not only
the substance of the discussion today but to the dilemma that you de-
scribed from the procedural standpoint. I think there are good points
stated by our colleagues in the House with respect to their opportuni-
ties to understand and evaluate this provision. There is certainly a
dilemma of major proportions in terms of the responsibility of the
Joint Committee to report within a time limit to the Senate.
Now, this isn't a very happy way to dispose of an issue but I am
absolutely convinced that given these factors, there isn't but one realis-
tic way for ,is to dispose of the issue, and when it is in order I will move
that S. 1439 be reported unfavorably.


Chairman P-ST(-)RE. Yom- motion i;z M order. An v (lil-5i01
Zenator 2YM I N rT I. iMlr. Ciairma1. befor e We 11 tove to vote ol1 t lat
I woi li 1e to 1) re nt to t il e ,011 i it e e w itl g m a r ect t le ai, lii'id-
ments to S. 14:19 which weP "I aot)te( tIV. tie lOei, I Ig 1atills (Co h i-
Inittee and wIli(lh I presel'lte~i to t{wile (.IairIll ye,-terlay.
[Material referred to follows:]

Subsection 123.d. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, a ainended, ik amended
as follows:
(a) Insert after the word "President,- the words "and any recommendations.
views and staItenients sulinitted t the President in a.'cordanee with sulsieetion
a. of this ser.tion,'" and
(b) Striko all of the lan-age, in the first sentence a fter the woid- "has been
submitted to the Congress'' and insert in lieu there if f llowin- : -and referred
jointly to the Jo int ('i ninittee on Atomic Energy for its ioo-idera tif of suich
matters as fall within its juris(liction under Section 202 of this Act and to the
Committee on International Relatiois of the IHouse of Reiire ,entativeI and the
Committee on Foreign Relations o)f the Senate for their c rnleration ,if all
other matters and a period of sixty days has elapsed while Congress is in
session (in comIputing, suh sixty days, there shall be excluded the days on whioh
either Hoise is not in sessuaiini be( aiise of an adjournment oif m ire than three
days), but any such proposed agreement for colperati}n sill wit 1 (bonlle effec-
tive if during such sixty-day period the (on.res" l asses a ciincurrent resolution
stating iil sfl ista, nee that it does not favi}r the Ii dse(t arenien t fo r coti qera-
tion Provided, That prior to the elapse of the first forty-five days of any such
sixty-day period such committees shall sibnit reports to the congressss (if their
views and rec( nmiend:itions respecting the prcqoiised a agreement, and an a(,com-
panying proposed concurrent resolution stating in subhstance that the (o,,ngress
favors, or does not favor, as the case may be, the Prop~osed agreement for
In Section 10 ('on page 11) immediately after the words "the Joint Comnmittee
on Atomic Energy" insert a comma and "the ( 'ommittee o n Fo)reign Relations of
the Senate and the Committee on Internationail Relations o)f the House (if
Representatives". In such section. strike out "that Comimittee" and insert in
lieu thereof "such committees".
In Section 17d. (on page 27) after the word "Joint Comimittee" insert the
following- "and the Committee on International Relations of the !touse (if
Representatives and the Committee on Forein Relations of the Senate".
Senator SYMIIN-GTON. The amendments have one basic 1)u I)oze, to
allow the Senate Foreign Relations Conmmittee and the llon-e Inter-
national Relations (' iimiittee oversirljt of itliciea I' agreehIents for
We are getting ourselves into a situation here where anv agreement.
any treaty, in the nuclear field is basically one of tile Illost iliport ant
aspects of the world (levelopment tolay. There iv no qlIe-t ion about
that. A great scientist said to ue the other day. -I wish I (tii.l't ave
anv children." Aid under these ,ir'nh1ltae. of what is halpnini
in this nuc-lear fiel-rer'a, lesss of \vlit 1)11Nt' t lie al llll iii vt]Pa-
tion-1I think the Foreign Relations Coinmittee in bioth lIou-,es should
have a right of review if cooperate MI is in tl e fIonf or of a tr ,5 o1
formal agreemnnt. ()therwise vonl cou]{l ,ayve a -it t181i> wIliitx woild
be very bad from the standoln)oit of the unII( sti1and1ii that hllo-c com-
mittees (T0 review treaties and formal agreement-.
Chairman PASTORE. The onrly t him i t i is. St nan. 1,1ler tlie law
any treaty goes to the Forel in ie1at o ii- ({o iitt ec. it doe-itt eveni
come to the committee. As a inlatten- of fact, even if it ha to lo with


atomic energy and it is a treaty, the only interventions that we have
is by way of courtesy on the part of the Foreign Relations Committee
extending it to us.
Now, when you talk about formal agreements, heretofore agree-
ments for cooperation have come before this committee and the proce-
dures are pretty well spelled out in the law.
Now, would you say that in this particular case we can't take action
in the Joint Committee until such time as we get authority from the
Foreign Relations Committee?
Senator SYMINGTON.. Let me go back and try to explain.
When I came out in effect pretty new from the Pentagon over into
the Senate I went to the chairman of the Armed Services Committee,
a very fine gentleman, and said to him:
Leverett, I think this whole matter of nuclear energy is going to be of para-
mount importance shortly in the whole question of weaponry, and the Armeu
Services Committee literally knows nothing about it.
And he said "if you want to know my position on it, Stuart," he
said. "this is so secret that I don't want to know about it., and I don't
think this committee should know about the details of nuclear power."
This was 25 years ago. There has been this veil of secrecy.
In the Foreian Relations Committee at times we would get informL-
tion. One of the reasons I went on that committee was to try to get
more information about what we sit and discuss here today. It was
difficult if not impossible to do that under the act which created the
Joint Atomic Energy Committee.
Now, you have got a further dilution of whatever is going on in
the executive branch by the NRC coming into the picture, which at
least to some extent attenuates. divides authority with the new agency,
ERDA, both agencies being created from the old Atomic Energy
Also, you have assessments such as the group with Dr. Kistiakow-
sky-who was President E[isenhower's No. 1 man-recently in Boston.
Five scientists got together, led by Dr. Kistiakowsky, and said in their
opinion nuclear war was not a possibility before the year 2000, it was
a probability. These are men who understand the subject far better
than I do. They are nuclear physicists.
I would hope that inasmuch as we have seen a tendency toward
agreements-this certainly doesn't bear on any one administration-
an agreement in effect should be a treaty. I hope that in the future as
we get into this vital problem of stopping proliferation, we realize
these treaty aspects. For example. we have the question of Canada's
reactor and our heavy water with respect to India. we have the ques-
tion of the reprocessing plant being given to Brazil. I personally asked
the Secretary of State, how did you let, the Germans make that deal
with Brazil? His answer to me was: "We did our best to prevent it."
Three days later the Chancellor of Germany said lie had no criticism
of the deal with Brazil from anybody at any time. That is on the
Now. you have the French offering a deal to the South Koreans,
which I believe it is fair to say we were able to prevent-maybe-it
depends on how things go. Because of a little amendment that we got
into the foreign assistance bill, the State Department is saying to the

Paklstanis that unless they agI'eed to the terms offered bv the United
States they could no longer ret aniv 1iilitarv or ecoiiomic aid. I noticed
Secretary KIs,;-iugei' 0 Iel lidi> in hi llopefillliv elfective pl*( t -i atiolit to
Pakistan at)out obtaiing a complete reprocessing plant.
-Now, the point that I am trying to make is-I am leaving on all
pretty soon-that I hope you realize that you niav not be able to make
any agreement or tr-eaty of ainy substance in tile fur lire, in mv opinion-
I bow to some of you'who know more about the subject than I do-
that doesn't involve the clear field. It has become by far the most
single problem the world faces today. I think tile only chancee of pre-
venting" a holocaust is to have some kind of world agreement regard-
less of whether it eilihratces c untries that dont agrree with our ide-
ologies. so that we have some recognition of this problem on the part
of the people. Probably the best place to develop it. although it is a
rather looked down on agency at this time. is the United Nations. And
I think anything we can do to bring the importance of what we talk
about around this table before the whole world, not just the American
people. would be very important to the future of the world. And it is
with that basis that I wonl(] hope that this committee, a great com-
mittee. would also allow the Foreign Relation Committees of both
houses to also have the opportunity to review agreements for coopera-
tion-because if this doesn't involve international relations. I am
Representative RONCALTO. Would you yield?
Chairman PASTORE. Will you permit me ?
Representative tOXNCALIO. Yes.
Chairman PASTORE. You know. Senator Symington. there was one
time when this Joint Committee was a most prestigious committee
in the Congress. It is the only Joint Committee under the law that
has the authority to be fully and currently informed on various sensi-
tive matters, including classified information.
Originally, it was constituted to make sure that there would be
civilian power over the atomic bomb, but in 1954 we amended the law
in order to institute cooperative progress between industry and the
Government in the development of the peaceful atom. The' most it-
portant adjunct of that is the authority that we have on bilateral
If you take that away from this committee-and this amendment
proposes to do precisely that-you take that away from this conm-
mittee I am ready to resign. because if mv only jo) here is 2oing to
be to make bigger an( better bombs. I (lo't v. ant to be on this
The only hope that the atom has in the service to mankind is for
peaceful use.
Now, I realize the problems that you stated. but N at you are
actually saying now i7 that this committee is ilicomnpetenit to judge
bilateral agreements. We have no jurisdiction over treaties. We don't
want jurisdiction over treaties. But when you tell Iim- that before this
committee can report out to the floor of tle Senate under thle (ondi-
tions ]aid out in s',ction 12' of the itoi iiIC hewuw\\l y011 say
that we can't do that any further, then what else i> there for us to


Senator SY3fINGTON. Both committees are involved in it.
Chairman PASTORE. You mean after we get through doing it, they
do it?
Senator SYIMTNGTON. We both do it together.
Chairman PASTORE. How do we do it together?
Senator SYMINGTON. The reason I came on this committee is that,
as a member of the Armed Services Committee and as a member of
the Foreign Relations Committee, I could get no information what-
ever on what I began to believe was the most important single subject
in the world.
This is not a legislative committee.
Chairman PASTORE. Indeed it is.
Senator SYMINGTON. In a sense. It is a joint committee.
Chairman PASTORE. It is the only joint committee that has legisla-
tive power.
Senator SYTINXGTON. Then I reverse myself on that. But I found out
the only way I could get information was to join this committee, and
I gave up the chairmanship of a committee to come on here to learn
about nuclear matters. It seems to me that we have got a problem now
with the bill. S. 1439, and so forth. All I know is when you get to talk-
ing with any country in the future. about our relationships with that
country. this matter of nuclear power is going to come up primarily
because of the energy problem. And it seems to me that you make a
sharp line if you say that the Foreign Relations Committee approves
treaties but under the law everybody agrees this committee would ap-
prove the treaty. But to me an agreement in this field is infinitely more
important than probably 9 out of 10 treaties in any other field.
I thought you agreed yesterday to these amendments?
Chairman PASTORE. I go along with the treaty business, but when
you say a formal agreement, you are saving that agreements for coop-
eration, bilateral agreements, with foreign governments, would now
come before this committee, have to sit here for a period of 60 days,
that we have an obligation to make a decision within 30 days and re-
port back to the Congress.
The point here is-what I am saving is that you leave us nothing
else if you take away- from this committee. What else is there?
Senator SY3IN-G TON. I am not advocating any position of relative
importance of committees. I am just presenting to everybody my con-
viction that here is something which is vital and is related to treaty-
making authority in the Foreign Relations Committee. It wasn't
started in this administration or the previous administration, but there
have been an awful lot of things agreed on that we have known noth-
ing whatever about in the past, and they were done as agreements in-
stead of treaties.
Chairman PASTORE. Then you should have amended the law.
Mr. Roncalio.
Representative RONCALO. I lave several questions. the first of which
is the unique parliamentary situation.
Are we about to amend a bill we are about to disapprove and, if so,
why don't we set that to one side.
Senator SYM.NINGTON. That is a very good question. If I may say. all
I did was to present my position, and the more I presented it, the more

I realized that the IHouse Meiniers wer-e righit in pa ing perlhaps we
hal better bypass it, if you see wbat I 11eaii. I1tit I dit wallt to lIy it oil
the table I)ecaulse I tllinik it is goui0 to 1)eco011e stea(dily a inure Iplj)(Wt-
tant matter to the Senate and I wvlld hioie also 4 o)the I iolle.
Ctairinan IA.xs TnE. You see, ilr. Roiwlla1io. tills bill, S. 14,39. was ye-
p)orted out fa vorabily by tle Senate ( oI'erll Ien () e ral ni>( ('olnl iit-
tee. Then it was 1efel( 1 )1 botlh t tlie Seiiate F)reiiI' el ati10)11 ( 'il-
mittee and to us. The Foreign Relat ions ( ikmiilitee has this bill before
them, but the one tlat is before thle Foreuri Relations ( onmiilittee of
the Senate has been amended by the ainendiient- I-oposed bY Stuart
Symington, but they are not in the bill that we lhave ftore us.
Senator SYMIG(.ToN.. That is why I brought it up.
Chairman PASTORE. They are not in the bill we have before us,- they
are in the bill before, tlie Foreign Relations Commuittee.
Representative RONCALIo. I would like the record only to show that
I don't think a sequential referral of an agreement to the Senate For-
eign Relations C(omniittee would so (leo'rolli this Joint C(omnmittee of
any of its jurisdiction or authority that it would make it no longer a
strong and effective committee. I think this committee has seen some
deterioration of its jurisdiction over the past 4 or 5 years. This is a
continuation of that pattern.
Representative PRICE. Do you want to see it continue?
Representative Ro.c.\LIo. I dont like, to see it continue but I happen
to see the substance of this matter as being quite important. An agree-
ment for cooperation mst have, I think, the approval of those corn-
mittees that are in char-e of foreign affairs of our Nation. That is
substantive. I tlink that is the whole point. We have to get 'along with
our colleagues, that is what it amounts to.
Mr. McCormack works on ER _I)A matters this way. You two gentle-
men are saying you are. leaving, but it will not be too many years
before the rest, of us will be leaving. There is not a dark-haired man
on the committee except Senator Baker.
Representative ANDERSON. Speak for yourself, Teno.
Representative RON-CALo. I have none.
Chairman PASTORE. Let me tell you, gentlemen, you are making my
decision look all the happier and the better. [Laughter.]
Representative HoRToN. Mr. Chairman, just for the benefit of the
Members of the HIIouse, I am not in disagreement with the proceduree
that, has been sulerostedl. It is a izood way to resolve the probleni thiat we
have on the house side as far as the proposal that was subiiiitted for
us to look at.
I might say that if the substitute that was proposed here does Cret,
into the Senate you may have a problem. If that does ,et into the
Senate as a substitute, with the letter of Dr. Seamans, if that is a valid
objection that he has raised. then you may fimid, if it ever (rot down to
the White House, that would be the basis of a strong urge for a veto
even of that substitute.
But I bring up another point to advise the Members of the Hlouse
that I understand tlhat tle International Relations Committee of the
House has before it the Export Adninistration Act and this morning
there was an amendment that was propose(! 11v -Mr. al1bloki to that act
which was accepted, which concerns nuclear exports and cooperation.

I don't know, since I have not had a chance to analyze it, what its
effect would be with regard to the subject we are now talking about,
but I imagine it might impinge on that. So we may find that the House
might move through with this Export Administration Act with a
nuclear export and cooperation act which might bypass us, and so I
just mention that for the Members of the House to be alert to make
sure that doesn't happen.
Senator SYMIINGTON. I don't know anything about the Zablocki
setup. It is no jcint movement.
Representative HORTON. I didn't mean that at all. I am just making
the point there may an effort to move by the House side on this and
we ought to watch it to make sure the House is going to refer the
matter to the Joint Committee so we can discuss it: if we get to that
Senator BAKER. If you would yield for one brief minute.
As I indicated to the chairman earlier, there is a probability that if
we report this bill unfavorably to the Senate that at some point either
he or someone else would offer the substitute.
Now, I want it clearly understood, as the chairman understands,
that in view of the objection by Mr. Fri. and apparently the objec-
tion by Secretary of State Kissinger, I reserve all my rights to decide
how I finally want to modify the substitute if it in fact were presented
to the Senate. N nothing is locked in as far as I am concerned in that
respect by voting to report S. 1439 unfavorable. We are not committed
to the support of anything, rather only just to report that bill
Chairman PASTORE. If I were forced to bring up an alternative I
would do it according to the original draft that you received 2 days
Roprecentative HORTON. I would suggest-
Chairman PASTORE. No, question about that.
Representative HORTON. Mr. Chairman. I would suggest that that
is a good starting place for this committee because that is much bet-
ter than the bill that is before the Senate now that we are going to
disapprove. I think we ought to use that as a basis for hearings, and
I would suggest we move forward very quickly because I think that
is a much better approach to the subject than the bill now before the
Senate. I think that would provide an op-Dortunity for some discus-
sion as to what this committee is doing and the concerns this commit-
tee has on this subject.
Representative McCon-AcI. Mr. Chairman. I don't want to presume
to advice the Chair or the Members of the Senate. but I do think that
it would be arnpropriate that in some manner or other the message be
conveyed to the leadership and all the Members of the Senate that in
rejecting S. 1439 we are at the &,ame time informing them we would
undertake hearings and attempt to prepare legislation in the very
near future which we think would be acceptable not only to the com-
mittee but to everybody else.
Chairman P.STOnF. Mr. McCormack. I caWt do that very well. I
will tell von why. I have been negotiating with these people. We had
a hearin" here and everybody was here when I instructed this staff
to work out a compromise.

I don't know whether or not the staff has consulted with you people
or whether You lhav-e ilade it vou!r 1)u llness to (-olslnlt wit i them. I
have been talkino- wit ll tllese people. I am tie guy heinr ordereded every
time I go on le Seiuate floor. Am I a fter all. Gentlemen I don't want
to go there and sav now we are worki lH( n 1 eyisl at ion after we have
been talking about them. I don't care wlet her you agree witl the com-
promise we reached or not. Ihat is your prerogative and I respect
it. But please dout place me in the position of acting rather silly
Tie point is this. All I am asking you gentlemen to (1o is to take
action on S. 14,39 and then from then on everybo(lV is on his own. The
act will speak for itself. If we amended it in the Senate. and we pass
it in the Senate, it comes to the House, and if you fellows want to
modify it or kill it that is entirely ill) to yo.
Representative HORTON. Then that removes from us the j urisdicti1
over this problem once we refer it back., apparently, an(d I dont think
that is the way we ought to proceed. I think we ought to proceed in a
logical way, an objective way, to find out the best legislation.
I have no ol)jection to taking the time to look at this legislation.
The limit of August 31 is put down by the Senate. not by us. I am
willing to have hearings on this bill. Lets get people in and have
them testify and let us decide.
Chairman PASTORE. Frankly, I don't oppose that but you people are
not understanding. The thing I am saving is this. Tie deadline is
August 31. I have to report this thing out one way or another. I am
not binding you people in any way, I am not stopping the hearin~s.
Representative HORTON. You are not going to have any for
us to look at the subject. You say go back and handle it in the Senate
and we will handle it in the House. The Joint Committee has juris-
diction over the subject. It ought to maintain the jurisdiction. It
ought to come out with a sound bill. That is not a sound bill they have
in the Senate now.
Representative PRICE. This committee would not be giving up any
jurisdiction at all. It would be acting on a matter before us now. We
would be takinc- the action the committee desiress to take at tlis time.
If somebody wants to revive the matter all there have to do is drop a
bill in the hopper and the process would start. all over, then we could
have hearings.
Representative HORTON. You have already done that. You put it in
yesterday afternoon.
Representative PRICE. That is not the same matter. That is for a
different, purpose. That was only to have in printed form the thing
you have here now so you know what the thougtlts were and what the
ideas were.
Representative HORTON. That is what John is talking about. That is
the very bill we have before us.
Representative PRICE. Our immediate job, and I think we ought to
proceed to do it, is report unfavoral)lv on the 1ill before us.
Representative \f('( ()RrM '. ("'ain- we at th!e --,(ie t*me 1,' i ~ alo !(er-
inrs on IT.R. 15'273 and S. 37 7) so we can hold hearings to report out
legislation 2


Chairman PASTORE. You may do that and you may start your hear-
ings tomorrow and I appoint you as chairman of the ad hoc committee
to do it.
Representative McCoRMACH. I think it is a responsibility, with all
due respect.
Chairman PASTORE. I want the cat off my back, that is all. All I am
saying is the deadline is August 31. I dont know what the leadership
is going to do. If the people who are interested in S. 1439 prevail
upon the leadership to bring the measure up for debate, then in that
case my question is-my dilemma is-what shall I do?
Representative MCCORMACK. Tell them we are working on it.
Chairman PASTORE. You think that will convince anybody?
Representative MICCORMACK. I think that is at least a legitimate
Representative PRICE. I would like to see a vote made on the motion
by the gentleman from Tennessee.
Senator BAKER. Before you vote let me make sure I have the situ-
ation fixed in my own mind, to make sure I am not proceeding under
a misapprehension.
The compromise, so called, or substitute, was introduced yesterday?
Chairman PASTORE. Yes.
Senator BAKER. It is identified as S. 3770?
Chairman PASTORE. Yes, sir.
Senator BAKER. I understand it was introduced in the House as
well, is that correct?
Chairman PASTORE. Yes sir; as H.R. 15273.
Senator BAKER. That proposal really is still before this committee
even though we report unfavorably on S. 1439. You can have hear-
ings on the bill, you can dispose of the deadline of August 31. You
can do whatever you want to do. It seems to me from the parliamentary
standpoint we are in acceptable shape.
If it is appropriate now I would suggest that we have a vote on
the motion that we report unfavorably on S. 1439.
Representative HORTO.N. We don't have a quorum now.
Chairman PASTORE. You had a quorum.
Representative HORTON. I am not going to make the point.
[Discussion off the record.]
Chairman PASTORE. I wish you would stay until we get two more
here. This may be the last opportunity before August 31 to take this
action, and we must take the action.
Representative LUJAN. Are you going to schedule hearings on the
two new bills or not?
Chairman PASTORE. Well, it strikes me that everybody is in accord
with the bill that was given to you 2 days ago. The only problem we
have here is on page 18. I think what you ought to do, if you want to
hold the hearings, is get Dr. Kissinger and get Bob Fri up here on
this question of page 18 and let's thrash that out. That is the only
thing that is really in controversy here. There isn't that much to it.
[Discussion off the record.]
Representative ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, is it appropriate to en-
gage in any discussion while we are waiting for the others?
Chairman PASTORE. Yes.

Representative ANDERSON. I was going to say I have had some time
to go through II.R. 152T3, which was the compromise version that was
reached within the last day or so. And as I indicated in my earlier
colloquy with you, I have some reservations about parts of the com-
promise, and I call attention to section 15 (a). Frankly, what I would
like to do would be to make those changes, suggest some amendments,
and drop in a clean bill, and that would provide some basis, I would
hope, then, for this committee at the Chair's convenience holding some
Chairman PASTORE. You know Mr. Anderson, Committee Counsel
Parler worked assiduously on this since we met here the first time.
Representative ANDERSON. I know he did.
Chairman PASTORE. lie consulted with all of the agencies. Naturally,
of course, the administration would rather see nothing done at all.
They made that point clear. They said in effect, well, we haven't had
much trouble in this regard., we are watching it very closely, this law
isnt going to protect us it is how we administer our laws already
presently on the books that is going to make a difference.
I think that in recent years we have become a lot more alert to the
dangers that are involved. As a matter of fact, terrorism is a new
phenomenon, as you well know.
Now we are talking about safeguards, we are talking about safety,
we are talking about a lot of other things we never used to talk about,
as diligently, possibly, as maybe we should have.
The fact still remains that a lot of decent people, are rather appre-
hensive about this whole thing and the laxity that has been exercised
from time ot time. Even now I understand the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission has declared a moratorium on licenses. That is a new phe-
nomenon as well.
Now the point is, you see, that with all the work that had been done
we reached a very good compromise. Then Senator Ribicoff and Sen-
ator Percy and Senator Glenn came up to me and said, look, we agree
with everything in your bill but we want these standards or criteria
put in the bill. So we talked back and forth. I said I can't buy that
because it gives the Congress veto power over a directive of the Presi-
dent. And I said it is unconstitutional. So finally they agreed to go
along with the idea that the President would have the right to shape
it down. to extend it, to change it. you see, provided of course, all
he would be required to do is just to notify the Congress as to what he
had done.
Now I don't think it is such a bad deal. I really don't think it is such
a bad deal. But it is true that Robert Fri and Henry Kissinger talked
to me today but Henry Kissinger (lid not talk to me from having read
this, he merely was Ieing guided by what some of the people in his
shop have said.
I tell you. frankly. if we are going to satisfy Bob Seamans and the
administration completely we are never going to get a bill.
At some point there is Yoin to be a little disarreement :l( we will
have to debate this matter on the floor to find out what the will of the
Congress is going to be.
Frankly, I think the only thing that separates us now is this matter
of the criteria. I think if you people want to go into it :1 little more
deeply that wouldn't take too long.


I certainly wouldn't have the time. But I think that any other Mem-
ber will have the time. We will get them up here and find out just how
disastrous this really is. I don't think it is at all.
First of all, this does not come into being until 18 months. You have
an escape hatch here for the simple reason that the President can mod-
ify it by directive. And, third, that act is more or less final unless the
Congress of the United States wants to pass legislation. So you see the
compromise isn't that bad. It isn't that bad.
Now I realize that this committee feels that S. 1439 goes a little bit
too far; it is a little bit too strong. I think so, too. As a matter of fact,
we are told categorically here by the representatives of every agency
that if this bill passed as it was introduced they would recommend that
the President veto the bill, and I think he would. There is a chance even
if we reach a compromise he might veto it. I don't know.
The President of the United States would rather have us do nothing
on this because he feels that this matter is being fairly handled by the
agencies at the present time. I don't think he would objet to some kind
of modification that is mild enough to protect us, that states the policy
as we had already suggested in our alternative.
Representative ANDERSON. My understanding was from talking to
Ir. Fri that rather than their being totally opposed to any action they
were simply asking us to take into account and into consideration the
fact that this task force from the executive branch was going to report
on or about the 15th and that they wanted those conclusions laid before
this committee before we finally decided on the matter. There can be a
difference of opinion on that question.
Chairman PASTORE. All right; what is the pleasure?
The motion before the Joint Committee is that we report back S.
1439 unfavorably. All those in favor of that please raise your right
[Present and voting were: Senators Case, Symington, Baker, and
Pastore; Representatives, Price, MeCormack, Lujan, Anderson, Hor-
ton, and Brown.]
Representative McCORMACK. We would like to request further hear-
ings on this.
Representative ANDERSON. We have a Subcommittee on Interna-
tional Cooperation Agreements, don't we?
Chairman PASTORE. You have another ,meeting here Mr. Jackson is
very much interested in.
Mr. URPHY. That is at 10 o'clock tomorrow.
Representative HORTON. Who is chairman of the International
Agreements Subcommittee?
Mr. NIURPHY. I believe it is Mr. Roncalio.
Chairman PASTORE. He is ready to give it away, too.
Representative HORTON. You appointed an ad hoc committee, didn't
you? I thought you appointed Mike McCormack.
Representative McCoRMAcK. I will do it if you want -me to.
Chairman PASTORE. I am asking Mr. Price. Mr. Price will do it.
Representative M-cCOR3ACK. Monday?


Chairman PASTORE. I will leave it up to him to call a meet in '. I don't
think it is going to be such a difiiiult task wlietli'r or inot wNe a 11'ee lt)01
it or not. I (:lont know. All 1 was trying to expla in i> t1hat w(, have to
report this thing lt by August "I1 if by (chance the leaderslip puts it
down. Natirallv. of course, if tHey don't pit it (lowil anld w., h1ave
enough time for the learlngs we could come out wit!d t l( aIternat iye we
all agree upon. We will recess until further caill of tlie cllair ilian.
[Whereupon, at 8 :10 p.m. tihe comhairittee aljore(L to recomeiie at
the call of the Chair.]


Washington, D.C.
The Joint Committee met at 10:15 a.m., pursuant to notice, in room
S-407, the Capitol, Senator John 0. Pastore (chairman of the Joint
Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Pastore, Jackson, Symington, Montoya, and
Baker; and Representatives Price, MNcCormack, Anderson, Lujan,
Horton, and Brown.
Also present: George F. Murphy, Jr., executive director; James B.
Graham, assistant director: William C. Parler, committee counsel;
James K. Asselstine., assistant counsel; Francesco Costagliola, profes-
sional staff member; Norman P. Klug and Stephen J. Lanes, technical

Chairman PASTORE. We will call this hearing to order.
Of course, I must acknowledge the fact at this juncture we do not
have a quorum. I am hopeful that. we will develop a quorum so that
some action will be taken one way or the other today. The reason for
my anxiety in that regard is the fact that we do have a bill on the
Senate Calendar, the bill that came out of the Foreign Relations Com-
mittee which bore the. title of the original bill that was reported by the
Government Operations Committee of the Senate. As a matter of fact,
the entire body of the bill as it now exists on the Senate Calendar only
bears the title of S. 1439 but the entire context of that legislation was
developed by this committee together with a compromise that was
worked out at the time that apparently was acceptable to the Foreign
Relations Committee and that is the bill that will be considered. as I
understand, some time today if it can be called up for immediate
In the meantime, I understand the Members of the House have been
working on another aspect of the bill and it would be my hope that
this committee, once we constitute a quorum, will have some kind of
vehicle to report to the House so that, no matter what happens, there
will be a possibility of a compromise or a 1)pessibility of at least going
to conference to see if something cannot be worked out.


Now, we met with the President of the United States and we ex-
plained our predicament to him. As a matter of fact, the four people
who are here-well, no: Mir. Brown was not there; Mr. Anderson was
there: Mr. Price was there: MNr. Baker was there; and I was there;
and the President said that he would come up with some guidelines
once the task force that he had appointed would report to him.
I notice in an article, which I consider to be a fine article, by David
Binder today, that the President has indicated pretty much that he is
ready to send up guidelines. He suggested at the time that we wait.
I told the President at the time that I would be willing to wait but
that was predicated on the fact that something needs to be done before
we adjourn sine die because there will be consternation all around un-
less we do something about it.
The ultimate decision, of course, will be up to the President of the
United States as to whether or not he will approve or veto.
The fact remains that in the atmosphere that prevails today some-
thing needs to be done. This is a very complicated subject. I think the
objective is the same on the part of all the people concerned.
What we are trying to do is stop proliferation in a manner that
bombs will not be made from the material that is reprocessed. That is
fundamentally the concern of all of us. Where we differ, of course, is
how do you approch this very complex problem. Do you do it unilat-
erally on the part of the United States and remove itself completely
from this field where by its influence will be lost in dealing with other
supplier nations or do we forthrightly say, well, the devil with it all;
let us do what we think we should even if it means the extinction of the
American nuclear industry?
Now, that may be a very extreme statement but that is the allega-
tion that is being made by the manufacturers in this country. They
feel this will be the beginning of the end of the American nuclear
industry in this country. That is their position.
On the other hand, we have a concerned citizenry who feel that this
matter has been loosely handled bv all of the supplying nations and
the time has come when we have, to put our foot down in view of the
fact that now we have a suspicion that something is going on in Tai-
wan: we have the experience with India: and there is a lot of merit
and logic to the fact that something needs to be tightened up, and I
think we all agree with that. We all agree with that.
So, I would hope. without prolonging this statement of mine, that,
once we gather a quorum here. that I understand Mr. Anderson has
developed some kind of legislation. together with his colleagues. that
we will consider that and if need be report it at least to the House
inasmuch as there is a Senate bill. and. frankly. my own opinion is,
and I am going to say this very, very frankly to my colleagues. I have
been around here for 26 years and if that bill comes up for considera-
tion on the floor, inevitably it will pass and I don't think we can stop
it no more than we can stop the wind.
What you boys do in the House. I would hope that you would do
something so that at least we will have a vehicle wherebv at least this
Joint Committee that has had the experience all over these years will
not be precluded from this consideration.
As the bill now stands. the jurisdiction is assumed bv the Govern-
ment Operations Committee. All they have there is the title. The body

is all ours. If it is passed as a Government Operations bill, there you
are. As far as I am concerned, they are welcome to take it.
Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman PAS'r(M)RE. Mr. Baker.
Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman. I do not want to prolong the dis-
cussion at this issue mduly, b)ut since we (o ot have a (1U01l11l1 I
would like to add a few worls' to those well-chosen conimients you have
just made.
As I told you, Mr. Chairman, I have not agreed to the bill coming
up on the Senate floor today. I have no (loul)t. as you point out, that
the bill can be motioned up and I am not at all sure that I could
prevail. As a matter of fact. I am sure I could not prevail in an effort
against the leadership to prevent that bill from becoming the pending
It is not my present intention, however, to let that occur by unani-
mous consent. Not because I am opposed to some sort of legislation to
control proliferation of nuclear weapons, but because we are talking
about doing something in too much of a hurry.
I have before me a letter I received from ERDA, making detailed
and, I think, very excellent suggestions on the form of legislation to
help control the proliferation of weapons gradually.
I have studied with keen interest the proposal which has been made
by Congressman Anderson and I think it has much merit.
I participated in the hearings and discussions of this committee on
the Government Operations referral and participated in the vote to
report unfavorably the Government Operations bill. I did not par-
ticipate in the formulation of the so-called compromise.
Mr. Chairman. I think in many wvays we are chasing the wrong ghost.
I think that two or three things need to be brought into focus if we are
to deal in a rational way with the threat of nuclear proliferation.
The first is that most of our efforts, including the Nonproliferation
Treatv. in my judgment are relevant to a time at least a decade aro
and have little relevance to the situation today. Proliferation is no
longer a threat : it is a fact.
The second thing is that the derivation of weapons grade material.
whether it is uranium or plutonium. is no longer the necessary under-
taking of great industrial nations or giant consortia of nations with
billion dollar gaseous diffusion plants or centrifuge operations. It is
no longer an engineer's job: it is a chemist's job.
As we know from the very considerable success enjoyed I v our
friends in India, by the presumed success of our fr 1 (eir in Israel. by
the alleged success of our friends in Taiwan. yon doiint have to hae a
giant fuel reprocessing plant or gaseous diflusion operation or centri-
fuge operation to develop a weapons grade material. It is a chenit's
The last thing I want to say is that the U7nited States las very little
leverage left, in my view. There was a time wlien we liad niiiiate
leverage when we were the only nuclear comnntrv in tie world ulit we
aren't any more.
In addition to the so-called nuclear clib, tliere are I (ion t know how
many threshold nations. In addition to lie nuclear 1/atioi> ald tihe
Letter dated Sept. 13, 1976, from Robert C. Seamans, Jr., administrator to Senator
Pastore. See app. 4, p. 257.


threshold nations, there are probably scores of nonnational entities-
I am speaking of great international industrial com)ines-that could,
if they wish, devote the talent and the resources to the creation of
weapons potential.
Now. that is truly a frightening prospect. But I don't think we are
going to contain that threat by eliminating the last vestige of leverage
that the United States has, and that is the leverage we derive from our
role as a potential supplier nation. I think we are rapidly dissipating
that leverage. I think we are rapidly suggesting to the world that we
aren't or may not be a reliable supplier.
So, I think. Mr. Chairman, we ought to give a lot less attention to
the question of how we deal with reprocessing plants, although that
certainly requires a great deal of attention, a lot less attention to the
grand problems of the 1960's, and a lot more attention to the question
of the 1980's.
That question, Mr. Chairman, may be beyond the scope and even the
jurisdiction of this Congress, let alone this committee. It may be, in
fact, that the problem is so serious and widespread, so significant, that
it ranks as one of those problems that come along once every millenium,
once every thousand years, possibly, that civilization has to deal with,
how do you avoid extinction.
It may be that it is even greater in terms of the challenge and the
depth of threat than it was after World War II when we convened
the nations of the world and chartered the United Nations.
Maybe it is time to have another convocation of nations to devise
the machinery and the techniques for the control of nuclear explosives
and to stop burdening our concerns with reactors or reprocessing
plants and start thinking about the totality of the problem.
Mr. Chairman, all this is by way of saying that I don't think we
are nearly ready to deal with this question on the floor of the Senate.
I do not intend to support the original bill.
Chairman PASTORE. I realize the position of my dear friend from
Tennessee, and I agree with a lot of the things he has said, but I think
we have to be a little practical here and see what confronts us, and
understand what confronts us.
You recall the original bill, S. 1439, was reported out of the Sen-
ate Government Operations Committee. That bill was absolutely un-
acceptable, absolutely unacceptable. So much so that when I talked
with the authors of the bill, while they didn't admit it, I think they
acquiesced with that observation; whereuiDon, I called upon Bill Parler
to reshape the bill and he reshaped that bill.
Now, I realize that it is not totally satisfactory to the administra-
tion and to some members of this committee. All I do know is this:
That it is being vehemently pushed by several members of the Senate
Government Operations Committee, including some members of the
staff who want it so badly that they can taste it. As a matter of fact,
they are all in this room now.
That is where it stands.
If this bill is called up, with the motions being what they are, there
is no question in my mind that, in all probability, the bill is apt to pass.
I was very, very muchl disturbed about ogivinr the Congress of the
United States the right to veto an act of the President. It is absolutely

unconstitutional. The lawyers on that (ominlittee must have been lasie
from their reasoning when1 tiley wrote tlt in the t)i 1. No one would
ever buy that.
I wouldn't want a President whose actions wollld be vetoed 1)v the
Congress. They could overrlle hiUn and vote aralnist li nIltItle
veto power under the Constitution }eloins to( the Pres*idet Of the
United States, and nobody else. But tlhey wr()te it in the b)ill.
I finally said. in effect: all riglit. I will go aloi ig with the o,onp1,o-
raise provided von take tlie veto power out and Yoi leave it to the
President of the United States to take whatever action lie wants and
notify the Congress of that action so that the (,oH I.ress then cold
pass whatever legislation they want to pass in order to meet what
they thought should be the proper way of proceedings.
Now, that is where we stand.
Now, it is true if this comes up and unanimous consent is needed
I understand that the Senator from Tennessee will interpose an
On the other hand. I don't think it is subject to a unanimous con-
sent agreement.
I think all the administration has to do or the leadership has to
do is to motion it up. If they motion it up. I understand that the emno-
tions are so strong, in all probability it will pass.
Frankly, because I worked out what I thought was a reasonable
compromise, which is not satisfactory to many menibers of this com-
mittee, I understand-and I am not finding any fault with that: von
have a perfect right to disagree with it-that, in all probability, I
might have to vote for that bill. anyway, if it is called tip.
Then it will go to the House. It will go to the House as a Govern-
ment Operations Committee bill. It won't go to the Joint Comnittee on
Atomic Energy.
This whole ball is being taken right out of the hands of the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy. It is no longer a reorganization. Tt is
not that at all. It is the rewriting of the Atomic Energy Act without
the consent and without the approval of this connmittee.
I am not going to be here next January: you fellows will have to
wrestle with that.
You know. it is getting so the International Relations Committee
of the House has taken a bite out of it: the Government Operations
Committee has taken a bite out of it. If they don't want the Joint
Committee on Atomic Energy. all they have to do is av so.
I am not jealous of the jurisdictional question that i involved in
this but that is the kind of power play that is being used
Let us face it. If you want to call a .)ade a spade. it is a power
I tell you it is going nowhere, because when it gets to the Presi-
dent of the United States I know he is going to veto it. We have
been told that in this room by all the representatives of every ageney.
I am beginning to think that there are some people iii thi Govern-
ment, who would prefer a headline more than a res a a1d vwl ) woiit
have a result here until you work soinethii out that is 'cati act rv.
While it. may be said that they hiave beeni st rUmlin. with this for
a long, long time. I agree with the Selator froi Tennessee. this is


such a complex. intricate, complicated problem that it requires a lot
of time, requires a lot of serious thought.
After all., let us face it. The minute you remove the influence of
the United States of America from the international market in nuclear
energy, you will have lost your hold on this very serious problem and,
second, in all probability we might have lost our influence.
That is the reason why I am a little set back; this is an important
meeting and all we have here is six members. We need 10 members.
Where are the other four?
I am telling you, unless you do something today this committee
will be excluded from the consideration of this legislation and that
will be catastrophic, catastrophic, because this committee has been
very, very much interested in the development of this whole program.
As a matter of fact. I managed it on the floor in 1954 when we
amended the law.
Now, if the function of this committee is only going to be confined
to make a bigger and better bomb. I want no part of it. I repeat that
again. But, if we are interested in developing a second source of energy
with proper safeguards, with complete adherence to the Nonprolifera-
tion Treaty, I think we ought to give that very serious consideration.
If there are any people in the Congress who feel that nuclear
energy has reached the point where it ought to be brought to a stop,
then they ought to have the courage, and. I might say, to use the
vernacular, they ought to have the guts to stand up and just rule it
out. But this idea of getting at it by the back door, by the side door,
by the cellar and bv the attic. I don't buy it.
Gentlemen. that is the situation.
That is all I am going to say this morning.
Representative ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman. if I may, I think largely
for purposes of the record rather than any attempt to restate the
very eloquent arguments that you have just made and the statements
that were made earlier .y Senator Baker. I find myself largely in
agreement with what you have said and with what the Senator from
Tennessee has said.
With me, it is not simply a matter of jurisdictional sensibilities. I
have no particular pride of authorship in H.R. 15419, which is the
bill which, together with Congressman Price. we introduced in the
House of Representatives on the second of September.
But, I would hope that this committee could preserve its jurisdic-
tion over this important question because I do believe that represented
around this table are the many. many years of experience that are
needed to work on legislation as complicated as this.
I could not agree more with Senator Baker that in a sense it is a
problem that is beyond any committee of the Congress: that the world
has changed. and that the United States cannot achieve our purpose
simply by the unilateral promulgation of criteria, which is what the
effect of S. 3770 would be. simply a statement that this is what the
United States would do.
If we could then leap from that to the conclusion that all other na-
tions would follow suit it would be a wonderful world indeed but it
is not that kind of world. We have no assurance that other nuclear
supplier countries which increasingly are gaining ascendancy in the
markets of the world in this area are going to follow suit.


The whole theory and thesis of IT.R. 15419. the bill which Congress-
man Price and I have introduced, is that tillis tias to b e Iv way of liiier-
national arrangement or mutual uidertakings. if vol want to u1 e thlai
term. This has to be the framework on which we bii1ld a triilv efiective
nonproliferation policy.
I would hope, therefore, that we could in this coiimittee mark up
that bill.
I am in receipt, as I know other members of this committee are, of
a long, detailed statement from Dr. Seamans I stating some additional
views on this particular bill, I.R. 15419, akin suoi/estions that. for
the most part, I think are constructive suggestions a, to ways in which
the bill could be tightened and strengthened and alende(d to become
a better vehicle to address this whole subject of nonproliferation.
Obviously, we await the presence of enough members to get on with
I simply state for the record that this bill, together with some
changes that I think can and should be made, to me represents the best
way of addressing this problem.
Representative PRICE. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman PASTORE. Mr. Price.
Representative PRICE. While there is an absence of a quorum of the
full committee, there is a quorum of the House members of the Joint
Committee. There is nothing in our rule that would preclude the House
members from reporting back to the House a legislative matter before
the committee.
I would suggest that the House members entertain that idea of
reporting it.
Chairman PASTORE. I would prefer that you wait just so that the
question won't be brought up. We are absent three members. I would
hope that you would wait on the motion. It is a joint committee. I
don't think you can separate the two bodies except in the case of con-
firmation because under the Constitution that belongs to the Senate.
I think, insofar as reporting a bill out. we would be stretchin. the
law if we suggested that you could do that without a full quorum of
the full committee.
Representative MCCORM1IACK. Can we work on the bill ?
Chairman PASTORE. Yes; you can do whatever yoi want.
You can work on the bill. There is no question about that. You just
cannot report it out without a quorum.
Representative PRICE. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that we do proceed
to consider the bill, the full committee consider the bill. and at suich
time as a quorum is present we take a vote on it.
Chairman PASTORE. That is satisfactory. It is open to von (gentle len.
Senator BAKER. Did I understand Mr. Price to say that we will go
head and work on the Htouse bill bibt make no effort to report a bill
until there is a quorum of the full committee ?
Representative Pratcm. The full committee.
Chairman PASTOmI. I yield to the (list iluuished ('onre sinlln from
Illinois. the vice chairnlan of this comlllittee, to t ake it over at 1 li>
Letter dated Sept. 13, 19- from Robert Seamans, Jr., EIRDA administrator. to
Senator Pastore. See app. 4, p. 257.


point inasmuch as the House has worked on this, and let him act as
chairman for the moment.
Representative PRICE. I would ask the counsel to read the bill so
that members, if they choose, may have the opportunity to offer
amend mients.
Mr. Parler?
Mr. PARLER [reading]:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United State8
of Amcrica in Congress assembled, That this act may be cited as the Nuclear
Explosive Proliferation Control Act of 1976.

Sec. 2. The Congress hereby finds and declares that the proliferation of nu-
clear explosive devices poses a grave threat to vital United States interests and
continued international progress toward world peace and development. Recent
events, including the explosion of a nuclear device by India and the announce-
ment of the transfer of uranium enrichment and nuclear fuel reprocessing
facilities to nonnuclear-weapon states, and the rising technical capabilities of
many nations making possible, and in s ome cases likely, the independent devel-
opment of at least a small scale nuclear fuel reprocessing capability, emphasize
the urgency of this threat and the imperative need to increase the scope, com-
prehensiveness, and effectiveness of international safeguards and controls on
peaceful nuclear activities to prevent further proliferation of nuclear explosive
devices. Accordingly, it is the policy of the United States to---
(a) actively pursue the establishment of effective international controls over
the transfer and use of nuclear equipment, material, and technology for peace-
ful purposes which will prevent the further proliferation of nuclear explosive
devices ;-
Representative BROWN. Mr. Chairman?
Representative PRICE. Mr. Brown.
Representative BROWN. I note we have a number of technical amend-
ments submitted by ERDA, the first one of which occurs in this
I wonder if it would not be appropriate to consider them?
Representative PRICE. Would you read the amendment?
Representative BROWN. It is on page 2, line 14.
Mr. PARLER. The first ERDA amendment is to insert the words
"sensitive nuclear" before the word "technology".
Representative PRICE. Is there objection to the amendment?
The Chair hears none.
The amendment is adopted.
Mr. PARLER [resumes reading]:
(b) insure that the actions of the United States in international nuclear
commerce in helping to assure adequate and reliable energy supplies to other
nations are consistent with the Trealty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons ("the treaty"), the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency
("the statute") and the need to establish effective controls on the proliferation
of nuclear explosive devices through international arrangements and coopera-
tive agreements; and
(c) encourage nations which have not ratified the treaty to do so at the earliest
possible date.
Sec. 3. It is the purpose of this Act to promote the policies set forth above by
insuring effective control by the United States over its exports of nuclear equip-
ment, materials, and sensitive nuclear technology, by establishing a framework
for international cooperation to insure that the worldwide development of peace-
ful nuclear activities as well as the export by any nation of nuclear equipment,


materials, a1( sensitive nuclear technology intended for use in pea ceful nuclear
activities di not c(mitrilute to the proliferat ion of i ,1,le. r eXpi,( i',, devices. anid
by providing incentives to the other nations of the wonl0 to join in such inter-
national loolperative efforts. Accordingly, this Act spe(ilie
(a) pr)vi.SBiins to) insure Ihe full and co n lr lellsiv e alllss l te 1 f I lie risk.: (of
proliferation of mnulear explo.sive devices in the negotiations anid review of a:tree-
nients f Ir' oleral ion a l subsequent arrangements under such a geicult .a
of policies affecting the ln4diferation of nulclearxl~losive devices:
(b) procedulres. under which the Congress will receive adequate mu riiiat ion
and opl(Jo'tulility t( eXallliinO hiIp)o(sed a reelnellts for coopenIatill al il 1lielld-
ments thereto and to review the Iplicies of the United States affecting the
prolifera t ion of niuclea r devices :
(c) licensing criteria which would be applied immediately to all future ex-
ports by the United States of nl(,ear materials. equipment, and sensitive nuclear
technology intended for use in peaceful nuclear activities and which could be of
significance for nuclear explosive purposes:
Senator BAKER. There is a further suggestion on that page. on that
para graph. is there not?
Mr. PARLER. On page 4. line 3, to delete the word 'criteria". and
insert the word %principle".
Representative PRICE. Is there objection to the amendment ?
The Chair hears none.
The amendment is agreed to.
Mr. PARLER [resumes reading]
(d) preferential treatment in the I)rovision of nuclear fuel services t, nationis
which agree to adhere to policies designed to prevent the proliferation of nuclear
explosive devices ;
(e) international arrangements which the United States shall seek to ieao-
tiate with other nations, including the nuclear sulplier nations, to estalblish
Senator BAKER. Would it be convenient for Mr. Parler to identify
the proposed ERDA changes?
Representative PRICE. Do you have the ERDA sheet in front of
you ?
Mr. PARLER. I have the ERDA technical amendments that were
I have another set of amendments from ERDA that were received
at 8:30 this morning. I will read those also.
Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman.
Is it not true. Mr. Parler. that one set is tech1ical aiiien(ments
and the other proposed substantive ameinduients .
Mr. PARLER. That is my understanding. but the am: endvnent I re-
ceived at 8:30 this morning quite frankly I tiavent giveii the pro-
fessional consideration that they wo,,uld deserve.
Representative PRICE. Vhen vou get to the point, mention the tech!-
nical amendment and mention the substantive alhlen(lllleflt. and we
will discuss the substantive amendment.
Chairman PASTORE. May I make a sulIestion in order to expedite
this because. as you read 'it hurriedly. this is not of great assitane
to anyone.
This bill wa; introduced: we are all familiar with it. Let us take
it section by section.
Let us take subsect ion (c).
Is there any objection to it ?
If there is an amendment. we will consider it rather than have him
read it hurriedly.


Representative MCCORMACK. Could we have him explain what each
section does?
Chairman PASTORE. As you come to a section of the bill introduced
if there is no objection to the section as written on the part of a mem-
ber we will go to the next one rather than having this whole thing
read. I don't know who is following it but we are all familiar with it.
Representative PRICE. That is a good suggestion.
I will ask Mr. Parler to follow that procedure.
Let us deal with the last two amendments to be certain that we have
them. Mention where they are and what they are.
Mfr. PARLER. The first amendment was on page 2, line 14, to insert
the words "sensitive nuclear" before the word "technology."
Representative PRICE. That is a technical amendment.
Mr. PARLER. That is correct.
Representative PRICE. Go to the next technical amendment.
Mr. PARLER. Page 4, line 3, to delete the word "criteria" and insert
the word "principle."
That is also a technical amendment.
Representative PRICE. And that has been agreed to?
Mr. PARLER. Yes, sir.
The third: On page 4, line 13, delete the words "international ar-
rangements" and insert the words "mutual undertakings."
Representative BROWN. Mr. Chairman.
Representative PRICE. Mr. Brown.
Representative BROWN. That change which has been suggested which
is a technical change on page 4 occurs at other places in the bill as a
While I am not thoroughly aware of all the issues involved in this
change of wording, I would, personally, prefer to see us retain the term
"international arrangements," although I would have no objections to
including "or mutual undertakings" as a portion of that.
I think there may be a connotation that "mutual undertakings" are
a matter of less substance or less formal than "international arrange-
As I say, I am not precisely sure how the difference may be
Representative ANDERSON. There is a reference to the point that the
gentleman makes in Dr. Seaman's letter of the 13th of September. I
think it would be well at this point to read it:
A second point concerns use of the phrase "international arrangements." As
defined in the Atomic Energy Act, that term does not include Agreements for
Cooperation or other mutual undertakings which are not treaties or other agree-
ments approved by the Congress. As written the bill would thus severely limit the
types of international understandings which would serve as the basis for es-
tablishing future licensing principles to be applied by the NRC.
In other words, I put the opposite construction than the gentleman
from California on this substitution of the term "mutual undertakings"
for "international arrangements." I think it broadens the possibility
to enter into agreements with other countries in an effort to limit
It does, I think, also eliminate the danger that if we insist on using
international arrangements that we leave out agreements for coopera-
tion as that is defined in the Atomic Energy Act.


I know there iiiif-ht be the natural Mclination to tbink that "inter-
national arranreinents" somehow has a nicer ii n- al out it and so1ds
as i it is more important than a mutuall iindertaking
Chairman PST OI)E. AWould(1 voii (reiitlenliei ie V NilliN 1l1 0 I lear from
Mr. POI-ler as te wilat Ie thinlks this (oes or (lt)e] not do?
Mr. PARiE. The piirpose of using the words internationall arran(e-
ments" was to depart from what I understand the pre z ent practices
to be. one of which is to ihllpose in export licenses conditions which
this country thinks should be imposed in order to deal with prolifera-
tion matters. The situation then is that our (lonlestic licensee-the
exporter from this collntrv-presuiablyl, has thle responsibility to see
that the recipient government carries out those conditions.
We are talkin about a situation in which there are exports under
existing agreements for cooperation which, for the most part. do not
include all of the proliferation policies, ol jectives, that presumably
should apply.
Chairman PASTOrE. Do you agree with Mr. Brown that, if we added
"mutual undertaking" in addition to "international arrangements"-
would you consider that in any way to disturb what we are trying
to accomplish?
Mr. PAIRLER. No. because it would preserve the important point that
there has to be a basis for an understanding that the recipient govern-
ment will indeed comply with these requiirements.
Chairman PASTORE. In other words. you agree with Mr. Brown?
Mr. PA iLER. Yes. sir.
Representative ANDERSON. Could I. for purposes of clarification.
\fr. Chairman-I am not sure I understood Mr. Parler precisely-are
you suggesting language to this effect. "mutual undertakings or. where
appropriate, international arrangements".+
Representative BROWN. I was suggesting the use of both terms.
I concur with your view, that we want to make this as encompassing
as possible. I had the feeling that possibly there would be anl effort
to shift certain things which are now the subject of international
arran;,rements and subject to approval by the Senate toward a lesser
status if we didn't include the term "international arrangements."
Chairman PASTORIE. In other words. "international arrangements
Representative LUJAN. Or "other mutual undertakiins."
Representative BRow-N. That was the intention of my suggestion.
Representative PnicI:. Without objections, the amendment is agreed
Representative BIowN. M1Nay I assume that wliere other lainiiafre
occurs in sections
Chairman PASTORE. That that correction be made.
Representative PRICE. Without objection.
Mr. PARLER. The next technical cliance is on page 4. lines 23 and 24,
the words "its agreement with a nuclear supplier nation. its agree-
ment to adhere to international proliferat ion control anid iupervi-
sion." would be deleted and. in lieu thereof, the words. "any material
obligation with respect to the peaceful use of nuclear materials. equip-
ment. or sensitive nuclear technolo yx" woNuld he substituted.
That. again, is a technical amendment.


Representative PRICE. What is the reason for it? Why drop this
language in the bill and substitute that language?
Mr. PARLER. In the absence of any further explanation available to
me from the ERDA, I can't answer the question, sir.
Representative PRICE. How does ERDA justify it? On what basis
does ERDA suggest the change?
Mr. PARLER. All that I have from ERDA, Mr. Price, is a list of tech-
nical amendments without any explanation as to what is wrong with
the present language or what is right about the substituted language.
Representative MCCOR-IACK. Mr. Chairman, the author of this
amendment, Mr. Peter Brush, is with us. He could give the rationale.
Chairman PASTORE. Is he here?
Mr. BRUSH. Yes.
Chairman PASTORE. Come forward, please.

Mr. BRTSH. The purpose of this technical amendment, Mr. Chair-
man. is to attempt to broaden the types of agreements, and types of
undertakings which would be subject to the procedures called for here
in the event of a violation.
Chairman PASTORE. Would you say this is more protective?
Mr. BRUSH. I would say it is broader, Mr. Chairman, and therefore
would encompass more types of agreements which we are seeking to
bring under this section.
Rather than just agreements with nuclear supplier nations or agree-
ments on international proliferation controls. we would like to cover
any material obligation with respect to peaceful uses of atomic energy.
Chairman PASTORE. Isn't that a good suggestion?
Mr. PARLER. It seems to me if you want to broaden something you
would follow the approach that was taken in the earlier technical
amendment that we were talking about. In other words, not neces-
sarily to delete any language but to include the additional language
that would result in the broadening.
Chairman PASTORE. What do you say to that ?
Mr. BRusH. Mr. Chairman. we have no particular pride of author-
ship with this language. The intent was to attempt to bring in a num-
ber of types of agreements.
Chairman PASTORE. I realize that. but what do you have to say to
what lie has suggested?
Mr. Biwsi. If that is the intent of such a change. we would pre-
sumably have no problem with it.
Chairman PASTORE. How does the committee feel?
Representative McCORM[ACK. The more words you have, the worse
it is. We ought to do it as simply as possible. If the recommendation
we have from Mr. Brush and ERDA is broader and does the same
thing, I see no reason to say it twice. I think all we do in that sort
of thing is confuse the legal situation.
Chairman PASTORE. In other words, you would take Mr. Brush's
recommendation in reference to this?

Representative MCCORMTACK. Yes. I would.
Chairman PxsTromE. Does it (10 any violence to tie objective here,
Mr. PA.RLER. No, sir.
Representative MC(ORMACK. I move we accept the suggestion.
Representative PtRICE. Without oI)jeetioll. tle sug-gestio)n of Mr.
Brush will be accel)ted.
Mr. PARLER. )o you want me to repeat the wording t
Representative MCC R)MACK. Yes.
Mr. PARLER. We have this written down here.
Section 4 on page 5, the only technical change that is on that page
is line 20, to delete the word "'sub" before "sections and on line 21
to delete the letters "n" and "v." That is clearly a technical change
and it presents no problem.
Representative PRic:. Without objection.
Mr. PARLER. On page 6, there is a technical amendment to lines 1
and 2, which would delete the words "with all interested nations."
That also presents no problem.
Representative PRICE. Any objection?
.Mr. Brush, if you have any points to raise on any of these, raise
them as we go through them.
Mr. BRUSH. I will. Thank you.
Mr. PARLER. The first substantive change appears on page 6. after
line 2, the following words will be added: "The United States, as a
matter of national policy, shall issue export licenses for or otherwise
authorize export of nuclear materials and equipment upon a determi-
nation that all the applicable statutory requirements are met."
From my standpoint, that change presents no problem.
Representative PRICE. Without objection, the change is agreed to.
Representative -MCoIAIACK. I have a question, Mr. Chairman.
Representative PRICE. Mr. McCormack.
Representative MICCORMIACK. As far as the structulire is concerned,
does this delete any of the material in the existing bill and, if so, what
does it delete?
Mr. PARLER. Later on?
Representative MCCORMIACK. I beg your pardon?
Mr. PARLER. You mean later on?
Representative MCCORIACK. No, right here. Is this inserted as the
introductory statement?
Mr. PARLER. This is an addition.
Representative McCoR.1ACK. Is this the beginning of section 5?
Mr. PARLER. I would assume that is where it would( go. It is not
entirely clear, but I think it would go at the beginning of section
Representative MCCORTACK. So, it is an mtro(tuctory statement for
section 5 rather than a closing statement for section 4 ?
Mr. PARLER. I think that is the way it should be. Tihat is not the way
the amendment was written here.
Representative MCCORMACK. There is some confusion on this point.
We ought to establish what section we are in.
Mr. Brush, do you have it written on section 4 ?
Mr. BRUSH. It was our proposal that it be a concluding sentence on
section 4.


Representative McCoRIVIACK. Then you would not disturb Mr.
Parler's structure for section 5 as far as the introductory statement?
Mr. BRusH. That is correct.
Chairman PASTORE. What is the reason for it, Mr. Brush?
Mr. BRush. This point is mentioned in Dr Seaman's letter, Mr.
Representative ANDERSON. I am confused as to what we are talking
Chairman PASTORE. Not everybody in this room has the letter.
Mr. BRUSH. As indicated in his letter, a number of countries have
of late taken action which in our judgment indicates that they are
questioning our ability to act as a reliable nuclear supplier. In many
cases, this results from problems within the Government structure on
issuing export licenses and other authorizations on a timely basis.
The purpose of this language is not to be operative; it is not intended
to direct any particular action on any particular license. But it would
be a statement of U.S. intent that where all statutory requirements
are met that exports will occur on a timely basis.
Representative ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer an
amendment to the amendment, if I may be heard.
Representative PRICE. Mr. Anderson.
Representative ANDERSON. I would like to propose that following
the word "policy," as the amendment now reads, it read "The United
States, as a matter of national policy, shall issue export licenses"
and so on. I would like to propose an amendment to that amendment,
the addition following the comma, following the word "policy," these
That after due consideration by the agencies involved and within a reasonable
time, shall issue export licenses for, or otherwise authorize, export of nuclear
I offer the amendment.
Chairman PASTORE. Will you explain why?
Representative ANDERSON. Because I think it would underscore
what is basically the intent and purpose of this proposed new section
or proposed amendment, and that is that after we have gone through
all of this machinery to make sure that the criteria set forth in the
bill are complied with, and then we really will go ahead and issue the
It underscores the fact that there is not going to be any waffling by
the United States. I totally agree with those who make the point that
if this whole bill is going to be effective, it has to preserve the credi-
bility of the United States as a reliable supplier.
Chairman PASTORE. The amendment being suggested by ERDA will
do exactly that. Why do you have to put in "reasonable time" and all
that "razmataz"? Will you restate that again?
Mr. PARLER [reading].
The United States, as a matter of national policy, shall issue export licenses
for, or otherwise authorize, export of nuclear materials and equipment upon a
determination that all the applicable statutory requirements are met.
Chairman PASTORE. WYhy doesn't that do it?
Representative ANDERSON. Reasonable men can differ, Mr. Chair-
man. It seems to me that that language would strengthen the section
as it is presently written.


Chairman P.VSTORE. I think we would overburden the purpose. I
think this does it (ompletely, that where tile stattitory provisions of
U.S. laws are mnet with, it is a matter of policy that we will live up to
o)ur agreement. Wlat is wrong with that It tells tlie whole tthinv.
Representative ANDEWSON. I think if you put in tihe additional words
"within a reasonable time" you strengthen it.
Chairman PASTOmE. What is reasonable time ?
Representative ANDERSON. It is a question of fact. It always is.
Representative PRICE. Mr. Brush. what is vour thinkln- on that
matter ? Do you think it reonires any additional language ?
Mr. BRUSH. I think additional language in my personal judgment
would serve to strengthen it.
Representative PRICE. In what way?
Mlr. BRUSH. It would get into this part of the bill the concept of
timeliness which does not occur in the language which we sent up.
Chairman PASTORE. Doesn't the law already require what time must
be consumed or taken into consideration on a bilateral ?
..r. BRUSH. On agreement for cooperation. but not on the issuance
of export licenses.
Chairman PASTORE. Isn't that a matter of determination for the
Administrative body?
Mr. BRUSH. Yes, sir.
Chairman PASTORE. Otherwise, some people might think 5 days
is reasonable. Other people might think 50 days is reasonable. I
don't think we ought to get into that. but leave it to the judgment
of the people who are responsible for carrying out this duty. I don't
see how it is strengthened.
Representative LUJAN--. I think it mandates hurrying up the is-
suance of a license once everything has been completed.
Representative McCoR3IAcK. Ma- we have the words of 'Mr. An-
derson's amendment?
Representative ANDERSON. "After due consideration by the agen-
cies involved and within a reasonable time. shall issue licenses."
Representative PRICE. Doesn't "reasonable time" fit somewhere in
the amendment?
Representative ANDERSON. I am not particularly wedded to that
part of it. The important point is the timeliness of the issuiance.
Chairman PASTORE. What we are trying to say to the people whom
we supply is that it is an American policy that where we have made
an agreement and all the rules and regulations and statutory provi-
sions are met with. that we shall carry out our responsibilitv.
Isn't that enough? It is a policy statement. If vou overburden this.
all vou are going to do is raise a lot of other objections. I don't
think you need it. I think it is superfluous. I wont question it if that
is whai you gentlemen on the House side want.
Representative PRICE. AWe will have counsel work in the sti1 illa-
tion "within a reasonable time" at the al)prol)riate place in tle
Representative ANDERSON. Fine.
Representative PRICE. Without objection.
Mr. PARLER. Page 6, section 5. there are tliree techiical amend mnteiPs
on that page. On lines 6 and '. lines 12 and 20. t hev are identical to


technical amendments that were earlier discussed by the committee,
and the committee agreed to, with the understanding that conforming
changes would be made elsewhere in the bill.
lep I0'Sentati ve IRuc1(E1. W without lion. it is agreed to.
Mir. P1,NRm:R. lPage T. line 7. delete the word "aid" and insert, the
words "or any mateial undertaking with respect to the peaceful use
of nuclear materials, equipment, or sensitive nuclear technology," and
I tlink that technical change is also for the same purpose as one of the
technical changes that was discussed earlier.
Chairman PASTORE. NOW, read the. whole subsection.
Mr. 1 IE I began with the preamble:
The United States shall institute immediate objectives.
One of them would be-
* adopt general principles and procedures to be followed in the event
that any nation violates the principles of the treaty, whether or not such nation
is a party to the treaty, or any material undertaking with respect to the peaceful
use of nuclear material, equipment, or sensitive nuclear technology.
Representative PRICE. If there is no objection. it is agreed to.
Mr. PARLER. On page 7, line 17, the words "agreed to" would be de-
leted and the word "adopted would be substitute: and also the word
'major" before "nuclear suppliers" would be deleted.
Chairman PASTORE. What does that do to it?
Mr. PARLER. I suppose that I would have to defer to Mr. Brush as
to the significance in the international area of the difference between
the word "agreed to' and the word adoptp ted." But oil the other )oint.
the change clearly is a good one, because the policy would apply to all
nuclear supplier nations without raising the issue which ones are the
major ones and which ones are the minor ones.
Chairman PASTORE. MNr. Brush.
r. BiiUsii. In connection with changrinr the concept of 'interna-
tional arrangements" throughout the bill to mutuall undertakings."
it was our feeling that in some cases "mutual undertakings" may not
actually be agreements. They may be statements of policy, principles
of policy. adopted, not agreed to. We do this merely as a conforming
change along with a change from "international ariangements to
"mutual undertakings."
Chairman PASTt'Roi:. Does it tighten it up ?
Mr. BRisIr. In the sense we are attempting to get niore types of in-
ternational agreements covered by this bill; yet, it would tighten it up.
Representative A-nEZSON. At tlis point, as I understand it, we have
now agreed with Mr. Brown's position that we ougght to use the words
"international arrangrements" anl "mutual ulndlert:kinrs" sort of in-
terchangeablv. Would we then not need to cover that by having both
agreed to or adopted so that we would have to use both words?
MNlr. BRusii. That would seem to be a proper change.
Chairman PASTORE. That is a good suggestion.
Any objection?
Representative PRICE. Let us go to the next one.
M r. PARLER. Page 8. line 1,
Representative MCCORNTACK. Mr. Chairman, before we leave this
page, I think there is an oversight. In the bill, the words "source ma-

terial." has be( changed to the ooI- 'iiiicleI' material 111( 1etiitiol-
o y N-. Yet. this W11,; no0t (lone onl lime 9. 1 pliesie tliat W;I- 'I o~I -ihi
chairmann P.IA).ST mE. Line !) of what pa e
Rei)v-eefltative M'(U ()IVN'i. ()f page 7. (ene iallv Speaklng. t}e
chanr 1,e has bee 'source and 1 pecial n c11 lear atI fi. I ias mater 11 4i e-
leted and the expression nuclearr mnateials and te' (,l ()g hs wein
inserted in its pl ace. Shoi i ( that not be done on thle Iil iv 9. ). i-; ti -(
a reason why tile clhan(ye was not nade there .
Mr. BIzLslI. We have proposed in the definition section t a tt tihe tefIi
"niiclear miaterial- be uise(d as a short term t() to covei- "''-( ,(, and 11)(Wi al
nuclear material" in this Act. Therefore, such a change here would fol-
low that structure. We did not. propose a ch-ange there tl(,.z( it a*-
curate as printed. For convenience. we made as few change- as po- si ble.
Representative McCoRwmcK. It wo~lld be con-sistent withI the lef ini-
tion, would it not ?
Mr. BRUSh. Yes. Sir.
Chairman PASTORE. It is only a repetition of it
Mr. BRUSh. Yes, sir.
Representative McCORMNACK. It is not just a repetition. Mr. (Chair-
man. You are using an expression here that, does not have a definition.
You have one definition in the front and another expression her-e. All
you have to do is chan(e the rest of the bill and say "numcear material
and technology" instead of source ando Special nuclear material Then
you are consistent throughout. Isn't that correct ,
Mr. BRUSHr. I would suggest changing it to "nuclear material- an d
it is consistent with the definition section.
Chairman PsToR. You would leave out "soice and special"
Mr. BRUSh. Yes: because by its terms this bill encompasses "o,,im
and special nuclear material" within the term 'nuclear material."
Chairman PASTORE. Any objection to that ?
Representative LUJAN. Other than he mentioned techolorv that is
being left out.
Chairman PASTORE. That is being explained in the (lefinition: is that
o-rect ? Nuclear material includes technology ii the dehunition .
\Ir. BRUsf. No. Mr. Chairman. N clear material covers only -ource
and special nuclear material. As I read the subsectio)l yon are talkimi
about procedures for recovering( material.
Representative Wc( )RMA('1. We are only talking aoupt 1phvb, l
thnoz, so we would not use the word "'techolo(ry.
Chairman P\STORE. That is right.
Mr. Parler?
Mr. PARLER. I wanted to make the point that Mr. "MeCormna(k just
Representative Pnirm:. Without ol)]e(tion. Go ahead.
IIr. I .EIR Pa(e 8. line 1. delete the word "a id" whenever it ap-
pears and insert a comma after the word 'resou-ees. Tlien. on line 2.
(elete the words "specific. initiatItves the United tates shall take are"
and insert the word "by." So that the particular l )paragrah Iill Its
entirety as amended would read 'as follows:
To assure ll nations of the world that the, United States. ;is ; ma tir Of na-
tinal policy, is committed to n -t,',) j and effe(tiv (, AVA I. k ak I,' cn,:,npleI)T-
sive safegua rds sys dstm a(ll1i1i'(erefd h that :-(,1Cy to lJreWWt the f,1 l rthr Pr)lif-
eration of nuclear explosives. Accordinmzly. the United tate' will c(' nimally


seek to act with other nations to strengthen the IAEA through contribution of
technical resources, suIpport, funding and by-
and contilliulij wit l otler section. wl ic'h follow.
Ilie next c1ianc(re would be on page 8, line 4, the word "continue"
would be deleted and be replaced by the word "continuing." These
changes are technical, and I think they do strengthen the objectives of
the bifl.
Iepresentative iPRI(E. Is there any objection? If not. it is agreed to.
Alr. lRARLER. Page 8, line 10. delete the word "assure" and insert the
wor(d "assuring.
lelpresentatiVe PRICE. 1\ without objection.
Mr. PARLER. On1,,eimprove" to "improving."
On age Sline 1,change ""in
That is just a style change.
Then the word "accountability" would be deleted and would be re-
placed by the word "safeguards. This is supposed to be a technical
chiar re a((ol(in(g to E1RI)A. 'I'lle word Iccl ountabilitv was deliber-
atelv used when this provision was drafted because it was my un-
ders;tandi r fr-om the tchnal people tlat the accountability part of
the overall safe(ruards system is something that should be specifically
focused on and improved.
In iny judgment, at least at this time. it is not entirely clear to me
that the word "accountability" should be replaced by the word "safe-
Chairman PASTOIE. What do you have to say, Mfr. Brush?
Mr. BRUSIT. Mr. Chairman. this change was suggested in discussions
with our safeguards people. They view the accountability as one part
of the safeguards system and they suggested we should attempt to
improve the entire system. This would not be intended to exclude the
accountability function of the Agency but merely to recognize it is
merely one part of that system.
Chairman PASTORE. AAWhat would be the harm in saying "safeguards
and accouintabilitv? l ut the two of them in. Is that satisfactory to
the committee?
Representative M({ RM-ACK. "Including accountability?"
Chairman PASTORE. -No: "and accomntability."
Mr. PA.ER. It should be "include."
Chairman PASTORE. "Incltde ?"
Representative IZUCE. Vithout objection. that change will be
Representative M(Con:r.\dI. That would come after the word "sys-
tem". would it not?
Representative ANDERSO-. Yes.
Mr. PARLER. Yes.
Representative PRICE. Go to the next one.
Senator SyMINOON.o... Mr. Chairman. may I ask a question here? T
have four hearings this morning at the same time. Have we accepted
ERDA recommendations in the main on the bill ?
Chairman PASTORE. We are going over them mow.
Senator SYMINTON. So far?
Chairman PASTORE. I-) to this point we have.
Senator SYMINrTNOTON. May I respectfully congratulate Mr. Anderson
and Chairman Price on this legislation. I have to leave shortly, but
vou have my proxy.

Chairman PASTORE. ANVe We n(ieed a (11IoIlml. \Ve have seven. Mir.
Baker can comIII up. Mr. ,Jackson, I underst a Il, w xiil be leie by 11 :,0.
Representative LUJAN. Mr. Cthairilial, if we work ttlrough it, it is
only at the end we need a quorun11.
Chairman iASToRE. Yes; ht there IS a tendency lhere not to have an
increase but a dinimitioi of the ileilbersli ll). Ilw loii-er we wait, the
smaller we get for some reason. That is what is I)otherig me. If I
knew theg were going to come later on, I would say, OK. A> a iiatter
of fact, I have been watching that door t)r an hollir. I 111therstan(d Mr.
Horton is on his way. If we can get Jackson black, we can ret a
Representative PICE. Mr. Iarle ro ahead.
Mr. PARLER. Pae 9. line 3. a technical chan,,e. Change the word
"assure' to "assurin ".
Representative PRICE. Without objection.
Mr. PARLER. Page 9, line 9, insert at the beginning( the wor(ls "coli-
sistent with the policies of this act" after the paragraph (d).
Representative PmICE. Is there Obje'tion? I tear-i102 none. it is agreed
Mr. PARLER. Page, 9, line 10, delete the word "either".
Representative PRICE. Without objection.
Mr. PARLER. Page 9, lines 11 and 12, (elete the words "are under
equivalent effective international safeguards controls'.
Representative PRICE. Without objection.
Senator SY31INGTON. May I ask a (question, Mr. Chiairmlin ?
Representative PRICE. Senator S mington.
Senator SYMINGTON. Has the staff been over these changes with
Representative PRICE. We have comments from ERDA in a letter
which takes note of some of the siimrestions that ERDA makes.
Representative A NI)ERSON. Mr. Chairnian. may I make a sm1 res-
tion-and it is out of a desire to be helpful and it is in response to the
question of Senator Svminigton. The so-called tech inical amen(mfents
tlhat we are now laboriously goiug through were receive 1. I think.
earlier this week by Mr. Parler, and the committee staff, and the, liave
gone through them. It is only the so-called slbsttantive amen(dment- of
-which there are only about five in number tlat were received onilv at
8:30 this morning.
I would like to offer the s (r(estion thlat to a-e time we a(lol)t tlie
technical amendments en bloc iiless there a,,'e se rio1s re4,ervatlion
expressed by Mr. Parler a (l the stafll on sonie of them. a:11(l then
we could take them u). But. a lot of theit see 1o 1be > i l istic a,(
grlnm ati(al ln( so on, and )rioceed then to) a tlist' ssionl ()f thle six
sul)stantiNe amendnments wlicli atre really y tle lieaut of, 1 1 p ol )l e .
Chairnian PsTnmko:. I (tonit jo alonc withl thlat. Aou h.av(e to a(ilmit
that Mr. Brown made a su(estion on a tellm nial a (,enel(net thant
we adopted. We added otl er words. I tiou't tllink Nvoln -:an a(!opt tI e,')
en bloc.
Relpresentaltive BTmm->,. AI[r. (Ia i rmaui(al. I ha Ie ('f)lW H)I Hl ie l
technical anIendments. I have only one it emflieiaer ii io-l-. wh ichW
I feel oug lt to be discli ssed )ri(fly. W ii I thaIt. I xvoilhI e Iii m
to accept the renma inder of tthe teIim al , dmen s.
Represenhative i ,('. Go to tat o(e.


Representative BROWN. There occurs the language in one or two
places, a substitution where it says "The Piresident is requested and
authorized." and I am wondering if that does not weaken the lan-
guage and perhaps inisconstrue the intent here. I would prefer to keep
the language as is-- The President is directed."
Chairman PASTORE. What page are we talking about ?
h. PARLER. It is in two places. sir. It is on page 9, line 15
Representative BiowN. And it is on page 20.
Mr. P~M=L1*:. Right. section 15 on page 20, line 17. The section on
page 20 is concerned withi the President's efforts to seek international
arrangements with the other nations of the world, and the language
on page 9 has to do with taking steps to implement the act in its
Representative PRCE. You raise a good point there. I have never
known of a request to somebody to do something. You either au-
thorize then or you prohibit them.
Representative BRowN. Mr. Cha irinan. it hias been our experience-
I am sure vours-it is hard enough to get the President to do some-
thing when yon say "shall."
Representative ANDERSON. If I may. I think I perceive what may
be the sensibility of the administration on this matter; that in a sense,
they are suggesting that by substituting the words "request, and
authorize for "direct. that instead of sort of posturing ourselves
in an attitude of confrontation with them, we are suggesting that
this is a matter where the Congress and the Executive are going to
work together in harmony and collaboration, and there is something
a little more peremptory about the word "direct" than when you say
"'request and authorize."
Representative PRICE. "Authlize would take care of it very well.
Senator SY.i NGT The President is directed to take immediate steps to assure that a maximum
effort is made on behalf of the Inited States promp)tly upon enactment of this
Act to have all of the other nuclear-supplier nations commit themselves to
binding international arrangements under which each supplier nation will le
committed to adhere to all of the criteria set forth below in all of their inter-
national nuclear trade which could be of significance for nuclear explosive
My basic objection to what lhas been going on in recent years is
that tlere lhas been no> direction. Certainly. he would want to have as
nluch supl)ort as le could from tile Congress on this particular point.
I don't see anvthin, wrong at all in saving "directed."
Representative ANDES( x. I frankly don't have personal difficlty
with it.
Repiresentative LVJ\N. I wonder if it adds another step that we
have to oo throii&-'] bV leaving the words "shall" and "direct." rather
tla'n "authorized." If we say "direct" then they have to take some kind
of positive step and o inire paperwork.
Senator SY-)FNT)N. If "direct" iieans he will do something about
it. it will be the first time it has happened.
Senator ,i'iK:z. The difference between "direct" and "request" is
that the Piresident is privileged to interpret it any way he wants to
as loni as tlere is any aspect of the Presidential authority involved,
and surelv there i in the negotiation of an agreement with a foreign


comitry. I don't thiink it lakes a bit of difference. "IDirectedt stilts
Ille better.
(IIair'1aii PA1.\STOR E. )(ot vo-u thIink iII order to avoid ie se it ivit y
of a President \vll( iiiight feel tlat lie is being- told hliat to do t hat
we use the word authorizeie .
Representative LUJAN. Ieave it as it is and leave "sl,"Il .
( chairmann P>AST(ORE. lie still lhas the power to veto the bill.
Representative LuavAX. Wily iiot leave tle w0ol 1d all" as we ia(d
it in before +
Representative Mc(CORMA'K. Every ap)ropriatiol bi)l1 is a (Iirecti1

to spend money. We direct him all the tile.
chairman n ASTOR)I. What is vuonr with "Tlle IPresaitellt shall take
steps" (?
Representative LuJa.\k. All right.
Representative PRICE. Without objection. the lanlgilae shall read
"The President shall take such steps." Is that the last one'?
Representative _MCCOR-MACK. I have one, Mr. Chairllan. There is a
technical amendment I would like to raise a question on.
Mr. (hairman, on page 17, line 14., there is a change which appears
to be substantive. Mr. Chairman., I wonder if I could have Mr. Brush
comment on and explain this change, because I t11i1k it has some
Chairman PASTORE. Where are you in the bill ?
Representati ye MAC COWMIACK. I request cOnsideration of line 14 on
page 17. This is one additional proposed technical amendment which
appears to me at least to require explanation.
Chairnian PASTORE. We are on page 17, line 14.
Representative MCCOR-MACK. Mr. Brush. would you 1ind exl la in-
gr What tihe change consists of and what the rationale is ?
MY. BRUsH. Thbis su!)section. (1) in section 11-2 of the 1)111 would he
the first criterion which the NRC and other exl)ortill" a'eicllies of the
Siiited States would apply in lookini at ai\ proposedl exo'rt. The
intent of this first criterion, as we understand it. is to reqliire thaIt
assurance )e received that IAtA safeguards be applied oi :my of our
eXlports. Ilowever, as written. it (loes not (listilliislh 1)etwee l('I eXl) )I t
to iiiclear-wea1)011s states a i Furthermore, it, IIa the ph rase -()r tleir equ1ieiva 1elt" il t. wI i<1,c
Iln oII ju(lgnlent may provide too large a lolo)le if our iitei t r'a1ll3
is t () sure that IA LEA sa feguards apl)llie(1.
(l aila-iian PAxST(R:. May I iMterrlI)t you for just a Iommieni I .vieb
to the (istinlguislie( vice chairman.
lRepresentative PiracuE Mr. CI I al 1-
('hairman P ,rSiTzi. ve ha ve a q(ormll.
Re resentative Pin 'E. Mr. ('h a i rI an. I love tle c)mlitIe(e
tej>ort ouit It.R. 15419 as amended.
Cliarrimian I1AST( m. Is there a secol(, .
Representative Puif( T.. II ll we (c1 coip l)l ete the 81 a1,(1 ldls.
(hairma I ,\sIoumz:. Will tie clerk call tihe roll
Mr. M ulwil -. Mr. ,ackson.
I No resplonse.]
M[r. iM[umwivy. -Mr. I "
Senator A ye.

vIr., it\1uizziu. iMr. Baker.
S(1,enatOr BAKER. Aye.
Mr. Mt\Iiiuy. Alr.. C>iC.
[ No resp)Ihone.J
MI.. M1v-z, lly. Mrt. Pearson.
[ No resl )o1se.]
\fr.Mi[UzPitY.A [1. Btickley.
[ No response.]
Mr. MuRI'pllv. Mr. Yolng.
)No resl)0ose.]
keIpr(- (-ntat I \-e M OR-MAK. I I Ma\Ir. All% Y g roxy andl he votes
"a ye.
Mr i. [uizi,i iIY. Ali. Roncalio.
I No Iesponse.]
Air. i.iit, ivY. 1\r. Mc( oinack1.
Rel)reseI tative Mi(( OIATICK. Aye.
Air., AIUnri. Mr. Brown.
Representative tBiow-N. Aye.
Alr'. MURPHIY. Mr.L Anderson.
Representative ANI)ERSON. -AVe.
Afr. Aluitriiy. Mr. Lujan.
Representative LUJAN. Ave.
Air. Atlupiiy. Mr. tlortoni.
Rel)resentat ive I to.T(o. Aye.
I a"IiImI .
Mr. Muiwiiy. AMr. Vice (iai rnan.
Rep)resentat i ve 1Iz(E.' Ave.
Air. M[URPhIY. Mr. ('ha irinan.
(ihiairnan PAsTrE. Ave. And I have Mr. Jackson's proxy. He votes
.11Mr. 'M t,i AMfr. I 1*iq:! ha \v.
[No response.]
C(hairinan I,\STO)E. ("all out tle vote.
Mr. AiutiytY. It is unamnious-I() )resent al(l ) pi)xies.
( hairi'an PASTORE. All riglt. you nav continue .
Representative McO('RMA(IiZ. xIay we ietuirn to line 14. page 17?
Senator BAKER. We ]have voted to Ie)Oi't WllateVeV it is We enld up
with ?
Representative. I 'CORMwAC K. That is right.
Representative PRI(cE. rMr. M 4oriack.
Representative AIcCoRmACK. 'Mr. Chairman, we were in the midst of
a discussion of what the iilport of this change is. Mr. Chairman, I
would like to address tfle nieml)ers attention to this., because I believe
it is a matter of some sit)stance.
I would like to ask if we can start the dlisciussion over again so that
the 1nenlers niav be able to follow it. So. if I may ask Mr. Brush to
explain to us what tle siibstance is here and what the purpose of this
chance is and what it is that we are doinir.
Mr. BRvsir. As I indicated, this would le the first criterion on
export licenses fromt tie Inited St'.tes. and it would be the criterion
that IAEA safeguards be applied on any export from the Vnited


States of niticlear materials or eqluiplellt. As writteil, Nre perI(eive two
problems with it.
First, the 1)}irase "or Ihe ir equivalent" seemiis to 1)e ill (.'eaii. It is
not defined. We do not know what it Illealls. I believe I knomw whlat it
means. I think it was intended to cover exports to tCie lK;iiropea i ('0111-
flluhinity countries which have not vet siole( I up foi' IAEA safegria r ls
althoughltey are parties to the t reaty and are wvorking. to get ttl()1e
safeguards. iBut, it does not say that. So, we felt that the lack of
definlition created a1 problem.
The second 1)roblem we see with it is that y) its ternms it would
aI)1)ly to exports to countries wit iclia1tI(lear weapolts states such
as France and England. Of (oliPse, under the n(mlroliferation treaty.
those countries are not required to accept I AEA safevnaris and. there-
fore, imposing" such a reqluirement, coul(l make it difficult for Its to
authorize exports to France an(1 to England.
Therefore, we have suco'ested, as a substitute, lanouaoe wltictl would
put this criiterion in strict conformity with our obligations lender the
nonproliferation treaty.
Chairman PASTORE. Read your new lang uage.
Mr. BRsf. The first criterion for exports Awould be that, "'safe
guards as re(luired by article III. 1)ara'raph 2 of the treaty, shall be
applied with respect to such matemal or equipment and to any special
nuclear material produced thrioigih the use thereof." Article III (2)
of the treaty of which we are a party imposes on the 1 nite(1 States
an o)lii5'ation not, to export nuclear materials or liiclear facilities to
nonnuclea-r weapons states unless IAEA safe iaruads or international
safeQ'lards are applied.
Clai ruan PASTORE. What do you have to say to that. MI'. Parler?
Mr. PARLER. Mr. Chairman, these criteria. im'ludincr the first one
that we are talking about, were not drawn out of thin air by mb vself. I
complied with your directions to (et tocretlier with representative
from the executive branch. The Secretarv of State. in lis testimony
on March 9, 1976. before e the Senate Government Operations Commit-
te. said"
We have decided to adopt as a matter of national policy certain i rin'iple
whi('l would govx,ern mur future nuclear exports. The first one is imvrisions for
the ai)1)lictation of JAEA safeguards on port. of imnterial. equipment and
As far as tle first poitit thlat M'. Brush mentioned is (1011ce( tt(.
"or tlweir e(Iquivalent." those words were put in there to (Ien] vit 11 tl(,
problems which representatives of tle executive 1> ra1 ml raised e(11inn11t
the drafting" session: thaut is. that even tlhomr h the Fiu'ato, commi i lii v
,1n11 otbens maybe (lont follow IAEA s, e'ear'ds, it .Is tlle )()li(- ofv
the United States to reul i'e that eii v] eit- fefi a -s h e I'olle( wt
I might mention. also. that this firt criterion is o e of the n'iep ilfl'.
that the I Director of the Arms Contol a Diiia Di atttt ottAU't'V st at l(1
in his most recent report to the (Clo 're'ss a' f llow>" I t1l "' t It
principles, exporters must "8 l)ply itt r (lit a] I.E.\ AYA'A e21Ia I to
all nuclear exports."
Chairman P.\sTmoiu. I think this is beit2" ve'v explicit. 'I r. l-.
If the executive (lePlrtlletlts have alre'cad s'.v ,1,'eie(1 ili lt 1t2a.
why don't we leave it tlhe way it is rathIet' l an ie fc' rin, b'(k to :Irt I 'lc(
III of a certain t reatv ? T1 I> sat tsies asti'amu' I It IA. A ] '-A leY nl'-(.

or where you cant apply theivi. their etuivIalent-then we are the ones
Who dictate what tie 'eqliV a ncy shiolbl be. Wily isn't this vell
drafted ?
Mr. Buusi. Mr. ( 'hai nl ian, beca use inlr j011'rjdgent "or the equiva-
lent" does not give 1us, the agency tllat 11u1st implemnent this, sufficient
uidanmie. For example. it is unclear to us whether under this criterion
as written we could authorize the export of enriched uranium to the
U nited Kinioin for fueling a power reactor if that power reactor in
tlie United Kn1(doinl is not to be ,-iub.,ect to IAEA safeguards; if it
were to be subject only to the U-nited Kingdoni safeguards or Euratom
sa feruards.
Cha irman PASTORE. Before you go any further, "or their equiva-
lent-now. woulinit that satisfy your objection ? You are not apply-
ing the safeguards as precribe..l... by I AEA but you are saying "or their
equivalent." In other words. if we deterinie that our supervision over
the transfer of this nuclear material under certain conditions is
equivalent to what the IAEA would do. it satisfies the requirements.
Mr. BnUSii I believe that would be the case if it were clear from the
legislative history that "or their equivalent" was intended to cover
situations such as I nientioned.
Representative ANDEWs supply that deficiency ? Leave th language as you suggested as it is
and then the report language.
Chairmnan P ASTORE. That is what lie has sugg.rested now and I think
that is all right.
Mr. BRUsi. There is one other case we have considered in writing
this la(ruage. and that is the situation where reactor operators in the
Western European countries may seek to obtain uranium enrichment
services from the Soviet Union. As yon knov. we do not now have
enriching capacity for any more uramurn enrichment contracts. Some
reactor operators in Western Europe may in the future desire to use
l7.S.-origin natural uraniunm. send it to the Soviet U nion for enrich-
nient and then it would come back to Western Europe for use in reac-
tor's. When it loes that. it will, of course. be subject to our agreement
with the Western Eu ropean countrv.
As written, this would prohibit us from exporting that niaterial to
the Soviet Union without IAEA safeguards or their equivalent. That
would be one other snall point that we tried to take care of in this
language cleanup. As written, the bill would appear to preclude that
type of arrangement.
Representative MI('OR-MACK. Mr. Chairman
Mr. Parler. obviously. the administration, ill sending down the words
or its equivalent," is tryin g to cover this. I)oes this expose the admin-
istration to litigation on the interpretation of what equivalency would
be ? Is this a potential booby trap ?
Mr. Pxnfriz I S l)ose any words inl a piece of legislation on a con-
troversial subject would expose the Govern ent or the participants to
litigation. The best way I know to deal with that is to use the most
precise word> yo- can in the statute or the bill. If you can't do that,
give as (lear I a legislative history lackcround as you can in the re-
port. I thiink if the lill would try to spell ouit in the bill what "or their
equivalent" means. that the potential for ambiguity and litigation
would b1e increased.

Sellator YMIN;T). Mr. (tlainian. e is one p1il hefor Ieav-
in t hat I woldl]l like to lwiijly Up). 'lTlat is. w \telI Io are et Iilr int o
the field of agrieenents and treaties on H1(clea iil ater-S it U VS vol v eretti ii,2
into an area ol (00lll,' of tilie 'FolvioI Iel'latliO ( 'Omnii)il I ee il ilite
Senate and t lie Intjerilatiotial Lvehtt lus Commlliit tee Ill tlie I Iolv -e.
Ill tlhe last few iiontls, tlie ( over'n1iient ( operation > ( oniiuitlet'..
wlich I served o for a w,)od many years and wthiclh is fine comn-
ittee, but in effect is a aI( lioY lconilittee .. Iave ili litst Vtou Iliit
say, taken a lead1 il the development of m euest ill his Illatter tliroll'l
Senators Ri bieoff. Glenn, am IIere v. ActuallY. Ia )weevr. if t lwiee 1s
going to )e an a,,g'eenle t or t reatv, a forl-aI a-gree uii ent. I t0iilnk it
review and alpproval has to end Rl}) somevIiwi( ill and wit\]i the Joint
Comnmittee and the Foreih'n Relations (o nittee.
Chairman PASTORE. That is right.
Senator SYMI o. We should (ret Sonie Iaiiruiae in tlilis bill along
those lines. Otherwise, we will get into a hassle withi tie ( overnelit
Operations ('onimittee., which is grettiinc more into the )ictilre thanl
they normally would. We can do this. providedI we are clear. in ollr
mind as to what we want to do.
I have discussed this to some extent witl the chairman and Sen-
ator Baker. I know that any formal agreement or any treaty incident
to the most important sul)ject in the world today, which is control of
nuclear proliferation, in the long run has to .,o to the Forelclm R1ela-
tions Committee, as I see it.
Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, I acree with Senator Svinnton. I
think we are gettingg into a traditionall- delicate matter: that is. juris-
diction of the committees. But, with the enornmity and the inltortance
of nuclear proliferation, there is no way in mY judgment th)at we
cannot take account of the responsibility of the Foreio'n Relatioms
('onmittee and International Relations (Colmnittee.
11e only thing that concerns me is whether or" not we put appropri-
ate safeguards on the length of time that one of those co it tees
could have to act on that matter, and that we preserve fundamental
jurisdiction in this committee.
When we do those things, not only would I be agreea!ble to it lit
I would enthusiastically support it.
Chairman PASTORE. That is the Sylllncrtoll amendment.
Senator BAKER. Vhv not add it onto this hill .
Senator SYMIGo). I would 11 ike to add one ire point. if I 1,a.
to show it is a practical matter. At one l)ol nI in an executive' hieari
of the Foreini Relations (onlimitiee. I j erst)1all v asked tlic Secretary
of State a few months ago wilV we a 2reeI to allow lie (ll ernia i
to make the deal with the IBirazil ianus o)1 tle sale of a rei ces" '' il, 10
pIlant, which is tie most, dangerous develolpment we have h at since I
hiave been involved in this situation.
Il, said lie (lid hiis best. this (,mitrv op it. A few
days later, the Clhancellor of (ermam*v, I )r. ScII Idt. said otIIv hya d hIil
no Comp laint from anybody at anY tiln, onI till ttel.
Then, when we took that il) wi'th the St-ate I)epa latillon ev s lol
that there was a l)reakdown in otonimmi<'at ions. vhichi se,(ened like a
sorry explanationi to Inme. To be frak. if' von have hotIi he.e com Ii
tees working togetlher on this sort of thin(. I I hiink we, wi 11,2ol :a loi


fartlier than we would if we just have the one, and I think it is proper
any111( v Ld tiLe hI s of (Congress and the Constitution.
tRel reseIltat ive liac-. \Vithiout objection. )oes that complete the
technical aiiieiidients .
Mr. l-iui:. Not the peni(ing one which Mr. M-Cormack raised.
leI)reselltat ive lI icE. Is this a techn ical amendment?
Mr. l .AILER It was i11(luded in the group.
Representati\-e PIZICE. Mr. Brown, were you satisfied with it?
Repiresentatlve Biow. Yes: I ama satisfiedI.
I'er sentat le zici.-I Theni, we ca ii take theiii en bloc.
i. 1 la'].ERI. Tle pel(lil1 (tllestimi is tlie one iMr. AIh( orimack raised
about t le parti(1lar an endient on page 1,. 1lie 14.
tepresentatiwve McCoRMACK. Mr. chairmann I can explain it and I
tlhiuk I have a sol ut ion. I t hink we have worked out something here.
Mly recommendation will be to take some words from both of these
recommnenlations so that we would have the words "assurance that
IAEA safeguards, as required by article Ill. section 2 of the treaty,
shall be applied." Is that acceptable to both of von gentlemen?
Mr'. IP xRL:. Yes. sir.
Mr. BRvs. Yes, sir.
Representative MCCORMACIK. Mr. Chairman, I move we accept those.
Representative PIRICE. Without objection.
Chairman PASTeRF. What do we do about this matter raised by Mr.
Svmington -
Senator BAKER. Mr. Chairman, if Contrressman Anderson does not
object. and (onoressman Price, I would like to see it added.
Representative ANDERSON. I have no objection. Under the Constitu-
tion, the Foreign Relations Comnittee will get the treaties anyway.
Under the International Agreement for Cooperation, as long as the
wording is such that it uses Senator Bakers expression. the final juris-
diction of this committee is preserved and we have the final signoff, I
certainly have no objection to having them referred to the Senate For-
eign Relations Coinittee for such disposition or use as they may care
to make on the agreement.
I think the amendment ought to make it clear that the final signoff
on the agreement. whatever ection it is, 123 is preserved in this
Senator SYMIN;T'ON. iIav' I read brieflv our idea about it. in order
to (et voir siugrest i1s and ad vice and criticism ?
In the first sentencee, on page 12. between lines 10 and 11. insert the
In the first sentence of such subsection, strike out all after the words "has
been smbimitted to the congresss and insert in lieu thereof the following, "and
refer jointly to the Joint (,onimittee on Atomic Energy for its consideration of
such matters as fall within its jurisdiction under section 202 of this act, and the
(Committee on International elations of the ILouse of Representatives and Com-
Jittee oil Foreign Relations of the Senate for their consideration of all other
matters if a period of 60 days has elapsed while Congress is in session. In
'omlputing such 60 (lays,. there shall be excluded the days in which either House
is not in session because of adjournment of more than 3 days. Any such pro-
posed agreement for cooperation shall not become effective if during such said
60-day Ieriod the Congress p asses concurrent resolution stating in substance
that it does not favor the proposed agreement for cooperation, provided that
prior to the lapse of the first 45 days of any such 60-day period such committee

shall submit reports to Congress of their views :111(d r(,WO."'W"],iIils I (*(,ting
the po)()oled a1gIeelle lt an a1 cc(p(, III] P l0iPiO c~l l ( 1 l (ei(' it lo(.1JIll| i'i
stating ill s11)St'll.ce thit the (C'ongress favor's or do,'es 1)1 0 fa"Iv r, as the (':Ise 111,1N
be, the l)ro)o sed ;igreeiment for operationo"
Ev(TX'l)0' v kniows- the coililit tee ha"s thle fillmi ISaY (,as to what. >lial
be done. I call't iiiauilag e the Foreivlo Relationls (CI)illitte' li aLrveeifl2
with the Joint ( omiiiiittee onl thle iiat ter. If* 11, get '; Io lw I foriiial1
a(1'ieiiiele t or treaty. it has () to() t() the Fore'i2 Relatiowus ( '(o itt(ee.
(hairniai P.\s'rrm'u. A' IreatY does, 18ut voi -ec ,Igvlveihellts f'br Co-
o1)eratio(n as a ile do iot. It is 1)re'scril)d(1 ill setioii 1 '; I (1iite agree
with you, 1)ecause, first oIf all, ill the regular ) proceduilre tl it i followed.
I guess contact is iiiaote with the foreli "ii OVei'iZ 1i iiit by tlie State
Departneint. Then ERI) \ gets into it 'Ilt lego)t iat es it t)e( Ilse. after
all, they have the expertise. The State I)ea) ri ieit is already (o0-
sulte(I with reference to the arie e ienat thiat lilt io,,"telV (,1)!()S here
after the President, of course, sends it 11.
NKow, tie next question is. it is true that froil an adni1itrat1ye
standpoint the State ueartset is ted1. 1)111 t here is not ii-ig ill
our law that gives the same p)rivilege to the lore ivui Relations (om-
1iittee. That is ol conl)lalit, Mi. SAnii ,toli. IF vell though we have
oversight jurisdiction over ERI A with reference to atonile en erlgV
and over the Nuclear Regulatory Conim ission. the fact still ren iaMs
that the Foreign Relations (oinmittee and the Intenational Relations
(Comnittee of the House have oversight over the State I)epartment
ad(1, therefore, it ought to be a cool)erative effort.
I see no objection to the amendment at all. I don't tlink it takes
anything away front us. It just sets ul) a. partnership between the two
committees. I dont see anything wrong with it.
Representative LuJAN. I have one (question on it. I)oes that add an
additional provision that does not now exist that one of the (0()l-
mittees has to take a positive action where perhaps as the law is now.
we dont have to take positive action-just disagreement ?
Chairman PASTORE. The ( congress is the ultimate arbiter of whet her
or not the agreement will be accepted. All we do is recominend it.
Mr. IPARLER. The requirement for this conmittee to take 1)o action is in the law now; it was iilcluded in 1974 in sect ion 123 (L.. of
the Atomic Energy Act of 19.54 l)v Public Law 98" "45.
Chairman PASTORE. Which I suggested ?
Mr. PARLER. Yes, Sir.
Chairman PASTORE. You see, now you have to tak, po(sit ive actlon.
Somehow, we ought to include th, Foreign Relat irs (Co n tiittee of
the Senate and also the comparable committee of the Ilouse.
Representative LUDLXN. Ioes the ainendldient i inld tlie Foreigl~
Relations Coimmittee taking 1)ositive action, or jiit th is 41)1 ittec.
Representative ANDERSox. That is the iilllpo't a lit (luesti l.
Chairman P.xsromw. They ca i take positive ac't iou. If th le y are miega-
tive and we are positive, let the (o(nress (le('i( he it.
Senator SYriNiiON. Then vou (Yet imto tlie vayv it has l)ole li lldtled
in the last two administrations as to what is a treat :111(1 wliat is ani
agreement. I will be off the comiiinittee next vea.r. Senit-or IRa ke' will
l)e back on the Foreignii Relatiois Coiiin'ittee. Iie las :iull itoeu iite'-
est. in this committee. Tle Nwa \ w( get 11lixed 11l). or il(-'e-d ill) iV a


better word, is when something is done that we don't know about be-
cause it is an agreement. Whether it is formal or informal, it is an
agreed ient, not a treaty, even though in many cases-I say that after
a good many y-ears on the 1Foreign Relations Committee-it should
have been a treaty.
Chairnl~l 1'ASTORE. The administration is now negotiating with
reference to a reactor for Egypt. It was because of the publicity that
was given to it sone few years ago that I introduced this amendment
in order to tighten it up whereby we would have to take positive
act ion.
Representative Luj .,N. This connittee ?
Chairman PASTORtE. This coniniittee would have to take positive
action before the agreement could be consummated.
Now the question arises that this is a very delicate diplomatic
question, too. I think it wouhl be fair to the Congress to have the
comnnittees that have to do with foreign affairs become parties to
whatever happens. I see nothing wrong with it. I think we ought to
include it.
Representative LUJAN. You are saying we have to have three posi-
tive actions instead of one according to the amiendment-one by the
House International Relations, one by the Senate, and one by the
Chairman PAsToRE. We report to both branches, you see, both the
House and Senate at the same time, as to our recommendation as to
these bilateral agreements. The next question is what is the obligation
of the International Relations and Senate Foreign Relations Commit-
tees ? So. I think they ought to come into the picture.
Senator SY IINGTON. We are not asking for the Armed Services
Committee to be included here, but we do get briefed in the Foreign
Relations Committee pretty thoroughly by the CIA. This is an open
hearing, but the recent development in China. to put it mildly, is some-
thing that this committee would be intensely interested in, as well as
the Foreign Relations Committee. So I think you have to cut in some
committee, and I would. much rather see the Foreign Relations Com-
mittee cut in with the Joint Comnittee than I would the Armed
Services Committee, both of which I serve on.
Representative AN)ER SON. I have the language of section 123(d)
before me. which does require that the proposedd agreement for coop-
eration be submitted., as the language now reads, "to the Congress, and
referred to the Joint. Committee." I have no objection at the point to
amending the law "to provide to the Joint Committee and the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee and the House International Relations
Then when vou go down three or four lines and get to the point
where it says. "Any such l)roposed agreement for cooperation shall
not become effective if during such 60-day period the Congress passes
a concurrent resolution stating in substance it does not favor the pro-
posed agreement." I would like to put in there that it shall not. become
effective if the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy reports adversely
on the resolution and the Congress then adopts that.
Chairman PASTORE. We could even report favorably and it might
be the right thing. We are reporting favorably not because of the po-
litical questions involved but because the proper safeguards have been

Then you have the surI0uniting Itesti1o1, is this the right thing for
us to do to have a reactor for political reason, III llother country i
Tliat is your political question. 'lit is y()Ur tore igl relations (ullestion.
I think what you oughtt to do here is colntine what you aiael said
there. There is a matter of draftsinaisl ip lloW. I think we ought to
leave it. up to the stalt to draw that. All we want to do is to say that
not only will this committee have to make a recoiniiendat 1oll to the
Congress as a, body, as a whole, hit also) tlie Vorei Uelg 4at oiis (C om-
mittee and the International Relations (mioinittee of the house.
I see nothing wrongo' with it gentlenten. Frot ilow oil, with refer-
ence to the Mliddle East, \ith ireterence to whether or Ilot you are going
to sell a reactor to Egypt or whatever the case might be. you not only
have the question of safeiiiards which coities wider tle ae"Is Of the
ERDA, but you also have the question of whether or not it is the right
thing to (10. Now the State I)elartment, has already told ERI )A that
it is the right thing to do, but the question is that that decision ias
never been reviewed by the Foreign ReIations ('omiiittee.
Senator SYMINGTON. ir. Chaimllan, I would like to add one more
point and then I will keep still about it.
During the Second World War, I was in the worst. raid that London
ever had and the worst raid that Birmingham ever had. London was
very badly hurt and Birmingham was nearly de.troye. The 1onlbs
dropped there were a quarter of a ton each. Less than .5 years later,
the one nuclear bomb dropped on I iroshima was about the sanle as
15,000 tons of TNT.
In the declassified pamphlet released in the last few months by Dr.
Ikle of ACDA, the largest ever dropped was 59 million tons, by the
It seems to me we are marching toward Armageddon every day.
Chairman PASTORE. Why don't we resolve this? I don't know i you
want to meet again this afternoon, but the point is that we are all in
agreement. Whv don't we leave it up to the stalf to draw it.
Representative HORTON. )o we have to rei' it seqtientially I
Chairman PASTORE. Sequentially.
Representative HoRToN. A onld it come to this coi-iinittee first ?
chairmann PR\svoTzlu:. It will go to the (onnittees at the samle t1ii1e.
Mr. I.xm. The way the ainenment is rafted it w ml d k e a joint
( 1haimman PIASTORE. That is r-i(rlt.
M\1r.I ,1;1. So. the three (on1i11 uttees oal d sta t off ,it tite sa le
time. ()ne woll(d not have to wait for the other and tlIen alter thte
passage of the 45 days all of the coiiiil ees wouldl relport to Il}e
(Chairmnan P,\s'on,. That is right.
Then tle Comgress as a whole woild( (le:i (e wi aIt to (1(). If there was
a )OSitive and a Ieative. we A oi NOId ma ve to ake si(les.
Representative I[)JU()N. I arti wNO11(lerill, i it woiilt1 be better to
come back to the ,Joiit (oi inittee -s a elea rimrliolie allt let ve 11"
rel)ort it witli tie ot1er COIln1ittees.
Representative AA1,s i. X VI a if we lt U1rle with t l her
(hairma IASTonE. That (olllf)licUItes iA. I think 11uler fthe cir,,ImmH-
stances tihe best tlhingzto (do is to) do it sinli auwm sl.


Senator BAKE.R. As long as there is a time limitation and as long
as n1oe of tle tlree comilittees c(anl intentionally delay completion of
it b, t he (,on'ress. I see no particular mischief. MI3v preference is to
break it down into two parts, that is to say, that there would be a
sel'alete'' fe'"ial anl t separate report to the (onress and Senate on
treaty matters nd that the Joint ('ommittee would seek and receive
the adi '(e anid views of tlie otlier c(l0i11i ittees on nont reaty matters and
then rei)olt tlhem in turn to the Congress mandatorily.
Blut to (to t1lat would ibe to ifinovate a new techique, _Mr. Chairman,
wliicli I ami sure 0111' colleagues oil Foreign Relations would not agree
t 0.
I think as a practical matter the best thing to do is to go with the
SviiImztoii amendnllent in this form and make sure the report language
reflects the fact tlhat we are not ceding primary jurisdiction of this
('hairnman PIsTI, ,1. I think we ought to include the Foreign Rela-
tions (Cointmittee in the saie responsibility, the same limitations as
piresci'ibed by the law, that, within a certain period of time, they have
to act and report back to the Conoress what their recommendation is.
'hI'enm the congresss at tliat point takes a vote. As I understand, under
the law they have to take a vote within 5 davs before the 60-day
period is up.
Is that correct
M r. 1. umjtn. That is correct.
Chairman Pxs'TRE. That will apply to all committees
Mr. Iki,\RLu. That is correct.
Chairman PAsToR.:. It is not a question of dillydallying. They can
act inldel)en(lentlv of us. W~e can act indepen(lently of them. They
make their recoenneindation ; we make our recommendation. Then you
take the vote oi the floor of the Senate or the House.
Mr. 1,nu.n. Tle anenM(mnent as drafted does explicitly reserve to
the Joint committeee on At oniic Elnerg- the jurisdiction it has under
the Atomic Energy Act rn thte nuclear area.
ReIpresentative A N)ERSO N. Mr. Chairman, although we have talked
about the remaining" ive amnen(imnents as suib-taintive amendments, I
lave had a chaiice to go over all of tlheni, and Mr. Rice and I, of
course., are tle ones who ult thiis bill in the IHouse of
'Ile rationale for all of those ainenidments is very well set forth and
exllaihied. in my jlld(rmnent. in the five-page letter that went to the
cin i rman ano to Mr. Price aiid myself and I think Mr. Baker from
I)r. Seanmans, the A(hni istrator of ERDA.
I would lbe prelared to ac,-ept the amendliients and to move that
they be accepted enl bloc.
Senator SHIMIN;'roN. has I)r. Seanmans agreed to them?
Representative AYNIs ). les.
Senator SYiMINCI I)N. I second the motion.
Chairman PAsTr'nam,:. All in favor, say "aye."
All opposed?
It is carried.
Representative PRiE. Mr. Chairman. I make the same motion on
the technical amen(iments that are remiainin'.


( ai'I i -(IIIP Ns'n) :. I ) I Ih ,ar t i e .e e() I I
R ep1l-C se IIt t i I- I, I( )l or( ) N,,. SCC,0 1 .
(lhairmiian I )Jkn.\TI'i.:. All III fa or. > v ,g 'iv ii ave."
That is carried.
How about tle SIi- iiiton a)ilenli liit
Senator SY INGTON. I miiove that we (o it. tle I read it.
(1hairian PAST()RE. AIV reiiarl-ks on that
11re(VSeIIt ItiV( 1IRT )ON. SNeeoided.
Representative The( Ac There is a (111011011 i te('liiijue. that
is. neither House can act without rep)Orts fromii 1)01 tlie Joiit ('111-
iiittee aInd the appropriate committee?
Chairnian PRsTORE. IlieY ar e coI)elle(l under the law: tuier the
law, it is subnuitted within 45 days, the (omlitt ee>, ha(ve to refer it
back to the floor where it can be deb)ated. and withiii the .' (day reiiain-
in before the 60-day periodd has lapsed you have to vote.
Representative M'CoItNL \K. Th at is' correct.
What I ani getting at is. they don't vote iII either tlli, until they
have the report of both ,oIiiittee>. They mni-t h av e bothI before they
can vote.
(Chairinan PASTORE. In other words. we impose upon all conm ittee,
the same provisions as to reporting1'.
Alr. PAmER. That is correct.
Chairman PASTORE. You have heard that.
What is your pleasure ?
Senator SYMNGTON. I move we adopt it.
Representative HORTON. SeConlded.
airmann PASTORE. All those in favor. signify by saying '
All those opposed ?
The bill is reported out to the Hlouise.
Representative ANDERSON. Could I for the record really expressii mv
gratitude to ERI)A and to I)r. Seamians and all of tl(, otl(r> who hiave,
worked with me on this legislation ? Thev have made it verv clear i t)i
they want a bill and they have not attenl)ted to delay or to obfll- ate.
Mr. BAKER. I)idn't we reportt this to the Senate also ?
Chairman PASTORE. The bill will be rel)orted to both tihe Ilmlose and
Representative MC(OR-MACK. I think it should be called t1e Ai(ler-
son-Prie bill. not Price-An(erson. >o that we lon't have two Pric-
[Whereulpon. at 12:05 ).m., the ,Joint (Coiitt cech led.
S. ,,S15, an identi(,al original bill. was reported to the Senate,.




S. 1439

[Report No. 94-875]



APRIL 15, 1975
Mr. PRcY (for himself, Mr. GLENN, and Mr. RIBICOFF) introduced the follow-
ing bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Govern-
ment Operations
MAY 13, 1976
Reported by Mr. GLEN.-, with an amendment, and an amendment to the title
[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic]

MAY 13, 1976
By unanimous consent referred jointly to the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy and the Committee on Foreign Relations for a period of 60 days


To reorganize certain export functions of the Federal Govern-

ment to promote more efficient


of such


1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-

2 ties of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

4 Act of f975".


8M4 efct;v r 64f the eyieeutive 4n)urpeb anM n 34ntr~

9 of the ffc ee fcweinlorigt tY-eoy-



1 KI ". .,U
2 Ofi~ and- c-41~ entr140Alie cerlibyHn exprt Iceily tit'i

3 to efiglie 41 for


8 the United Sat-s

9 ()4 that the 1I eparImcit of Sae tlh Dc1llt mc4i 4ilft

10 ileT'p-~

11 Adnnirtoand the Nuelecnr Regu11l; ini

13 that are sibftntia~ ilsmila to the ftuthofities niow exert


16 .eho$lid be transferired to the lbepartrn4ent of Gorie,

18 euota t3ntolttreAi roetd ile li&&i

19 igadapoa fcpr~

20o () th at th e expotin of Aoii~i~r 4. V.1i(x r f
21 ilii, ateril,,n and.,.. tc nologyo iflVJV(7,,. ... .,tl .... ;I ...

2lenretetoChfll defewl ni :;vcurh. vllikm I f4Ie-

242of Ii S pltu d othe epeci 1 nuci'ar fM n tvIrbL. 114 -

24 Af:l a1Ote-Iru Ip m j'rzlio~is


F1 4h04r4o ntiaL -41- by Jtil ll, 66414/d41
2 grouplsl illto cxloivlc'f weapons~ll, ori d]isprsal dcvic,,es;.

4 ml:'ae conictrntn un a deter.inti-on, tha"t sa'fegu'ards,<]

7i a ait dinrsi, tn sbtateo i eiit ntion..r-

8thalitse in the United States

13 issulae of com e ulr lin Unie



16 States should We made ini the context of maigu

17 inentoa cnrladthtcnieato hudb

18 i'ivn to the interntIn,.lZ4tion of fill strategic.lly

19 "aii ape of the inmilitAy nu lear hp! eycle.


21SEe. 3. As used int this Att the termn

2 2 ()"tm ene'rgy facility or matetrial foll use for

23 nionmfilitrlz j~ss mean any!:4 prdcinp 01 -eel
S.. .... l )n / -.--I sour


























Al' 4 any byproduct ti tinr

tioln 11 f t A Atoumic Energy Act I~ .t h ic

for nomiitr Q4rs44 4-4

relate to aCtFic enejgy fAtilitic .f ,mat r urtv

(t a p aia.P; 0 S e

( je tls the (crtm 4 CmIo te

T1 ANEfLRS TO THE ,.;,4,-,, Oe .,. ]E

SF~o. 4. (at() hee etare to the Suar

of0ei ertr ofSat ndr4cto 41o the M

Secuity Act of 1951 as relate to thlt appl'o;vA fwra.w~

(2) NoeKpor~t iC-en~e for nR444, ammumun. ;i di

imlm "t f arwhic"h pr4ior tto tilt edetie(ate (4th

Aet Would have beePn w4ued byte ertar ofS;4e


Rfiiic, tim3nnfusi tie" and the imp4:lemfenits 6i war maylo 14p issuc

2 by thfe SecretaFryA iiL4 the Seeretftry of Sttate hasQ gc;Iven wtrit

St-en fproa for the isstlance of stleh a license.

4 ~ Tcrtr here fo raisich e fction ofhe Scard ofe

S14811 ~~ "A44 bycli-
4we Tetsyonhe zua e f rt: t s r

S(2) Noexport liense which piore to the eeti e dttte

18e 9ie foheltary purpot:..s.

19 (2 oepr lcnefraomceeg ,aitiesor,
20 deals for u fo noith nmtileilitary ot e ma be i ssuedJ
21 afeorthey etivdt fthsAtuless the provisions of e1Wiet
2 0 ....... ..... ... .... . .. ......... A7 1,. ...1. . .

22 :;.t.i 7 h) of th":; Act are mta.
13 (d) (1 There ertte tranisferrfed to thfe Secrcetftfy anfd the

24 Secrettary rshwll poi-form, sucah fuinctions of the Adini ratorgi

25 of theffiEnrgy4oef h nd eeope Admin i t 83

1 relte to tl provl fo epot ofnomiitr alof il'

4 tay to4cenrg toolmoloogv after the ellpoii e dato of ii.

5 Act is~th rv1Ln of :cctionB 7 (11 o 6f 44Li,4 Aet 1r
6 R*46

7 ~.5 TPXNfeR TOy- ffttsfey-e SeetzetTAIi- ofVTT

10 -4 l~tor of th E ey 1 ..... ..And D.e.opment Adiuii:


14 enRpigy t4 4-11 l 4 1 al.

16 SEC. G. ()Ther-e are trinvferred toI the Co1n1n 1 1

17 and4 tlle 1Com414.1ion dm1l :P11 pefomRuClifucto: f

18 ediiArtro the Eeg ecrhadI'4~+-1

19 -X-Htrto s Yelate to" rae'urs o toI44iit,4141CrA

20 -f-aci4ities or mae i fr iRSe for non3lta I'P44:m

21 -i~+-aratmcenryteulv- lehrcto b

22 -4p~~d

23 --h)-l.e-*rc~ ti-ansfcrr to tie GIOHHHni(4! ad Yi

24 Commirioti hall efr see ftiott 8 ai of thte 18cretary k4



1 Stfttes Potle Ilift re]Rte to the trAnsportoatin of rfidioactiv

4 E. .() oepvort liense for the exportation of

*.aoi eeg ac5te or mAterimls for useA far nonmliitary

6 pklirpo~es mway be issued by4 the Sec-reAtary and4 no approve

foir the f nonmlar fitoi enery technology may

S )Cgienbyth Scrtayunes the Commis ideterm+.ine
9 thkat the- recipient countryj to which any Puch technology,

19 tr in progr.m....mae..ileto. er-ionsi fr ous

20i--4 thesofhih purcha licensd atomic enrg forcilitie r

21 toaer ia ...f u-ie fo neonzmt-ru re l forof nyerson"'
2417 nn and- physicals Qecuity consisten wth -natioa

18 ,. ,, ,, -o-1 TLol n sll gimiR Anc~f nd Q,-e,-ate a
...... tr iiii pro ra ta' LA.. =Pd Av i ...... ........
-- --------" n r m o



1 (2)Thelre firc, Luhrie o b p iipnated iicl mu

4I T4 ('44444~ Zia 4;iEAJO 441 J1 T 44AE2 6-ii
5 \-. (-1 T.nh
,] 1 .,',e Cl~ .
dteiinai' pusun torcin7()ivovig: rt

8 o ombawproc n f~mltar tomi ii efef te~

11 (o4)gy, prepar and f ease pfolieltionl a 7. lesel


134 h Armso-al orol Ad4 Dillrmamet A gccoftc Ioee
14 p' or ...en.. a o.....t......e all opportune

15 toe, omment@1 on4 Siuchft approfvel or lientse.-

17 Sfie' P.- \Iki ( I ) Tit,,- /of,.....iot ... ,i.., f,-ll e ... dt,.ie H. 0.....

18 Ough study of the af gards. ge-nn..gltio fo

19 atomicenerg facilities; or matei ilA for use; far ioiiwilitorNv

20 1)l'lTOSe esahse b4tyInt( Sae lil1 the Imfer
2 nationall A tomic, Z4nrg Agncy, ith cia,0,,l coslat,

22 o-f the-A (ifferenees-pp ini suc sfeuad

23 () olaethan in onths from 0he (date of en

24 aetment 4 0f thi i A t, tle (homs0un ---l----- pare an,

2- trsi to thA Ps4en F-4d 144 i t-0 igre11s4 a rep0rt Oil the


1 Gtl(iVd rPiAmr('di by 'this sttigectian togcthc ihadre

2 mto for the upgradin
3 of Iuh~fgiRS~ a the14 f*4Ntiondems AdviA.

6 taly:lututaspeots of the ilit atoi energy

12 iionl a t l Commr711111111 advsal
7 LIP]d A..P..

13 (c Such sum f a i may e ntecictlsl 11r- tr hedy t ofe

9 thoitd t A ot the I,1-,4-on, o1-P A- p pti n.

11 ll T l@q44ir-@ by llll?,3%1 thisll to te i ste loeel paen

12 tiois fis he alvslile


16 ..... 10. Ia All p"Pl, ibiie cntrctprlop

1 7 PAYv. of4d Fecor1-4 fs are dietermtiied by th446-to f

20 under the#1 OYlllllslti of tist A~t. ar traserd to !1 'i thel S

18,tt of tAt to the Q m:;ilo. ar

9')' v -- -f-- -"'1 -.7 ") -- -l


24 suscin CIon nae in flinctious transforrcd under



1tis Aet sital1 be trat ferred in tt 'lru wt ~pV

%l.l...JI&I Lte tf "S e Of~lJ pe.ifite p 1_.%1n t.oA!.;J sljll QtL-tioll
4 (t A)1 shall be w4itot reduction in elassigition of eofttpeiv

5 ia o m er ar suTehi'! Tr-ans4,Tr-, k

7SfeC. 41. (a) Al 11Ofders, (termflio4s, riles reico'ItIft
8 tio-n"s" p....its, contvract" s," cer-i,-atc s lcen-s,-- and.. p-I ,.i;

10 whih have c ieegn Of ..l

11 lowed to becomfie effective in the exerciseA of fiuncrions

13 agency cor office, or par~t thereof, Any fonctionhof whic
14 -ou ol'otp

15 ..... and

17,efect hlcte in ,.ohrdtinge tos t tems

18 utlmodified, terminataed, superseded, set ciside or*- -e-

19 -_ . -

20 byX the Comimigsion, as the case may LA, or bIZ A44y u

21 f cmpeentjursditiol. b, oupration of law.


24 3fY gny r of IiceF or part t-er-of, functions of whilh .re
25 atsf l t V g A vt proo, iad;tioxo i,4 .t



Re,,ettelt ad Developmntefit dt or the Con

;-,VJ;1i CtO Lite CUfi;C moi be. Suchl proecediig2, to the extent 'Ley

were 11Wc ling 84 tfho time of st.h tIrlttnfer. in either eff

ofders shall be issted ini stie1h4 proccdng ,4ppead shall be

l,\ .\11,, ... 11-i.... .: .I :% .. ...... .o.I)
slict ords, PR if thi Act pt 1 no : ,t ben nact -d; -nd orders

i-W( h priiinso R1is 4Act sha4144 ll effect suIts

and ~ ~ ~ ~ A effectIP asv ilf ths c hd o beneaced

or oease, itor partO 4 t thereof, ofeiiettJl

d Lim-.

ons ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of5 thsAAS421" i -R'-'*"

Vl V 1 KS, JLl ( Iprii tal~ L e tttll th i seetio~ll tft -e egffe And-III



or- 1 ()y OF C4"ause allt io fip.4- thel- r aiii iI .1'i -i' t

% t~~~t( i o 41 i. l (4J-11
1.1 1 .
0....)V, 01' 'I,, I"'i ,, ,ai fl v iI 4 .. .. ,,1 ,, h;.1, ,,i V t jja1 It ,. .....

shll Ab4Atfe i ofy rClS1itef,1 (Ai t Ih ifthHN I ( W 144,(I
actions, 0 U i 04 1 1t" litN o 'ite IIlWtill4 d0 111' l lf4i ff f(I It.
a1,a just .... r te ,, t ut, .. .. 0 1. i i ;i............ . ..... I ... ....1 te

th4 O~prn f AS 4t'FAtc4 044114 the -1-1 ;Viillvn al' to dw

Jpropriato4 0.d inayhiT )1pl4ig .I i iii eti'
t....t e t e ay t. li tili t4 i Nike!i i Te1et.
tt of anyL gg prty enterLILL anll o" ler wh K i. chIII wll ll. 'iv effect tl~r l) I U'

OF .'e IsOlil daiv

'~~pal-ty to a R1it, Bil U1(lcl this :A(4

(A uhageiwcv oi-4(o ( )4 -o aiiy part40 itbcr-eof.i!

triweredto theQ S441-01-11V ti-e Sl4et-ll' aryf SI ate
.,(B);,. any; f.ntio of1uhaeiyofo

then l l Fui ll beIP c L4ine b the1 11 e1a1 4 +( 1 (i Se1 e
(w fl o G' "I

S-eeiofeSae, o St1we (iu.iVi u i aN 1Ill 1~(exe
W44-T. i1 k Off 8444401k 141 111A i iN Le

in. the 4c-1u ofC if nttulii~fi e r tn 114 n ;!1414(i c~

sce,(.tap'y th1S40ear of PStatel ()I tile ic(S~Iii i fi! litl



1ealse fiffy ;eH i whiell (mte tile SH4 sl:arll be conitinueld by4 the
agao oi vt1 leo,(I-Afovwi'l ap yt

3 the sl14 r..i t... the efect;iv dt.e of thi AcQ

16Ld 11-41 re.pc an funtio -ransfrre b thig AcPt

~ u(1 xered t: the efcetive datte of this Acet) refcrefefe

6 il yoilief ituderal lflrN to Rny tagencyll offic, r a4t

7 dlereof. OF officer so tfra]44fcrrcd 44r flllctioni obf whlichI Sr O

8tlui'fcrrcf~d s:hulI 4e, 4eeffin- to fifan the -1)cpartielitl h

10 s-ch fuiuiun is lto this A(t.

12Stteo ot tie H4nin4 lmta:te etise +Hy llv, iii. Otc exet-eic
1:3 l o1 fucionsEIII I Illw tMI11(e hsAts iahJl b ldt- t

14 feil i t i l i -,tti t e ex ('Ilit o iii the stiniie mI -nner ln w

1 if i1w JI o,' (ll i4 i at |iIs A1(1 01t.II b h ige!4iwy (r offfike, Of

18 hcanngs. Retlonf uipon le 444rd1o a(lintistratjve review

19 thtapyt(o ;n11 fuctioli triifw-lrd by- lin A tt ihall apply

20 k) tile elXercis;e of suceh fiti-tibeSertay th e e
21 ) toyo tite, or the Coinwwsiol41 a, the eatse itify 4e.
21 11111111 1. I.-l I-1 HAk I Il

23 thj- Act, ith Seretry,- te Sece ,ry... of ..tate, th die Co
24 n a .....e... ,... flli, i,, sh0 all Lae ti sme authority
24 1 ,1 -
29,~~ ~~~ .. ...... .. ()j. ... .. .. ,''.. i-...
25s il d~ %- IP H. 04"WI il il I/I I(Il.lII lk~


2 LJ and.,,' bil. acr(tiow i, n cxccivlii uizi. ;...o I iLvc h.
3 sam e re a4d effect eis -inc(C~db .ul- H "4eIIV Hr

4 eJ44w+k L Leffe4f.

5 -te I-vf I+Aq~--

7 feet nfiiety dafys aftfr the date of ettfetiincut ofthJ
8 or on such1 prioj!dt ttfeittfittori ef-,

10 That this Act may be cited as the "Export Reorganization

11 Act of 1976".

13 SEc. 2. (a) The Congress hereby finds and declares-
14 (1) that it is in the interest of the economy and

15 effectiveness of the executive branch, and in the interest

16 of the effectiveness of congressional oversight, to reor-

17 ganize and centralize certain export control functions

18 of the Government;

19 (2) that the exporting of nonmilitary nuclear equip-

20 menit, material, and technology involves speckia1 prob-

21 lems related to foreign policy and to common defense and

22 security and public health and safety posed by the inter-
23 national proliferation of plutonium and other special

24 nuclear material, and by their potential conversion by



1 nations and subnational groups into explosive weapons
2 or dispersal devices;
3 (3) that the approval and licensing of such exports

4 should take into account the adequacy of safeguards
5 against theft, diversion, and sabotage in recipient nations;

6 (4) that Congress established the Nuclear Regular
7 tory Commission as the agency responsible for protect-

8 ing the common defense and security and public health
9 and safety through the issuance of commercial nuclear

10 licenses both domestically and for export; and
11 (5) that the Department of State, 'the agency princi-

12 pally responsible for the development and implementation
13 of foreign policy, should have the principal responsibility
14 for the negotiation and renegotiation of international
15 agreements for civil nuclear cooperation and of subse-
16 quent arrangements made pursuant to the agreements
17 and should play an integral role in the approval for

18 export of nonmilitary nuclear equipment, technology,

19 and material; and
20 (6) that commercial nuclear exports by the United
21 States should be made in the context of meaningful
22 international controls, and that consideration should be

23 given to the internationalization of all strategically sig-
24 niflcant aspects of the nonmilitary nuclear fuel cycle.



2 SEC. 3. As used in this Act, the term-
3 (1) "atomic energy facility or material for use for

4 nonmilitary purposes" means any production or utiliza-

5 tion facility, any special nuclear material, any source

6 material or any byproduct material as defined in section
7 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, to be used for non-

8 military purposes;
9 (2) "Commission" means the Nuclear Regulatory

10 Commission;
11 (3) "function" includes power and duty;

12 (4) "nonmilitary atomic energy technology" means

13 any technology which the Commission determines to

14 relate to atomic energy facilities or materials for use for

15 nonmilitary purposes; and

16 (5) ''nonnuclear weapons country" incans any couin-

17 try that had not detonated a nuclear decice prior to the

18 tine the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nulear

19 Weapons came into force;

20 (6) "'nuclear weapons country- meas (IiI {Yintry

21 that detonated a nuclear derice prior to the him the

22 Treaty on the Non-Proliferatioo of uch'ar 11e Upn,

23 came into force: and

24 (7) "safeguards" inc/uds Inaterials acU)oiitdility

25 and physical security.



2 SEC. 4. (a) There are transferred to the Secretary of
3 State, and the Secretar.y shall perform, such functions of the
4 Administrator of the Energy Research and Development

5 Administration as relate to negotiating, renegotiating and

6 entering into international agreements for cooperation on
7 atomic energy facilities, components or materials for use for

8 nonmilitary purposes and nonmilitary atomic energy tech-
9 nology, and to negotiating, renegotiating and entering into

10 all subsequent arrangements made pursuant to the agree-

11 ments: Provided, That the Secretary shall obtain the close

12 cooperation and the technical advice and assistance of the
13 Administrator in negotiating, renegotiating, and entering into

14 such agreements and such subsequent arrangements.
15 (b) (1) No agreement or subsequent arrangement under

16 this section shall be negotiated, renegotiated, or entered into
17 unless the Secretary of State has consulted with, and has taken
18 into full consideration the recommendations and policies of,

19 the Commission applying to the licensing for export of atomic

20 energy facilities, components and materials for use for non-
21 military purposes or the approval for export of nonmilitary
22 atomic energy technology, which are the subject of such agree-

23 ment or arrangement.
24 (2) The Commi.ssion shall furnish a copy of its views to

25 the Congress when such a proposed agreement for cooperation

1 is submitted to the Congress pursuant to section 123(d) of

2 the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
3 (c) (1) The Secretary of State shall provide the Commis-
4 sion with appropriate data and recommendations, subject to

5 requests for additional data and recommendations as re-

6 quired by the Commission, for the performance of its func-
7 tions under sections 53(a), 62, 82(c), 103, 104, and 109(b)
8 of the Atomic Energy Act as relate to the issuance of export

9 licenses for atomic energy facilities, materials or components
10 for use for nonmilitary purposes, and sections 4(b), 5(a).

11 and 6(a) -of this Act as relate to the furnishing to the Secre-
12 tary of State and to the Congress the recommendations and
13 policies of the Commission relating to negotiating, renegotiat-

14 ing, and entering into international agreements for coopera-
15 tion and subsequent arrangements made pursuant to the
16 agreements by the Secretary, the approval for export by the
17 Commission of atomic energy technology for use for non-

18 military purposes, and the taking into account by the Con nis-

19 sion of the adequacy of safeguards on all atomic energy
20 exports for use for nonmilitary purposes.
21 (2) The Secretary of State shall obtain the data and
22 recommendations referred to in paragraph (1) from the De-
23 partment of State and other such agencies of the Federal
24 Government as he deems appropriate and furnish them to the
25 Commission, except as provided in section 7(b).


2 SEC. 5. (a) There are transferred to the Commission,
3 and the Commission shall perform, such regulatory functions

4 of the Administrator of the Energy Research and Develop-
5 ment Administration as relate to the approval for export of

6 nonmilitary atomic energy technology.
7 (b) There are transferred to the Commission, and the

8 Commission shall perform, such regulatory functions pursu-
9 ant to section 109(b) of the Aitomic Energy Act as presently

10 exercised by the Secretary of Commerce with respect to the
11 licensing for export of nuclear components.


14 SEC. 6. (a) The Commission, in considering applica-
15 tions for licenses for export of atomic energy facilities, com-

16 ponents, and materials for use for nonmilitary purposes and
17 applications for approval for export of nonmilitary atomic
18 energy technology, and in making determinations relating to

19 common defense and security and public health and safety

20 under section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act, shall take into

21 account the adequacy of safeguards in the recipient country
22 to which any such facility, components, material, or tech-
23 nology is to be exported to meet the risk of nuclear diversion,
24 theft, or sabotage in the recipient country.

25 (b) (1) Within ninety days of the effective date of this



1 Act, the Commission shall promulqate rcp!lation. relating to

2 what it deems to be appropriate issuance of public notiIC,
3 access to nonclassified information, sch(dlliql of public liar-

4 ings, and recording of minutes and votes of the ('mnison

5 with respect to applications for licenses for export of atomic

6 energy facilities, components., and materials for use for non-

7 military purposes and applications for approval for export

8 of nonmilitary atomic energy technology.

9 (2) The export-licensing decisions of the Cornmmission

10 shall be announced in wrritinq, and, where appropriate, ac-

11 companied by a written opinion, including any concurring

12 or di.,senting rie" of the (onInn"siocrs. A (I0(!d(ihd "ol1wr!

13 of the procisions of anl such liC nsc approu cd bY tt(t 'uom-

14 -mission shall be publish,( 'd in the Fcdc(ral hIpqstcr as soo as,4

15 practicable after smch aipproal by the (Cunwislon lo/cth(

16 with a description of tthe ,,afequards rt iiH d to hc f,,llw (I

17 in connection with ,'ich license and ,s of sih ft'ailitl, sS.C0n1-
18 ponents, viateria1 or technology.

19 (c) (1) No application for a license for ex)ort of at/uni C

20 energy facilities, components, or material for as for nun-

21 military purposes or an application for approval for export

22 of nonmilitary atomic enerqqj technology shall be apprior' bY

23 the Commis..qon unless the SecrtarY of ,S'tate has (irc n wrrit-

24 ten approval for the issuance of suh a lic nse or the granting

25 of such approval.


1 (2) Any special nuclear material distributed by the
2 Lnergy Research and Development Administration to any
3 Nation or group of nations for nonmiltary purposes shall
4 require the issu1n'ce of a license by the Commission, subject

5 to the written approval of the Secretary of State, as provided

6 in th?5 section.
7 (3) In the event that the Commission does not agree writh
8 the Secretary that an application should be approved, or the

9 Commission determines that an application raises substantial
10 issues that the Commission cannot resolve, the Commission
11 shall defer approval of the application for sixty days hence,

12 pending a review by the Congress.

13 (4) In the event that the Commission exercises the option

14 pursuant to paragraph (3) it shall furnish the Congress a

15 complete record pertaining to the particular application, in-
16 eluding a report explaining its action and any findings made
17 pursuant to subsection (a) and to section 103 of the Atomic

18 Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and all data, findings,
19 and recommendations furnished to the Commission by the

20 executive agencies pursuant to sections 4 and 7 of this Act.
21 The aforementioned application and accompanying docu-
22 ne'tation shall be submitted immediately to the Congress and
23 referred to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy for a
24 period of sixty days while Congress is in session (in corn-

25 puting such sixty days, there shall be excluded -the days on

I i)


1 which either House is not in session because of an adjou r-
2 ment of more than three days), and the Commission shall
3 approve and issue the license for export of atomic energy fa-

4 cilities or materials for use for nonmilitary purposes or

5 approve the export of nonmilitary atomic energy technology,

6 as the case may be, immediately upon expiration of the sixty-
7 day period unless during such sixiy-day period the Congress

8 passes a concurrent resolution stating in substance that it
9 does not favor the proposed export. Prior to the elapse of

10 the first thirty days of any such sixty-day period the Joint
11 Committee shall submit a report to the Congress of its views

12 and recommendations respecting the proposed export and an

13 accompanying proposed concurrent resolution stating in sub-

14 stance that the Congress favors, or does not favor, as the
15 case may be, the proposed export. Any such concurrent res-
16 olution so reported shall become the pending business of the
17 House in question (in the case of the Senate the time for

18 debate shall be equally divided between the proponents and

19 the opponents) within twenty-five days and shall be voted on
20 within five calendar days thereafter, unless such House shall
21 otherwise determine.
22 (d) There is authorized to be appropriated to the Con-
23 mission an additional sum of $1,400,000 for fiscal year
24 1977, such sum to remain available until expended, for the

25 purpose of exercising its responsibilities relating to safe-


1 guards for atomic energy facilities, components and ma-

2 terials for use for nonmilitary purposes and nonmilitary
3 atomic energy technology which are to be exported.


5 SEC. 7. (a) The Commission shall, with respect to its
6 functions pursuant to section 4(b) involving all international

7 agreements for cooperation, and those subsequent arrange-
8 ments made pursuant to the agreements which the Commis-

9 sion determines to be of strategic significance, and pursuant
10 to section 6(a) involving what the Commission determines

11 to be strategically significant atomic energy facilities, com-
12 ponents, or materials for use for nonmilitary purposes and
13 nonmilitary atomic energy technology, obtain a Nuclear Pro-

14 liferation Assessment Statement from the Arms Control and
15 Disarmament Agency.
16 (b) The Arms Control and Disarmament Agency shall
17 prepare and furnish such Nuclear Proliferation Assessment

18 Statements directly to the Commission, to the Secretaa'y of

19 State, and to the Congress.

20 (c) The Commission shall notify the Agency when it

21 requires that a Nuclear Proliferation Assessment Statement
22 be prepared by the Agency, or the Director of the Agency may
23 prepare such a statement at his own discretion. Such state-
24 ment shall be furnished by the Agency to the Commission by
25 a mutually agreeable date.


2 SEc. 8. (a) The Energy Research and Development
3 Administrator, in consultation with the Commission, shall
4 establish and operate a training program to be made available

5 to persons from countries which purchase licensed atomic

6 energy facilities, components, or materials for use for non-
7 military purposes or nonmilitary atomic energy technology

8 from any person in the United States. Any such program
9 shall include training in the most advanced safeguards tech-

10 niques and technology, consistent with national security
11 interests of the United States.

12 (b) (1) The Commission shall conduct a thorough, con-

13 tinuing study of the safeguards guidelines and regulations

14 for atomic energy facilities, components, and materials for
15 use for nonmilitary purposes and nonmilitary atomic energy
16 technology established by the United States and by the Inter-
17 national Atomic Energy Agency, with special consideration

18 of the differences and interactions between such safeguards.

19 (2) As soon as practicable after the end of each fiscal
20 year, the Commission shall prepare and transmit to the
21 President and the Congress a report on the study required
22 by this subsection, together with such recommendations, in-
23 cluding recommendations for the upgrading of such safe-
24 guards, as the Commission deems advisable.

25 (c) The. President is directed to review all activities



1 of Government agencies relating to limiting the spread of

2 nuclear weapons and to make an annual report to Congress
3 not later than December 31 on the Government's efforts to

4 control proliferation, such report to include but not be limited

5 to discussion of-

6 (1) promoting cooperative arrangements between
7 the United States and other nations for the purpose of
8 preventing the stockpiling of nuclear weapons material

9 outside the nuclear weapons nations;
10 (2) promoting adherence to the Treaty for the Non-
11 Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and discouraging or
12 prohibiting nuclear sales to nations that are not parties

13 to the treaty or have not entered into comparable agree-
14 ments with respect to safeguards and nuclear explosions;

15 (3) strengthening the safeguards of the International
16 Atomic Energy Agency, ensuring uniform application of
17 such safeguards and promoting promptness and openness
18 in the verification and reporting procedures of the

19 Agency;
20 (4) promoting an international convention or similar
21 mechanism for establishing and enforcing minimum
22 physical security standards for preventing acts of sabo-
23 tage and theft with respect to civilian nuclear equipment

24 and material;
25 (5) promoting an international convention or simi-


1 lar mechanism for recovering diverted or stolen nuclear

2 material, for imposing swift and strict sanctions against
3 all nations that engage in unauthorized use of nuclear

4 material or conduct unauthorized nuclear explosions, and

5 for dealing with subnational or criminal groups engaging

6 in acts of sabotage or of theft or using or threatening
7 to use nuclear explosive or dispersal devices.

8 (d) Section 307(c) of the Energy Reorganization Act
9 of 1974 is amended by adding a paragraph at the end there-

10 of, as follows:
11 "In addition, the Commission report shall include

12 a full summary and analysis of the Commission's rec-

13 ommendations and actions in regard to nonmilitary nu-

14 clear exports, with emphasis on the adequacy of safe-

15 guards to ensure that such exports are not misused for

16 nuclear-explosion programs.".
17 (e) Such sums as may be necessary are hereby au-

18 thorized to carry out the provisions of this section.

20 SEC. 9. (a) It is the policy of the United States to

21 strengthen the safeguards program of the International

22 Atomic Energy Agency and in order to implement this policy

23 to contribute funds to assist the Agency in meeting the chal-

24 lenge of effectively implementing nuclear safeguards at a


1 time when international utilization of nuclear power for

2 growing energy needs is rapidly increasing.
3 (b) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated

4 S5,000,00 for contributions to the International Atomic
5 Energy Agency toward its safeguards activities, which

6 amount is authorized to remain available until expended:
7 Provided, That such sums shall be in addition to any other

8 contribution to the International Atomic Energy Agency by
9 the United States pursuant to any other provision of law.


11 SEC. 12. (a) The President is requested and authorized

12 to enter promptly into negotiations with the Union of Soviet
13 Socialist Republics, France, the Federal Republic of Ger-

14 many, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Japan, and such

15 other nuclear supplier countries as he deems appropriate, for
16 the express purpose of reaching an agreement which shall be

17 binding on each of the parties, and which shall include pro-

18 visions for-

19 (1) arrangements leading to the co9perati'e pro-

20 vision, under international safeguards, of nuclear reactor

21 fuel enrichment, falbrication and reprocessing services to

22 recipient countries on a nondiscriminatory basis, includ-

23 ing the application of article 12 of the statute of the

24 International Atomic Energy Agency (hereinafter re-


1 ferred to as the "Agency") providing for the dep sit wit/h

2 the Agency of excess special fissionable materilI and spent
3 reactor fuel;

4 (2) prohibition of the -transfer to any indiidnal

5 non-nuclear weapons country of any technology, coin-

6 ponent, or facility capable of enriching, fat)ricatin ', or
7 reprocessing special fissionable material;

8 (3) prohibition of the transfer of any nonmilitairy
9 atomic energy technology and any atomic energy facility,

10 component, or material for use for nonmilitary purposes
11 to any non-nuclear weapons country that has not entered

12 into an agreement with the Agency-

13 (A) to accept the safeguards of the Agency on

14 all source and special fissionable material in all

15 nuclear activities within the territory of such, coun-

16 try, under its jurisdiction, or carried out under its

17 control anywhere, and
18 (B) t9 undertake not to receive the transfer of,

19 or manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weap-

20 ons or other nuclear explosive devices, and not to

21 receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear

22 weapons or other nuclear explosive devices:

23 (4) establishing-

24 (A) minimum physical security standards for

25 the protection against acts of sabotage and theft of


1 all facilities and all shipment, handling, and storage
2 of source and special fissionable material within the
3 territory or under the jurisdiction of each of the

4 parties, and transferred by the parties to other coun-
5 tries, and

6 (B) an international mechanism for enforce-
7 ment of such standards, for recovery of stolen source

8 and special fissionable material, and for dealing with
9 individuals and groups engaging in acts of sabotage

10 and theft;
11 (5) establishing-

12 (A) sanctions to be imposed against any nu-
13 clear supplier country that refuses to participate in

14 the arrangements described in paragraphs (1), (2),
15 (3), and (4) of this subsection, and any country
16 that willfully violates the safeguards of the Agency,
17 (B) an international mechanism for recover-

18 ing source and special fissionable material that has

19 been obtained or used by a country in willful viola-
20 tion of the safeguards of the Agency, including use

21 in a nuclear explosion program, and for recovering
22 any exported technology, component, or facility used
23 in connection with such violation.
24 (b) The President is requested and authorized to enter
25 promptly into bilateral and multilateral negotiations with as



1 many other countries as possible including those referred to

2 in subsection (a) for the express purpose of reaching an
3 agreement which shall be binding on each of the parties and

4 which shall establish an international mechanism for dealing

5 with and imposing sanctions on any non-nitclear-'eappo,s

6 country that, by virtue of engaging in unauthorized nuclear
7 activities beyond the reach of, or in violation of, the safe-

8 guards of the Agency, is deemed to have embarked upon a

9 nuclear weapons program. Such international mechanism

10 shall, with respect to any non-nuclear-weapons country that

11 has detonated a nuclear explosive device, include procediires

12 for-

13 (1) suspending some or all commerce and communi-

14 cations between the parties and such country;

15 (2) requiring the return of any exported source or

16 special fissionable material, and any exported technology,

17 component or facility used in such a nuclear weapons

18 program.

19 (c) The President is directed to prepare and submit a

20 report to the Congress not later than June 1, 1977, and

21 annually thereafter as a part of the report due December 31

22 pursuant to subsection 8(c) of this Act, which shall include-

23 (1) a description, of the degree of progress made

24 toward the negotiation of agreements that meet each of

25 the objectives described in subsections (a) and (b) ;


1 (2) an analysis of each agreement for cooperation
2 negotiated pursuant to section 123 of the Atomic Energy
3 Act, including a discussion of the scope of the require-

4 ments and obligations relating to the safeguards and
5 peaceful or civil uses contained in each agreement and

6 a discussion of the adequacy of such requirements and
7 obligations to protect the interests of the United States

8 and to maintain its obligations to prevent the further
9 proliferation, of atomic weapons capability;

10 (3) a determination as to which agreements for
11 cooperation should be modified because they are incon-

12 sistent with the interests and obligations of the United
13 States pursuant to paragraph (2). In making such de-

14 terminations, the President shall discuss whether each
15 agreement should prohibit the following activities and

16 whether such activities have been engaged in by the

17 recipient country-

18 (A) the explosion of a nuclear device by a non-

19 nuclear weapons country;
20 (B) the refusal by a non-nuclear weapons coun,-

21 try to accept the safeguards of the Agency on all

22 nuclear activities;
23 (C) the refusal by a non-nuclear weapons coun-

24 try to give a specific assurance that it will not engage
25 in a nuclear explosion program;



1 (D) the import or indigenous production by a

2 non-nuclear weapons country of technology, com-
3 ponents or facilities capable of producing special
4 fissionable material suitable for direct use in a

5 nuclear explosive device; and

6 (E) the stockpiling by a non-nuclear weapons
7 country on a national basis of special fissionable

8 material suitable for direct use in a nuclear explosive
9 device.

10 (4) beginning December 31, 1977, and annually
11 thereafter, a statement on the degree of progress made

12 toward renegotiating any agreements for cooperation

13 which the President has cited as needing modification
14 pursuant to paragraph (3) of this subsection.


16 SEC. 13. This Act, other than this section, shall take

17 effect ninety days after the date of enactment of this Act.

18 or on such prior date after enactment of this Act as the

19 President shall prescribe and publish in the Federal Register.


21 SEC. 11. (a) All personnel, liabilities contrawts, prop-

22 erty, and records as are determined by the Director of the

23 Office of Management and Budget to be employed, held, or

24 used primarily in connection with any function transferred



1 under the provisions of this Act, are transferred to the Sec-

2 retary of State or to the Commission, as the case may be.
3 (b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this

4 subsection, personnel engaged in functions transferred under

5 this Act shall be transferred in accordance with applicable

6 laws and regulations relating to transfer of functions.
7 (2) The transfer of personnel pursuant to subsection

8 (a) shall be without reduction in classification or compensa-
9 tion for one year after such transfer.

11 SEC. 12. (a) All orders, determinations, rules, regula-

12 tions, permits, contracts, certificates, licenses, and privi-
13 leges--

14 (1) which have been issued, made, granted, or al-

15 lowed to become effective in the exercise of functions
16 which are transferred under this Act, by (A) any

17 agency or office, or part thereof, any functions of which

18 are transferred by this Act, or (B) any court of compe-

19 tent jurisdiction, and
20 (2) which are in effect at the time this Act takes

21 effect,
22 shall continue in effect according to their terms until modi-
23 fled, terminated, superseded, set aside, or repealed by the

24 Secretary of State or by the Commission, as the case may



1 be, or by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by opera-

2 tion of law.
3 (b) The provisions of this Act shall not affect any pro-

4 ceedings pending at the time this section takes effect before any

5 agency or office, or part thereof, functions of which are

6 transferred by this Act; but msch proceedings, to the extent
7 that they relate to functions so transferred, shall be contin ued

8 before the Department of State, or the Commission, as the

9 case may be. Such proceedings, to the extent they do not

10 relate to functions so transferred, shall be continued before

11 the agency or office, or part thereof, before which they wrere

12 pending at the time of such transfer. In either case orders

13 shall be issued in such proceedings, appeals shall be taken

14 therefrom, and payments shall be made pursuant to s*ch

15 orders, as if this Act had not been enacted; and orders

16 issued in any such proceedings shall continue in effect until

17 modified, terminated, superseded, or repealed by the Secre-
18 tary of State or by the Commission, as the case may be, or by

19 a court of competent jurisdiction, or by operation of laiw.

20 (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2)-

21 (A) the provisions of this Act shall not affect suits

22 commenced prior to the date this section takes effect, and

23 (B) in all such suits proceedings shall be had, ap-

24 peals taken, and judgments rendered, in th- same manner
25 and effect as if this Act had not been enacted.


1 No suit, action, or other proceeding commenced by or against

2 any officer in his official capacity as an officer of any agency
3 or office, or part thereof, functions of which are transferred
4 by this Act, shall abate by reason of the enactment of this

5 Act. No cause of action by or against any agency or office, or

6 part thereof, functions of which are transferred by this Act,
7 or by or against any officer thereof in his official capacity

8 shall abate by reason of the enactment of this Act. Causes of
9 actions, suits, or other proceedings may be asserted by or

10 against the United States or such official of the Department

11 of State or the Commission, as may be appropriate and, in
12 any litigation pending when this section takes effect, the court

13 may at any time, on its own motion or that of any party,
14 enter an order which will give effect to the provions of this

15 subsection.
16 (2) If before the date on which this Act takes effect,

17 any agency or office, or officer thereof in his official capacity,

18 is a party to a suit, and under this Act-

19 (A) such agency or office, or any part thereof, is
20 transferred to the Secretary of State or the Commission,

21 as the case may be, or
22 (B) any function of such agency, office, or part

23 thereof, or officer is transferred to the Secretary of State

24 or the Commission, as the case may be,

25 then such suit shall be continued by the Secretary of State


1 or the Commission, as the case may be (except in the case

2 of a suit not involving functions transferred to the Secretary
3 of State or the Commission, as the case may be, in which case
4 the suit shall be continued by the agency, office, or part there-

5 of, or officer which was a party to the suit prior to the effec-

6 tive date of this Act).
7 (d) With respect to any function transferred by this Act
8 and exercised after the effective date of this Act, reference

9 in any other Federal law to any agency, office, or part
10 thereof, or offer so transferred or functions of which are so
11 transferred shall be deemed to mean the Department of State
12 or the Commission, or officer in which such function is vested

13 pursuant to this Act.

14 (e) Orders and actions of the Secretary of State or the

15 Commission, as the case may be, in the exercise of functions
16 transferred under this Act shall be subject to judicial rerew
17 in the same extent and in the same manner as if such orders

18 and actions had been by the agency or office, or part thereof,
19 exercising such functions, immediately preceding their trans-

20 fer. Any statutory requirements relating to notice, hearings,
21 action upon the record, or administrative reciew that apply to

22 any function transferred by this Act shall apply to the cxer-
23 cise of such function by the Secretary of State or the Coi-

24 mission, as the case may be.
25 (f) In the exercise of the functions transferred under



1 this Act, the Secretary of State or the Commission, as the

2 case may be, shall have the same authority as that vested in
3 the agency or office, ar part thereof, exercising such functions
4 immediately preceding their transfer, and his actions in
5 exercising such functions shall have the same force and effect
6 as when exercised by such agency or office, or part thereof.

Amend the title so as to read: "A bill to reorganize cer-
tain export functions of the Federal Government to promote
more efficient and effective administration 'of such functions.".


Aum;s'r 25. 1976
Mr. PASTORE (for himself. Mr. RII(' r., Mr. GLNN, Mr. mrN, Mr.
PERCY, Mr. ,JAVITS. and Mr. BAKl mit romli-ue! le 'lol,) wing bill" which
was read twice and referred to the Joint ('ommittee on Atomic Energy

To provide for more efficient and effective control over the pro-
liferation of nuclear explosives )V anieidinents to the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended.

1 BC it elacl(Ied b!y he Sca(Ie (tdl House of Rc'pres nta-

2 1ives of the Unit (1 Sta(/C.s of America in Cofirs.s assmhloebd,

3 That this Act may i)e cited as the "Nuclear Exp)losive Pro-

4 liferation Control Act of 197(".

6 SEC. 2. The Congress hereby finds and declares that the

7 proliferation of nuclear explosive devices poses a grave threat
8 to vital Iinited States interests and continued international

9 progress toward world pea( and development. Recent


1 events, including the explosion of a nuclear device by India
'2 and the announcement of the transfer of uranium enrichment
3; and nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities to non-nuclear-weapon
4 states, emphasize the urgency of this threat and the impera-

5~ tive need to increase the scope, comprehensiveness, and effec-

6 tiveness of international safeguards and controls on peaceful
7 nuclear activities to prevent further proliferation of nuclear

S explosive devices. Accordingly, it is the policy of the United

9 States to-
10 (a) actively pursue the establishment of effective

11 international controls over the transfer and use of nuclear
12 equipment, material, and technology for peaceful pur-

13 poses which will prevent the further proliferation of

14 nuclear explosive devices:
15 (b) insure that the actions of the Uinited States in
16 international nuclear commerce in helping to assure ade-

17 quate and reliable energy supplies to other nations are

18 consistent with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of

19 -Nuclear Weapons ("the treaty") the statute of the
20 International Atomic Energy Agency ("the statute"),

21 and the need to establish effective controls on the pro-
22 liferation of nuclear explosive devices through interna-

23 tional arrangements and cooperative agreements; and
24 (c) encourage nations which ha,-e not ratified the

25 treaty to do so at the earliest possible (late.



2 SEC. 3. It is the purpose of this Act to promote the
3 policies set forth :above by insuring effective control by the

4 United States over its exports of nuclear equipment, mate-

5 rials, and sensitive nuclear teclinology, by establishing a

6 framework for international cooperation to insure that the
7 worldwide development of peaceful nuclear activities as well

8 as the export by any nation of nuclear equipment, materials,
9 and sensitive nuclear technology intended for use in peaceful

10 nuclear activities do not contribute to the proliferation of

11 nuclear explosive devices, and 1)y providing incentives to the
12 other nations of the world to join in such international cooper-

13 ative efforts. Accordingly, this Act specifies-

14 (a) provisions to insure the full and comprehensive

15 assessment of the risks of p-roliferation of nuhela' ex-
16 plosive devices in the negotiation and review of agree-

17 ments for cooperation and subsequent arrangements
18 under such agreements, and policies affecting the prolif-

19 ration of nuclear exl)losive devices;

20 (b) procedures under which the Congress will re-

21 ceive adequate information and opportunity y t) ,xanmiie

22 proposed agreements for cool ena tion and am oiendments

23 thereto and to review.the policies of the Inited States

24 affecting the proliferation of nuclear (xl)lsive devices,
25 (c) licensing crteria which would he applied im-



1 mediately to all future exports by the United States of

2 nuclear materials, equipment, and sensitive nuclear tech-
3 nology intended for use in peaceful nuclear activities and
4 which could be of significance for nuclear explosive

5 purposes;

6 (d) preferential treatment in the provision of nu-
7 clear fuel services to nations which agree to adhere to

8 policies designed to prevent the proliferation of nuclear
9 explosive devices;

10 (e) international arrangements which the United
11 States shall seek to negotiate with other nations, includ-

12 ing the nuclear supplier nations, to establish-
13 (1) effective international proliferation controls
14 and supervision to assure that nuclear materials,
35 equipment, and sensitive nuclear technology which

16 are intended for use in peaceful nuclear activities
17 do not contribute to the development of nuclear

18 explosive devices;

19 (2) procedures to be followed in the event a
2Q 'nation violates its agreement with a nuclear supplier

21 nation, its agreement to adhere to international
22 proliferation controls and supervision, or the princi-
23 ples of the treaty; and
24 (3) procedures to be followed in the event of

25 diversion, theft, or sabotage of nuclear. materials


1 which could be of significance for nuclear explosive
2 purposes; and
3 (f) increased support to be given the International

4 Atomic Energy Agency ("the IAEA").

7 SEC. 4. The United States, as a matter of national policy,

8 shall take such actions and institute such measures as may
9 be necessary and feasible to assure other nations and groups
10 of nations which may seek to utilize the benefits of atomic

11 energy for peaceful purposes, including the generation of

12 electricity, that it will provide a reliable supply of nucle't

13 fuel services to those nations or groups of nations whidh
14 adhere to policies designed to prevent the proliferation of

15 nuclear explosive devices. Such nuclear fuel services shall
16 be provided under agreements entered into pursuant to
17 subsections 161 m. and v. of the Atomic Energy Act of

18 1954, as amended, or as otherwise authorized by law. The

19 United States will make its best efforts to assure that it will
20 have available the capacity to carry out this policy with
21 all interested nations on a long-term basis.
22 SEC. 5. The United States shall institute ininediate

23 initiatives-
24 (a) to seek to negotiate with other nations., in-


1 eluding the nuclear supplier nations, one or more bind-
2 ing international ariangements which shall-
3 (1) assure that nuclear materials, equipment
4 and sensitive nuclear technology intended for use

5 in peaceful nuclear activities shall be transferred in-
6 ternationally only to nations or groups of nations

7 which afford undertakings sufficient to insure that
8 such materials, equipment, and sensitive nuclear
9 technology will not be used in, or for the purposes of

10 developing any nuclear explosive devices. Such un-
11 dertakings shall be in compliance with the criteria
12, set forth in paragraphs (1) through (6) of section

13 15 (a) of this Act;
14 (2) require that special nuclear material ex-

1.5 ported by or in the possession of the parties to any
16 such international arrangement, and that all special
17 nuclear material produced in or through the use of

18 any nuclear material or equipment transferred in-

19 ternationally by such parties, be subject to adequate

20 physical security measures to insure their protection

21 against acts of terrorism, sabotage, and theft;
22 (3) establish. international standards of physical
23 security and effective provision for application

24 thereof;
25 (4) adopt procedures to be followed in the