NOMINATION OF JOHN A. MCCONE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 29
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 19, 2003
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: July 2, 1958
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Rele 1 5 &A-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
W i
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE TO BE A
MEMBER OF J THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
HEARING
SENATE SECTION OF THE
JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON THE
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE TO BE A MEMBER
OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
Printed for the use of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1958
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 :' CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15: CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2-
CARL T. DURHAM, North. Carolina, Chairman
CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico, Vice Chairman
CHET HOLIFIELD, California RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Georgia
MELVIN PRICE, Illinois. JOHN 0. PASTORE, Rhode Island
PAUL J. KILDAY, Texas ALBERT GORE, Tennessee
WAYNE N. ASPINALL, Colorado HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
JAMES E. VAN ZANDT, Pennsylvania BOURKE B. HICKENLOOPER, Iowa
JAMES T.-PATTERSON, Connecticut WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND, California
THOMAS A. JENKINS, Ohio JOHN W. BRICKER, Ohio
CRAIG HOSMER, California HENRY DWORSHAK, Idaho
JAMES T. RAMEY, Executive Director
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE, OF CALIFORNIA,.
TO BE A MEMBER OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY.
COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, JULY 2, 1.958
UNITED STATES SENATE,
SENATE SECTION OF THE
JOINT COMMITTEE ON ATOMIC ENERGY,
Washington, D. C.
The Senate section of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy met
at 10 a. in., pursuant to notice, in room P-63, the Capitol, Senator
Clinton P. Anderson (chairman of the Senate section) presiding.
Present: Senators Anderson, Jackson, Hickenlooper, Knowland,.
Bricker, and Dworshak; Representatives Durham, Holifield, Price,
Van Zandt, Patterson, and Aspinall.
Also present: James T. Ramey, executive director; John T. Con-
way, assistant director; David R. Toll, staff counsel; George E.
Brown, Jr., and George F. Murphy, Jr., staff members; Joint Com-
mittee on Atomic Energy.
Senator ANDERSON. The meeting will be in order.
This is a meeting of the Senate section of the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy to consider the nomination of Mr. John A. MCCone,
of California, for appointment to the Atomic Energy Commission.
By resolution of the Senate, adopted January 20, 1947, in the 80th
Congress, 1st session, the Senate members of the Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy constitute a committee of the Senate to which
nominations to the Atomic Energy Commission are referred. As a
matter of courtesy and in accordance with past practice, I have invited
the House members of the Joint Committee to participate in this
hearing today. In the event any of the House members may wish
to ask questions, I welcome them to do so.
The nomination of Mr. John A. McCone, of California, to be a
member of the Atomic Energy Commission was submitted to the
Senate on June 6, 1958, by the President, and is for a term of 5 years,
expiring June 30, 1963.
A summary of Mr. McCone's background and experience, which
was forwarded to the Senate with his nomination, is before each
member of the committee and, without objection, I will submit that
summary for the record.
(The information referred to follows:)
BIOGRAPHY OF JOHN A. MCCONE
Born: San Francisco, Calif., January 4, 1902.
Education: Student, University of California.
Marital status: Married.
Experience: Construction engineer, Llewellyn Iron Works; 1929, superin-
tendent, Consolidated Steel Corp.; 1.933-37, executive vice president and director,
Consolidated Steel Corp.; 1937-45, president and organizer, Bechtel-Mc Cone
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15: CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
Corp., engineers, Los Angeles; 1941-46, president and director, California Ship-
building Corp.; 1945 to present, president and director, Joshua Hendy Corp. and
Joshua Hendy Iron Works.
Miscellaneous: Director of the California Bank of Los Angeles; director, Pacific
Mutual Life Insurance Co.; director, Industrial Indemnity Co.; 1947-48, member,
President's Air Policy Commission; 1948, Deputy to Secretary of Defense; 1950-51;
Under Secretary, United States Air Force.
Memberships: Phi Kappa Sigma Clubs; California Club; Los Angeles Country
Club; Pacific Union Club, San Francisco; Burning Tree; Metropolitan Club of
Washington; F Street Club of Washington; The Links, Deepdale, N. Y.; Blind
Brook, New York City; Cypress Point, Pebble Beach.
Present position: President and director, Joshua Hendy Corp., Los Angeles,
Calif.
Political affiliation: Republican.
Home: 1100 Oak Grove Avenue, San Marino, Calif.
Office: 612 South Flower Street, Los Angeles, Calif.
Senator ANDERSON. If there is no objection, I will also place in the
record at this point a copy of a press statement issued by the Joint
Committee which contains the public notice previously made by me
on the floor of the Senate June 26, 1958, with regard to the hearing
today.
(The information referred to follows:)
[From the Office of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. For immediate release, June. 27,1958. No.189]
Senator Clinton P. Anderson (Democrat, New Mexico), vice chairman of the
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, announced that public hearing will be held
Wednesday, July 2, 1958, to consider the nomination of Mr. John A. McCone
to the Atomic Energy Commission.
The President, on June 6, 1958, nominated Mr. McCone, of California, to fill
a vacancy on the five-man Commission that will occur June 30, 1958, when the
term of Chairman Lewis Strauss expires.
The following notice of the hearing was given by Senator Anderson on the
floor of the Senate June 26, 1958:
"Mr. President, on behalf of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, I desire
to give notice that a public hearing has been scheduled for Wednesday, July -2,
1958, at 10 a. M., in room P-63 of the Capitol, the old Supreme Court chamber,
to consider the following:
"John A. McCone to be a member of the United States Atomic Energy Com-
mission.
"The Senate members of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy consist of
the Senator from Georgia [Mr. Russell], the -Senator from Rhode Island [Mr.
Pastore], the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. Gore], the Senator from Washington
[Mr. Jackson], the Senator from Iowa [Mr. ?Hickenlooper], the Senator from
California [Mr. Knowland], the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Bricker], and the Senator
from Idaho [Mr. Dworshak].
"As in the past, House members of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
will be invited to attend and participate in this hearing.
"I give this public notice so that any individual who may have information
with reference to Mr. McCone may supply it to the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy."
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. McCone, do you have any statement you
desire to make before we start questioning you?
STATEMENT OF JOHN A. McCONE, NOMINEE FOR APPOINTMENT
TO THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, Mr. Chairman, with your permission I would
like to read a brief statement.
Gentlemen, in anticipation of my appearance here today, Senator
Anderson has requested a statement of all of my financial holdings,
business activities, and affiliations for incorporation into the record of
this committee. This statement has been furnished and includes both
?
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE 3
the direct and indirect holdings of my own or my wife, Mrs. Rosemary
McCone.
Section 22 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, as amended, requires
that-
No member of the Commission shall engage in any business, vocation, or
employment other than that of serving as a member of the Commission.
If appointed to the Atomic Energy Commission, I will devote my-
self exclusively to the affairs of the Commission, and during my term
of office will not engage in any business, occupation, or profession. I
therefore propose to dispose of partnership interests and to resign as a
director and officer of all enterprises conducted for profit and all
educational or nonprofit organizations holding Atomic Energy Com-
mission contracts.
I will be pleased to discuss and will appreciate the advice and
counsel of this committee with respect to my business holdings, some
of which are in public-held corporations, others in privately owned
companies. Since the latter closely held companies do not have, nor
ever have had, AEC contracts, I respectfully request that any ques-
tions concerning these particular matters be maintained on a confi-
dential basis.
With respect to my stock in publicly owned corporations, I am
prepared, as stated, to dispose of any holdings which present, or may
seem to present, a conflict of interest.
The list of my holdings, with ownership of 1,100 shares of Dow
Chemical stock and 3,600 shares of Tennessee Gas Transmission Co.,
stock, I will dispose of these shares should the retention of them be
regarded by this committee as inadvisable, since both of these com-
panies are important AEC contractors.
Common stock is also held by me in the Standard Oil Company of
California and the Gladding McBean & Co., California, and the
California Bank of Los Angeles. The California Bank and Gladding
McBean & Co. have no known interest in AEC affairs. Standard
Oil of California is a large company and is widely owned. According
to a statement given to me by its president, it performs no work for
AEC except a very modest research contract which it performed on a
nonprofit basis. I see no reason why the sale of that stock should
be necessary.
I own approximately 5 percent of the common stock of Industrial
Indemnity Co., of San Francisco, and 5 percent of a partnership
known as Industrial Underwriters. These are modest size companies
engaged principally in the writing of workmen's compensation and
liability insurance in the State of California and elsewhere. Con-
trolling interest is owned by Messrs. K. K. and S. D. Bechtel, of San
Francisco. Because of the present and future scope of Bechtel Corp.'s
activities as an AEC contractor, I have arranged to dispose of these
interests upon confirmation of my appointment. These interests are
the only remaining business interests I have with the Bechtel family.
I own all of the outstanding stock of Joshua Hendy Corp., all of the
outstanding stock of Panama Pacific Tankers, Inc., and approximately
10 percent of the outstanding stock of Prudential Acceptance Co.,
The latter company is a small automobile finance company, the ma-
jority of which is owned by my sister and has no connection whatsoever
with AEC contracts or business. Joshua Hendy Corp. and Panama
Pacific Tankers are engaged directly or through subsidiaries in the
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
4 NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
shipping business as owners, charterers, and operators of ships under
both American and foreign flag. Hendy vessels are employed in the
transportation of chemicals, crude oil, and refined petroleum products
and iron ore and bauxite.
Hendy & Panama Pacific Tankers and their subsidiaries are not,
and never have been, engaged directly or indirectly in contracts with
the AEC or in the transportation of materials specificially identified
for use by the AEC.
While I am certain that no one would be able to trace or discover
any conflict between the ownership of the stock in these companies
and my duties and obligations as a member of the Atomic Energy
Commission, and since I am unable to dispose of my interest in these
personally owned companies, I have arranged to place my stock in
trust with the trust department of the California Bank of Los Angeles.
A copy of the trust agreement, which is irrevocable for a period of 7
years or for my term of office, whichever is the shorter, has been filed
with this committee.
The trust agreement provides, among other things, that I will
remove myself entirely from control of these corporations either
directly or indirectly, that the trustees are empowered to vote the
stock, and that I will be free from all management responsibilities.
The trust agreement further provides that these companies are pre-
vented from engaging in any contractual undertakings with the
Atomic Energy Commission or acquiring stock interests in companies
holding AEC contracts.
The trust agreement also provides that any dividends from these
interests will be retained by the trustees except that the trustees
are directed to pay for my account the applicable Federal and State
income taxes resulting from such dividends.
I will naturally expect to answer questions on policy which are
particularly in the public realm.
I wanted. to make this statement of my personal finances for the
record in order that any questions in the mind of any committee
member might be resolved at this time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator ANDERSON. Thank you very much.
Do members of the committee have questions on this financial
aspect? Mr. McCone has indicated that he has stock in Dow Chemi-
cal Co. and the Tennessee Gas Transmission Co., and he has more or
less asked the committee if it has any suggestions as to the propriety
of retaining those interests. These companies contract directly with
the Atomic Energy Commission.
I want to say as far as I am concerned, I think you ought to sell
them.
Mr. McCONE. Very well, sir; that is sufficient.
Senator ANDERSON. No; I want the others to express themselves
very frankly on it.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I think that would be up to Mr. McCone.
I know a great many people who own stock interests in opertions and
still are in Government positions and it does not seem to affect the
integrity with which they approach their duties and a minor stock
interest is not a very important matter. But I would say that it is
up to Mr. McCone. If he disposes of those, it might satisfy some to
have him dispose of those interests. I personally would not think it
would be necessary.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/1"5 : CIA-RDP6.00346R00040?~080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCO
Senator ANDERSON. Are there any comments, Senator Knowland?
Senator KNOWLAND. I will say that Mr. McCone has made a forth-
right and complete statement in regard to it. These are the only two
areas that I think might.raise some question.
If Mr. McCone so felt, I would think it would eliminate any possi-
bility of any question-if those having direct relationship with the
Atomic Energy Commission could be disposed of.
Senator BRICKER. I feel the same way. Although it is not a con-
trolling interest, I do not feel it makes any difference practically; some-
body might have a question.
Senator DWORSHAK. I feel that same way, Mr. Chairman.
Senator ANDERSON. I say very frankly, Mr. McCone, I do not think
it makes the slightest difference in the performance of your duty. I
do not think the small amount of stock you have in Dow Chemical
Co. would make any difference whatsoever in the way you treat Dow
Chemical. I also recognize that the Armed Services Committee has
questioned a good many witnesses about their ownership of stocks.
Somebody might in the future question, Why does he keep stock
in Dow Chemical and then make a contact with Dow Chemical for
research work or for the construction of a reactor and all sorts of
equipment when he is a stockholder in the company?
The same thing applies to Tennessee Gas Transmission Co. The
Atomic Energy Commission is a large purchaser from Tennessee Gas
Transmission Co., not a minor but a large purchaser. While your
stock ownership is small, I think you would feel better if you did
not have the stock under the circumstances.
I feel completely different about the California Bank stock. I see
no possible objection to your ownership of that stock or any others
you have discussed, but this is a matter you have to resolve for
yourself.
I do believe when you are contracting directly with these companies
and the contracts are important to them, that the ownership of stock
is a matter on which you want to counsel with yourself, at least.
Do Members of the House have any questions?
May I ask one question with reference to Joshua Hendy? I do
not feel we should take Joshua Hondy and deal with it because it is
a privately owned company, but this question I believe is important.
Does Joshua Hendy own any industrial stocks?
Mr. MCCONE. None at all. And to dispose of the question of
those interests, I would like to tell the committee that I will accept
your advice and those will be disposed of prior to my taking office.
Senator ANDERSON. If you have other people who give other
advice, you take the advice you wish.
Mr. MCCONE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator KNOWLAND. I understand Mr. McCone does plan to resign
his directorships.
Senator ANDERSON. I was going to come to that question next.
You do own all the stock of Joshua Hendy & Panama Pacific
Tankers?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. You cited yourself the prohibition gainst en-
gaging in any other business or profession.
Mr. MCCONE. That is right, sir.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release fjf4 R :oq1~ ~4 0?oNER000400080002-2
Senator ANDERSON. You have prepared a trust agreement for the
operation of those companies which you have filed with the committee?
Mr. MCCONE. That is right.
Senator ANDERSON. Upon your confirmation, those trust agree-
ments will become effective?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct.
Senator ANDERSON. They will remove you from the direction of the
companies?
Mr. MCCONE. Entirely.
Senator ANDERSON. You will not be responsible for the business
management or for the operation of the companies in any way?
Mr. MCCONE. In no way whatsoever.
Senator ANDERSON. Are there any questions on these particular
transactions? These are privately owned companies in which he is a
hundred percent stockholder in the two companies.
I believe you said these companies do not do business with the
Atomic Energy Commission and never have?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. This goes back to a previous conversation and
if it is privileged you just say so quickly.
Have you had discussion of this with the Office of the Attorney
General of the United States?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, I have.
Senator ANDERSON. Did the Office of Attorney General of the
United States furnish you an opinion on the propriety of your retain-
ing these corporate interests?
Mr. MCCONE. They furnished an opinion to the White House and
I requested a copy of that opinion and have received it.
Senator ANDERSON. Did the White House indicate to you whether
or not that opinion could be made a part of our record?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, I requested that, if I so desired, be permitted
to release it to this committee as part of the record and they have
agreed that that can be done.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you desire to do so?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, I would like very much to do so.
Senator ANDERSON. I think that would be helpful to the committee
if we had that.
To try to boil it down to its least common denominator, the Attorney
General's Office confirmed your feeling that the transfer of these
interests to a trust company would completely satisfy the legal
requirement that you have no interest in any business or profession;
is that a brief statement of the conclusions reached?
Mr. MCCONE. The conclusion is expressed in one paragraph and I
could read it. Then I would file the document with the committee
for the record:
It is the conclusion of this memorandum that as a matter of law Mr. McCone
may serve as Chairman of the Commission without being required to divest
himself of his stock interests. However, if Commission action of any kind should
be required with respect to any of the companies in which he is interested, directly
or indirectly, Mr. McCone should disqualify himself from consideration of such
matter and thus avoid any improper or illegal action.
It is suggested that his 100 percent stock interest in Joshua Hendy Corp. and
Panama Pacific Tankers be placed in a voting trust to preclude any possibility
that retention of these interests could be construed as causing him to engage in
a business in violation of the Atomic Energy Act. This trust arrangement would
also lessen possibility of benefit being derived from the influencing or direction of
company action based on actual or supposed use of inside Government information.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
That is the conclusion. The report is signed by Malcolm R. Wilkie,
Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel.
This copy is not signed, but a conformed copy can be supplied. It
is an exhaustive report of 12 pages.
Senator ANDERSON. Are there any questions on that phase of his
activities?
As I understand it when you get into the contracting work, the
Office of the Comptroller General is frequently called upon to pass on
the rights of parties to continue the contract.
Would you have objection to our asking the Comptroller General if
he concurs in this opinion?
Mr. MCCONE. None whatsoever.
Senator ANDERSON. Are there any questions on this particular
phase of his activities?
I should say that in the committee files there will be a letter from
Mr. McCone outlining his present civic and educational organizations,
most of which he is resigning, and his stock ownerships and a general
statement as to his business interests and a copy of the trust agree-
ment to which lie has referred.
These will not be a part of the minutes of this hearing because I
regard them as private. They will, however, be in the files of the
committee unless there is objection on the part of some member.
Mr. McCone, I imagine I will have more questions and some of the
others. So I think we will start with Senator Hickenlooper on general
questions on policy.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Mr. McCone, have you as yet been cleared
for access to atomic data in the Commission, or will that come later
if you are confirmed?
Mr. MCCONE. A very exhaustive investigation has been made.
I have not been informed whether I have been cleared, or not.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. By being cleared, I mean have you been
briefed on top secret data involving the Commission and its activities
as yet?
Mr. MCCONE. No, sir.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Is it your understanding that that will
not occur until if, as, and when you are confirmed and appointed?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct.
A note has been given me by Mr. Lee, an executive assistant of
mine, that the representatives of the Atomic Energy Commission
staff have advised that I have been cleared.
I have not been briefed, nor have any matters of a privileged nature
been discussed with me.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. That clearance, I take it, is a clearance
against the time when you may be confirmed and appointed?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. And assume your duties?
Mr. MCCONE. I would assume so.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Have you had any particular experience
in the atomic energy field, Mr. McCone? I believe you were Assistant
Secretary, or Under Secretary of the Air Force?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, as Under Secretary of the Air Force in 1950,
and 1951.
Prior to that, in 1947, I was a member of the President's Air Policy
Commission and in 1948 I was a special assistant to the then Secretary
28044-58-2
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Apprc8ted For Release/ptW5eC,DP61*6R000400080002-2
of Defense James Forrestal. I had a close contact with atomic energy
matters.
Since I have left Government I have had no privileged contact
whatsoever.
Senator HrcKENLOOPER. Since 1951?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. In your connection with the University of
California, or Cal Tech, have you been a member of the board of
directors or the board of regents or some such board of one of those?
Mr. McCoNE. I have been a member of the board of trustees of
the California Institute of Technology.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. In connection with those duties have you
had any intimate association with atomic energy matters?
Mr.MCCONE. No, I have been familiar with the contracts and the
work that Cal Tech has done for AEC or for the Department of
Defense, dealing with atomic matters. Under the organization of
Cal Tech the trustees approve the contracts, but they do not involve
themselves_ in the operation.
Senator iHicKENLOOPER. In the intimate activities of operating the
contract?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I believe you are an engineer by profession,
are you not, Mr. McCone?
Mr. MCCONE. That is right.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I think that is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator ANDERSON. Senator Knowland.
Senator KNOWLAND. Mr. McCone, you have indicated your back-
ground in the Defense Establishment. for a number of years. Of
course, in the normal procedures the members of the Commission are
first selected and then a determination is made on the chairmanship.
Might I ask whether your impression has been that if confirmed by
the Senate, the intention is to have you serve as Chairman of the
Commission?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, Senator Knowland, I believe that is the
intention.
Senator KNOWLAND. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator ANDERSON. Senator Dworshak.
Senator DWORSHAK. Mr. McCone, you served in 1950 and 1951 as
Under Secretary of the Air Force. Who was the Secretary at that
time?
Mr. MCCONE. Mr. Finletter.
Senator D WORSFHAK. Do you know who recommended you for that
position at that time?
Mr. MCCONE. Originally the present Senator Symington and then
that recommendation was followed up by Secretary Finletter.
The first people who spoke to me about accepting that post were
Senator Symington and General Vandenberg.
Senator DWORSHAK. Is that because of the service you had rendered
on the President's Air Policy Commission, so far as you know?
Mr. MCCONE. And my subsequent work as a consultant to Mr.
Symington and General Vandenberg when Senator Symington was
Secretary of the Air Force and General Vandenberg was Chief of
Staff.
Senator DwoRSHAK. Have you ever been a candidate for any elec-
tive office?
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Re1W&?q%0W5J6f4i4AR[@4W0346R000400
M McCorrE No sir
Senator DWORSHAK. Have you ever held any other appointive
offices except the two listed here?
Mr. MCCONE. No, none.
Senator DwoRSHAK. You have never been active in politics?
Mr. McCoNE. No, Sir.
Senator DWORSHAK. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. Durham?
Representative DURHAM. No questions.
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. Holifield?
Representative HOLIFIELD. No questions.
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. Patterson?
Representative PATTERSON. No questions.
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. Van Zandt?
Representative VAN ZANDT. No questions.
Senator ANDERSON. Gentlemen, I have one wire which came in this
morning. This is the Los Angeles chapter of the Federation of Ameri-
can scientists:
We would like to suggest a few questions to ask.
No. 1: Academic freedom. Would he accept and encourage the critical evalua-
tion of the AEC?
Mr. McCONE. Is that one question?
Senator ANDERSON. It seems to be. I was going to ask you a
question about academic freedom, but I thought I would get these
out of the way first:
Would he accept and encourage critical evaluation of the AEC?
Mr. MCCONE. I think that any department of the Government
should be under constant examination and review because in these
vast organizations there is always room for improvement.
I would assume that evaluations have been. made by the Commis-
sion itself and by outside consultants and .by this committee, and
consultants engaged by this committee.
If further evaluation was in. order, I would certainly enthusiastically
support it.
Senator ANDERSON. The next question is on unrestricted security.
It seems to be divided into three parts:
Would he wish to list everything AEC touches as classified?
Mr. MCCONE. No, of course not.
Senator ANDERSON (reading) :
How would he advise the American public so that we would know at least
as much about nuclear developments as other nations?
Representative PATTERSON. I think those questions in the telegram
are unfair, Mr. Chairman.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. That is like the "have you stopped beating
your wife" question.
Representative PATTERSON. I think Mr. McCone should be given
an opportunity to look over that telegram and think about those
questions.
Representative VAN ZANDT. It involves policy, Mr. Chairman. I
do not think Mr. McCone wants to sit here and in a matter of a few
seconds establish a policy that might fire back later on.
Representative PATTERSON. As to the first question, in my opinion
you would have to know what the criticism was going to be. I do not
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 ApproU d For ReleasocU i1 5o C,,,4rWl?p4ppW46R000400080002-2
think the Commission should be subject to criticism at every turn of
the road.
If it deserves being criticized, I am sure Mr. McCone would go along
with that, but a question propounded like that at a hearing is ridic-
ulous, in my opinion.
Senator ANDERSON. I leave it purely up to you, Mr. McCone.
As I say, this wire came in this morning. I had never seen it before
until I started over here.
Mr. MCCONE. This matter of classification of information has been
under constant study and review by the highest authority in govern-
ment and your committee, and it is impossible for me to enunciate a
policy or viewpoint at this time.
Senator KNOWLAND. You certainly have to know all the surround-
ing facts on it before making a policy determination.
Mr. MCCONE. Certainly.
Senator ANDERSON. I think I can help a little bit on what these
people are worried about in connection with the expectation that the
American public might know as much about nuclear development as
other nations.
There was a news story a day or two ago that the Japanese had
detected a nuclear explosion that they thought ran to 20 megatons.
So far as I know, the American public knows there might have been
one, but has no idea whether it was a kiloton, 10 kilotons, or 10 mega-
tons, and the American public probably will never know, but the
Japanese will know and the Russians will know.
These people hope that the day may come when the American
people can also know. The fact there was a test was announced by
the AEC, but nothing was said about the yield at all.
I have a theory as to why the yield was not announced.
The other question was:
Would he encourage Government development of nuclear power and electric
power?
It does not matter to me whether the questions are answered. I
do believe that these scientists who for a long time have had a point
of view quite different from the point of view of the Atomic Energy
Commission are also citizens and also probably have some rights.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Chairman, I think, for the record, as
long as this telegram has been injected, we ought to know the names
of these scientists-who they are, whom they represent, and so on.
Senator ANDERSON. I would be happy to do that if I had all the
names of the members of the Los Angeles chapter.
This is signed by Paul Bowman, chairman, Los Angeles Chapter of
the Federation of American Scientists, Box K, Cal Tech, Pasadena,
Calif.
Does that name strike any familiarity with you?
Mr. MCCONE. No.
Senator ANDERSON. Were you a trustee of Cal Tech?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes; I was.
Senator ANDERSON. At the time the Cal Tech scientists expressed
themselves on the subject of nuclear testing did. you enter into that
controversy a little bit?
Mr. MOCONE. Indeed I did; yes, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. Did you write a letter with reference to it?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes; I did.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 :.CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE 11
Senator ANDERSON. Would you mind giving us what was in the
letter?
Mr. MCCONE. No; I will be very happy to.
Senator ANDERSON. This was the. group that Harrison Brown and
others were members of; was it not?
Mr. MCCONE. Would you like me to road this letter?
Senator ANDERSON. You may read parts of it.
Mr. McCoNE. This is a letter. to Dr. Thomas Lauritsen, who was,
1 of the .10 signers of a statement that was, I thought, an improper
statement for a group of scientists at Cal Tech to make because the
statement in my opinion was misleading to the American public and
I thought that there was some purpose . behind the statement other
than that of getting a professional viewpoint,into the hands of the-
American public.
Senator ANDERSON. You think there was a purpose behind it?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes; a purpose other than giving information that
would be of value to them (the public).
Senator ANDERSON. To the enemy?
Mr. MCCONE. No; of value to the American public in appraising
the dangers of bomb testing and fall out.
Senator ANDERSON. Let me see if I can get the background straight.
These scientists felt that it might be all right to have a halt in
nuclear testing?
Mr. MCCONE. Unilaterally; that is right.
Senator ANDERSON. Are we not now discussing with Russia a halt
in nuclear testing?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. They were just a little ahead of us.
Mr. MCCONE. No; they (the scientists) were advocating a unilateral
stopping.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you have their statement?
Mr. MCCONE. No; I do not have their statement. Maybe I do.
Yes, sir; here are the first two paragraphs.
For some time Gov. Adlai Stevenson has urged that the United States take the
lead and renounce further H-bomb tests for as long a time as other nations likewise
refrain from testing these devices.
Senator ANDERSON. Is that unilateral?
Mr. McCoNE (reading) :
This suggestion has been attacked as advocating a dangerous unilateral action
and as advocating a step which would permit the Russians to get ahead of the
United States in nuclear technology.
Senator ANDERSON. You say that that was unilateral? They did
not recommend unilateral action.
Mr. Harrison Brown insists at no time did they recommend uni-
lateral action and the position they take at this time does not recom-
mend unilateral action any more than the present position of the
United States Government at this time does not recommend unilateral
action; is that correct, Mr. McCone?
Mr. MCCONE. It was my impression at the time, sir, that the idea
was that if we would go ahead and stop tests, why, then, the Russians
would also stop testing. It was unilateral in that respect.
Senator KNoWLAND. Mr..Chairman, might I interject at this point?
Is it not possible that the problem arises as to whether or not this
stoppage of testing is only to depend upon a so-called agreement, or
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
12 NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
whether there are to be adequate safeguards to such an agreement to
make certain that it is not in fact unilateral that the stopping of testing
take place?
Senator ANDERSON. I do not know. The only reason I was inter-
ested in it is that we have many thousands of scientists interested in
our present programs.
Here were 10 scientists who individually decided it was safe for this
country to stop testing as long as other countries stopped testing.
Mr. McCone took them pretty strongly to task and there were
suggestions which I understand he did not make; that they all be fired.
They were distinguished people, they expressed themselves.
Now, if -Mr. McCone becomes Chairman of the Commission, and it
has been established that he would, do you think a scientist would
dare express himself on the subject if he worked for AEC while you
were Chairman?
Mr. McCONE. There was no scientist fired from Cal Tech on advice
or recommendation from me, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. I realize that. I tried to say that in advance,
that T did not believe you recommended they be fired, but there were
suggestions that they be fired.
Was ours not the only letter that was sent to the people?
Mr. yours I do not know that. My letter was addressed
to Dr. Lauritsen, who was one of the signers. I did not send a letter
to the President, nor did I send a copy of this letter to the president
of the university.
Senator ANDERSON. Was it given to the press?
Mr. MCCONE. No, Sir.
Senator ANDERSON. It has not been published?
Mr. MCCONE. It has never been published; no, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you want to summarize your attitude
toward it, or do you want to read the whole letter?
. Mr. MCCONE. I can summarize this. I thought that the suggestion
of a unilateral stopping of testing on our part was a dangerous pro-
cedure.
Senator ANDERSON. This was not a suggestion for unilateral testing?
Mr. McCoNE. Well, my impression at that time was that it was in
support of a suggestion made a few days earlier by Governor Steven-
son that we proceed on a unilateral basis.
Senator ANDERSON. Did not the scientists try very hard to protect
themselves against that?
Mr. MCCONE. They have since then, sir, but it seemed to me that
they moved pretty rapidly behind a program for unilateral stopping
of tests at that time.
Senator ANDERSON. You keep using the term unilateral stopping.
Will you introduce some statements of theirs, or this statement of
theirs, that indicates they wanted to do this unilaterally? That
would solve the whole problem.
Mr. McCONE. I would have to have time to get the various state-
ments in their full context in order to do that, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you have a statement there from them?
Mr. MCCONE. This statement of theirs really is in support of a
statement made by Governor Stevenson. To determine exactly what
they are driving at you would have to have Governor Stevenson's
statement as well, and I do not have that.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. M3COI4E 13
Senator ANDERSON. You are not trying to associate them in some
'way with this as to what their statement was about, what he said?
Mr. McCONE. No; except in their opening line they referred to his
statement. It was his statement that caused this statement on their
part.
Senator ANDERSON. I did not like the unilateral implications of his
earlier statement much better than you did. Maybe that was because
Mr. Holifield and I had tried very hard to write into the Democratic
platform a plank which we thought was an improvement.
The only point that I would like to determine is what is your
attitude toward a scientist who expresses himself on a public question
as an individual?
Mr. McCONE. I have no objection to a scientist expressing himself
as an individual, nor do I have any objection to a group of scientists
expressing themselves on any subject they want to express themselves
on.
Senator ANDERSON. Is that not exactly what happened out there?
A group of scientists expressed themselves on the situation.
You will admit from your letter you took violent exception to it,
will you not?
Mr. MCCONE. I think it is one thing to object to a scientist ex-
pressing himself ; it is another thing to. take exception to what he says.
But in this instance I took exception to this particular procedure that
was followed because I thought this group of scientists used their
position as professors of distinction at the California Institute of
Technology not to express themselves on a particular technical matter,
but to inject themselves into a political discussion.
Scientists have an absolute right to do that, but not as a group and
not using the university as a platform for so doing, in my opinion.
Senator ANDERSON. Not as a group?
Mr. MCCONE. Not as a group who are using the university as a
platform.
Senator ANDERSON. Now, Dr. Teller has made some statements
about the ability to detect tests. lie is a scien tist. He was connected
with the University of California. He is now in charge of the Atomic
Energy Commission's Livermore Laboratories. He testified before
the Disarmament Committee headed by Secretary Humphrey.
Do you see anything wrong in that?
Mr. McCONE. Not at all.
Senator ANDERSON. Then he went on to television and expressed
himself very freely on the subject.
Is there anything wrong with that?
Mr. McCONE. Nothing at all.
Senator ANDERSON. What is the difference between what Dr.
Harrison Brown did and what Dr. Teller did?
Mr. McCoNE. Well, Dr. Teller was speaking as an individual and
as an authority in a particular area. I felt, as I have said before, that
Dr. Harrison Brown recruited 10 men, I assume be did, 10 of them
together, and using their position in the institute, injected themselves
into what appeared to me to be a political argument. That was my
objection to their procedure.
Senator ANDERSON. Now Dr. Lawrence, who is a very fine scientist,
with Dr. Teller went over and made statements on the steps of the
White House on this nuclear testing matter.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
14 NOMINATION OF JOHN A. MCCONE
Do you think that was improper?
Mr. MCCONE. If they did it under the authority of the University
of California, I think it was improper.
Senator ANDERSON. Did these people do anything under the au-
thority of California Tech?
Mr. MCCONE. The original statements came out as "California
Tech scientists do this."
Senator ANDERSON. If the mengot to the steps of the White House
and some newspapermen say, "The University of California scientists
say so and so," that would have been wrong? They are University
of California people. You cannot separate them from their academic
background any more than you can separate Harrison Brown and the
men who wrote the letter.
Mr. McCoNE. That is correct. For that reason, 'they have to be
extremely careful.
Senator ANDERSON. And somewhat quiet?
Mr. MCCONE. No; I do not think quiet, but I think they have to
be extremely careful just as spokesmen for industry or spokesmen for
the law have to recognize responsibilities as well as their freedom.
Senator ANDERSON. I wish you would help me differentiate what
Harrison Brown and his group did in California and what Dr. Teller
and Dr. Lawrence did on the steps of the White House.
They announced at the White House you could not possibly detect
an explosion underground. That was just before the Nevada shot.
However, it was detected some 2,350 miles. 1 did not think there was
anything wrong with it. They expressed themselves quite .frankly.
I am trying to find out what was wrong with what these people did at
California Tech. They were members of the California Tech faculty,
but they were not acting as faculty members. They were acting as
individuals. As individuals, they thought it would be all right to stop
the testing of nuclear weapons provided other people would stop at the
same time.
We now have a delegation in Geneva proposing we stop the testing
of nuclear weapons provided other people stop testing at the same
time. What was unpatriotic at one time is patriotic now.
Could we put some sort of interpretation on it?
Mr. MCCONE. Maybe I could clear up this point by reading this
letter, with your permission.
This is to Dr. Lauritsen. This was on October 15, 1956:
Dr. THOMAS LAURITSEN,
California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, Calif.
OCTOBER 15, 1956.
DEAR DR. LAURITSEN: This morning I read with amazement your statement.
It seemed to me the arguments you use concerning renouncing the H-bomb tests
are without validity. Indeed, your arguments completely support the position
of President Eisenhower and his administration that experimentation and tests
must continue until a system of international control is developed.
You mention Foreign Minister Shepilov's statements of July 17, suggesting
abandoning of bomb tests; but what you fail to mention is that on almost the day
Mr. Shepilov made the statement the Russians were conducting nuclear tests in
the interior of Siberia.
You, Dr. Lauritsen, and your associates know the lead time required to conduct
a test. You know that almost a year must transpire from the time the test is
decided upon until it is made. This year is consumed in planning, assembling
material and construction and, finally, in the transportation of the device to be
tested. Now, if we make a unilateral decision of a type you and your associates
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. MCCONE 15
advocate and then Mr. Shepilov does as he did last July-turns around and sets
off a few hydrogen bombs in their own testing ground-where do we stand?
The answer is simple. We have lost a year; we are behind in the race; all of the
dangers which you enumerate in your press release have been multiplied; valuable
time has been lost; a reckless decision has been taken and the security of America
placed in jeopardy because of it. .
You point out that we are caught in a nuclear armament race, that time is
running out and that nothing is being done to arrest the competition in this field
between nations. You know that President Eisenhower went to Geneva in an
effort to solve, the disarmament question. You know that Secretary Dulles has
met repeatedly with the foreign ministers of other countries,inclitding Russia,'in
attempting to find a reasonable answer to the disarmament problem. You know
that the United Nations has had its committees on disarmament in almost con-
tinuous session during recent years. You know that President Eisenhower
placed Mr. Stassen in his Cabinet and assigned him exclusively to the task of
finding an answer to the disarmament riddle. You know that 81 nations are now
meeting in New York furthering our President's atoms-for-peace program. You
know of these actions but still you state that time is running out and infer nothing
is being done. How do you reconcile your position with the facts as I have out-
lined them?
Your statement is obviously designed to create fear in the minds of the unin-
formed that radioactive fallout from H-bomb tests endangers life. However,. as
you know, the National Academy of Sciences has issued a report this year com-
pletely discounting such danger. Also you know from your close contact with
the tests that one of the important objects of them is to develop techniques for
reducing fallout. The tests are to be applauded rather than criticized on this
particular ground.
Your proposition that postponement of tests will delay the time when other
nations might possess practical H-bomb experience seems to have no foundation.
In fact, it is an argument that has for several years been a prominent part of So-
viet propaganda and you apparently have been taken in by this propaganda. No
nation, friendly or unfriendly, has so much as hinted that our tests are stimulating
their work or, on the contrary, that a unilateral decision on our part to abandon
tests would cause them to decrease their emphasis on bomb development.
As far as our prestige in Western Europe is concerned, I have spent much
more time in Europe during the past 2 years than you have and have been in
touch with the civilian or military officials of practically all Western Europe.
governments and I can tell you from personal knowledge that our conduct of tests,
H-bomb or other nuclear devices, is' not at issue with our prestige in Western
Europe.
You infer that our Government shields our people from the realities of the
dangers which confront us. This impression is false. President Eisenhower has
repeatedly warned us of these dangers. Secretary of the Air Force Quarles dealt
with the question at length in addressing the World Affairs Council in Los Angeles
on last Wednesday. Secretary Wilson dealt with it last night on TV. Secretary
Dulles has discussed the danger time and time again. Mr. Peterson of the Office
of Civilian Defense has criss-crossed the country for 4 years warning of the very
dangers of which you speak. Vice President Nixon has discussed the subject in
Los Angeles and elsewhere in the United States on many occasions. The country
has been advised time and time again that others have developed the II-bomb and
the A-bomb, that they are building up stockpiles, that they have aircraft to
deliver them. Our people have been repeatedly warned of the dangers-not
shielded from the facts as you infer.
Surely the unilateral abandoning of the very tests which are an essential part of
any development of this type does not improve the very situation that seems to
worry you. On the contrary, it gives the advantage to our adversary and greatly
increases rather than decreases the danger of America and the security of our
people.
A unilateral decision of the type you recommend might be fatal to our country.
It might easily lose for us the precious technical advantage we now hold. Think
of the desperate circumstance we would find ourselves in today had we followed
the advice of one scientist, Dr. Robert Oppenheimer, a few years ago and aban-
doned the development of the H-bomb. Democrats and Republicans alike at
that time'saw the folly of such thinking. I am sure the more thoughtful members
of both parties will see the extreme hazards to our national security in the course
you recommend and advocate.
I stand steadfastly behind a policy of disarmament when we reach agreement
with other nations for a safe and proper procedure of inspection so that we Amer-
.Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
16 NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
icans will be sure that, as we take our guard down through agreement with
Russia, we will not be exposing ourselves to their unrestricted power against
which we will have no defense. This President Eisenhower has advocated time
and again. It continues to be his policy and you, unfortunately, have completely
distorted his position in your press release.
Yours very truly,
JOHN A. MCCosE:
Senator ANDERSON. May I say I don't wish to imply that Dr.
Lawrence and Dr. Teller went to the White House during the presi-
dential campaign in 1956. I think it was in 1957. It was in the
midst of an argument. It was not a political argument concerned in
the elections.
My sole interest in this is to make sure that scientists are not worried
that you do not approve of their speaking their minds frankly on a
great many public questions. -I have read steadily through the years
the Bulletin of the Nuclear Scientists. It is not always in agreement
with the policy of the United States, but it is stimulating reading just
the same.
I am sure that these-scientists, who do have strong views and want
to express them, would like to feel they can express them as the Los
Angeles Chapter of the Association of American Scientists or other
local groups and not be worried. That is my main interest in trying
to bring this out, because I do know that some scientists are worried
about it.
Representative HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman?
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. Holifield.
Representative HOLIFIELD. Mr. McCone, I listened very carefully
to the reading of your letter. I certainly think you had all the right
in the world to write such a letter. There are many things in the
letter with which I concur. I have debated in public with Dr. Linus
Pauling against this so-called position, which, as I understand it, is a
bit fuzzy and is quite a bit on the unilateral side. I could not sustain
such a position, myself. I think it will have to be an international
agreement which will run concurrently and which will be adequately
policed and inspected to insure compliance by an international team
probably of inspectors.
There was one thing, however, that I noted in your previous state-
ment which I thought I might ask you a question on. You have
made the statement that this group of scientists was using the uni-
versity as a platform. I would like to know if, in signing their sig-
natures, they signed it as individuals or did they sign it as 10-scientists
of California Tech University, or if that was a reference that was given
to the letter by a newspaper headline.
Mr. MCCONE. I think they signed it as individuals, but it was
accredited and probably by newspapers.
Representative HOLIFIELD. This, of course, would be a normal
thing for a newspaperman to do. Yet I would ask you this question:
If a group of people from any university or any organization signed a
letter of public criticism or public policy as individuals, would you
put them in a different capacity than an individual writing a letter
of criticism such as you have written here today?
In other words, the fact that there were 10 people together stating
a policy would not prejudice your mind against the policy that was
stated, would it? -
Mr. MCCONE. Not at all, sir. - -
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. kCCONE 17
Representative. HOLIFIELD. So your objection then, fundamentally,
is as to their position and not the fact that they happen to be mem-
bers of a single university or a criticism of the fact that they acted
as a group?
Mr. MCCONE. That is correct.
Representative HOLIFIELD. So you would grant a group of people
the same freedom to express their opinion as you would an individual?
Mr. McCoNE. Most certainly.
Representative HOLIFIELD. That is the only point I wanted to
clear up.
Senator ANDERSON. That was the point I was hoping to get cleared
up. I am glad to have it.
Representative HOLIFIELD. At the time of the chairman's state-
ment, Dr. Mark Mills, who has passed away since that time, and
Dr. Teller and Dr. Lawrence did act as a group from a university
and did express themselves during the political campaign, and there
is no doubt that the weight of their prestige had something to do
with it. But I do not know that any member of this committee has
ever criticized them for making a statement, as a group or, as indi-
viduals, of their earnest convictions.
I would grant Dr. Pauling and the other people who believe in his
position absolute freedom to express it, while reserving my right to
violently disagree with them. I hope that you would have the same
type of attitude and mind on these controversial subjects.
Mr. MCCONE. I do not think there is any difference in the position
between you and me, Mr. Holifield, at all.
Representative HOLIFIELD. That is all.
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. McCone, a good deal of the mail that I
got after your name came up had to do with your partnership in the
firm of Bechtel-McCone. The Bechtel people are, I think, very
competent engineers, very able people. Are your past or present
relationships with Bechtel such that it would make any difference
whatever in the consideration of that firm when they came to you
with a proposal, that you would divorce yourself from your history
and treat them as strangers?
Mr. MCCoNE. I think in order to develop that position of complete
independence as far as possible to do so, I have, as I read in my
statement, arranged to dispose of the one remaining common interest
I have with the Bechtel family, and that transaction will be completed
before I take office. Then I will have no business interest what-
soever.
I can assure this committee that I can, as a member of the Com-
mission, evaluate any matters in which Bechtel Corp. is interested
without bias or prejudice one way or the other, either pro or con.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you know that Mr. Kenneth Davis, who
is the Director of Reactor Development of the Atomic Energy Com,
mission, since your appointment has announced he has resigned to
accept a position with the Bechtel Corp.? Would you regard that as
significant in any way?
Mr. MCCONE. I was told that a man, and I did not know that it
was Mr. Kenneth Davis, had indicated that he was going to resign
from the Commission and go to work for Bechtel Corp. This was told
me by one of the Bechtel Corp. executives with whom I wanted to talk,
to discuss the scope of Bechtel's AEC contracts and commitments. I
kept that in the back of my mind.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
18 NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
I would like to dissuade Mr. Davis of his intention to leave the
Atomic Energy Commission. I am personally alarmed over reports
that I got of important staff people and executives who are leaving
the Commission.
Senator ANDERSON. I am glad you are alarmed, because Mr.
Roddis was his deputy, was he not, and I understand he has left, and
right on down the list.
Mr. MCCONE. I think this is a very, very serious problem. That
is one thing that I intended to.give immediate attention to. I solicit
the assistance of the committee.
Senator ANDERSON. Mr. Goodwin, the Assistant Director, has also
resigned. And Kenneth Fields, the General Manager, who in my book
is one of the most capable men who has been over there, has resigned.
Dick Cook has resigned to go with AMF.
I must say that after we finished with the Dixon-Yates unpleasant-
ness, I was not too enthusiastic about Mr. Cook, but those people
who know him are, and I am perfectly willing to say he must be a
fine man.
But one by one the exodus has taken place. I do hope that one of
the first things you may do is to make it an order of business to try to
keep some of these fine people who admittedly for years have been
able to leave for better positions in private industry.
There is.Dave Shaw, who came in here from Hanford and who
brought a great deal of joy to many hearts when he came here, because
we all regard him as a very, very competent person.
You cannot afford to lose men like that to private industry if you
can help it, and private industry, I do not believe, is helping the general
program by what looks to be a sudden raid on personnel.
We just-got through passing a bill to raise the salaries so they could
hold these people. I guess that was a great advantage to them to get
higher salaries where they went but it is disappointing to us.
I hope that in case you are confirmed-and I regard it as a very
likely possibility-you will enlist the forbearance of some of these
people until at least you have had a chance to recruit your own team.
Mr. MCCONE. I want your help and the committee's help in this
problem. It is not a wholly unfamiliar problem. It is one that you
have to deal with in the Pentagon Building at all times. There is
always the temptation of aircraft manufacturers and others to tempt
these very capable and able young officers to give up their careers and
accept positions in industry.
Senator ANDERSON. It is riot confined to the private companies
outside. The Livermore Laboratory had a very fine scientist in
Dr. Herbert York. He was brought in to Washington, I understand,
at $33,000 a year, and that automatically has leavened the whole
mass.
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, I heard about that, too.
Senator ANDERSON. I am glad you did because I tried to spread
the gospel that that does not solve any of our problems.
What are your past and present relationships with Parsons Engi-
neering? Were they not your partners at one time?
Mr. MCCoNE. They (the Ralph M. Parsons Co.) were our partners
in 1942 and 1943 and I have had no relationship since that time.
Senator ANDERSON. Parsons has had a number of AEC contracts.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. 'McCONE 19
Mr. McCoNE. I am not familiar with that. I know he was operat-
ing a reasonably large engineering firm. I am. not familiar with his
work at all.
Senator ANDERSON. Are there other large industrial organizations
with which you have had rather intimate business relationships that
do business with the Atomic Energy Commission? Kaiser, for
example?
Mr. MCCONE. Kaiser, yes; I have some business relationships with
Kaiser inasmuch as a jointly owned company, 25 percent of which is
owned by Hendy and 50 percent is owned by Kaiser Aluminum, has
a long-range contract, negotiated 2 or . 3 years ago, to transport
Kaiser's bauxite from Jamaica to Baton Rouge. This company has
built three ships for the purpose of carrying out that contract.
Senator ANDERSON. Are there others. that are common patrons of
the AEC?
. Mr. MCCONE. Hendy, in its intercoastal and coastwise transpor-
tation of chemicals, transports products for Union Carbide,. Dow
Chemical, Standard Oil of New Jersey, Standard Oil of California,
and others. Those are commercial transportation contracts, some
of them of very short range, such as a single voyage, some of them of
5 years or more.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you think the trustee relationships you have
established for your wholly owned corporation, Hendy; sufficiently
insulates you in your capacity as a public official?
Mr. MCCONE. I think so.
Senator ANDERSON. Would your firm continue to. deal with these
firms in the atomic energy field such as Union Carbide?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes, I would expect that they would continue.
Senator ANDERSON. Union Carbide is a large customer of Hendy's?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes; they are.
Senator ANDERSON. You have attempted to transfer your interest in
that in such a fashion that you will not be involved in. the. future
relations between your firm and that firm?
Mr. MCCONE. I will be involved in no way whatsoever. As a
mat-ter of fact, although we have been doing business with Union
Carbide for several years, I do not know a single individual employee,
officer, director, or manager of Union Carbide.
The. whole. business has been handled by people in. the Hendy
organization other than me.
Senator ANDERSON. I believe I understood that but I wanted to
get the situation for the record.
Now, will your company, the Joshua Hendy Corp., seek any
contracts from AEC or accept them if tendered to them?
Mr. MCCONE. No; they will not. In fact, the trust agreement, as
I indicated in my statement, definitely forecloses them from accepting
any contract, directly or indirectly, with the AEC or acquiring any
stock in any corporation or engaging in any venture with anyone
that has AEC work.
Senator ANDERSON. What if your firm, under this trusteeship,
decides to go into the nuclear ship propulsion business?
Mr. MCCONE. They cannot do that. The trust agreement fore-
closes that. Hendy would enter into no contracts, nor be engaged
in any way, in the building of, or operation of, vessels using nuclear
propulsion during the life of this trust agreement.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Apprord For Releas PMR50- C AOMPA6 pg~E46R000400080002-2
Senator ANDERSON. That being true, would there be any tempta-
tion for you to try to steer the interest of this company away from
nuclear ship propulsion or would you try to expand that field? . I
know that question implies that you might not be strictly loyal to
all your duties. I do not mean it in that way. I am personally
very, very much interested in nuclear ship propulsion and the devel-
opment of a fleet of tankers propelled by nuclear propulsion for the
long haul that would go clear around Africa and bring oil from Iran
and elsewhere to the European market.
Would the fact that Hendy would be barred from nuclear ship
propulsion in any way deter you from pushing this program?
Mr. MCCONE. None whatsoever.
Incidentally, I share your views as to the importance of this devel-
opment.
Senator ANDERSON. I was fully convinced in my own mind what
your answer would be but I thought it was important for this record
to have it asked and answered.
Mr. MCC ONE. I am glad the question was asked.
Senator ANDERSON. The AEC has a policy of ethical standards for
its employees: and officials. May I read from it?
Conflict of interest.-Employees, including consultants and designees, shall
avoid situations which require, or appear to require, a balancing of private inter-
ests or obligations against official duties.
Would there be anything in that that would in any way embarrass
you in your conduct in this office because of your former associations?
Mr. MCCONE. None whatsoever.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you think any extensive business relation-
ships between your wholly owned firm and industrial concerns in the
atomic field might appear to require a balancing of private interests
against official duties?
Mr. MCCONE. No.
Senator ANDERSON. I say frankly I do not think so, either, but I
do recognize that it is going to be a hard course to steer when you are
dealing directly with Union Carbide as Chairman of the Atomic
Energy Commission and Union Carbine is a prize customer of your
privately owned firm.
Mr. MCCONE. I have done a great deal of soul searching on that
question, as you know. This was the reason why I hesitated in
accepting this nomination because, while I was confident as to my
conduct, I did not want to be in a position where someone would
even suspect I was acting under prejudice and bias.
I wrote a letter on June 2, to Governor Sherman Adams and I
would like to introduce that letter into the record.
I have his permission to do so. That letter was transmitted-to the
Attorney General with attachment, a copy of which you have as
part of the official record of this meeting.
Senator ANDERSON. Do you want to submit that for the record?
Mr. MCCONE. I will submit it for the record.
Senator ANDERSON. Without objection, the letter to Mr. Adams
will be placed in the record.
(The letter referred to follows:)
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION QF JOHN A. McCONE
Gov. SHERMAN ADAMS,
The White House,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR SHERM: Enclosed are three copies of a brief summary of my current
holdings and the activities of closely hold, companies in which I have an interest.
All of this information was given to M. Wilkie orally on Thursday. He re-
quested a memorandum, and you may pass this on to him if you desire.
For reasons which I discussed with you, it is not practical for me to divest
myself of the ownership of my holdings. Therefore the question of any possible
conflict of interest must be carefully weighed. I can be relieved completely of
active management responsibilities and resign .as an officer and director of all
companies and, if desired can place my stock in a voting trust so that I will be
removed from control. however, I will continue to benefit from any success
these interests may enjoy.
While companies in which I have interests are not engaged in Atomic Energy
Commission contracts, you will note they are, and I personally am, engaged in
contracts or joint endeavors with important AEC contractors. This could be
construed as reason for prejudice or bias on my part when dealing with the
relationship between the Atomic Energy Commission and the parties with whom
my companies have business arrangements. I am thinking of such important
AEC contractors as Union Carbide, Kaiser Engineers, Betchel Co., Dow Chemical,
Utah Construction Co., and possibly others.
I sincerely hope that such an objection will not be raised, but I feel the possi-
bilities should be carefully considered by you and others before formal action is
taken on the proposed appointment.
Sincerely, and with warm regards,
JOHN A. MCCONE.
Mr. MCCONE. If I can introduce that letter in the record, the
attachment, which was referred to, is a 4- or 5-page document which
you have. I could say, Mr. Chairman, that I have resolved this
uestion in my own mind. It has been reviewed by the Attorney
myself on that very point before this committee.
Senator ANDERSON. I do want to say to you that I know it is some-
times hard to understand the reasons for questions of this nature but
on the other hand, I feel that if these questions are asked in advance
it is much better, with the hope that nobody at a subsequent date
will come up and say, "Well, this firm does business with the Union
Carbide."
We know your firm does business with the Union Carbide and I
am perfectly satisfied to let that relationship continue. I hope that
the day never comes that a man, in order to hold a position of public
responsibility, has to be somebody who has never acquired a dollar's
worth of property in his life.
Are there any questions on this matter?
Have you or your corporation made gifts to public officials, local,
State, or Federal?
Mr. MCOONE. No, sir.
Senator ANDERSON. Have you made any commitments with refer-
ence to several policy matters that I am going to ask about? If you
feel you cannot answer, all well and good.
As to weapons testing, for example?
Mr. MCCONE. No,
Senator ANDERSON. I ask that because just in the last day or two
there was a statement that a man connected with the Atomic Energy
Commission still did not feel it was safe militarily to engage in the
suspension of tests. On the same day there was a story in the news-
paper, in the same paper, on the same page, saying that our people
were arriving at Geneva, ready to start discussions.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
22- NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
I think if there is a strong feeling on your part that there must
never be any halt in the tests, that ought to be known, because it will
be in sharp conflict with, I imagine, the opinion of the Secretary of
State, John Foster Dulles, who apparently is trying very sincerely to
arrive at a suspension of tests with proper safeguards that Senator
Knowland mentioned.
You have no opinion that cannot be shaken on that question if the
safeguards were satisfied?
Mr. MCCONE. No; I have no opinion. As I expressed in that
letter to Dr. Lauritsen that I read, the closing paragraph, I am a
great supporter of a program under adequate and proper safeguards.
In answer to your specific question, I have made no commitment.
I have no irrevocable conviction on this question.
Senator ANDERSON. How about the increased facilities for the-pro-
duction of plutonium?
This is a long story and I am not trying to involve you in it im-
properly, but in this authorization bill which the Joint Committee is
reporting out today, there is a provision for $145 million for a
plutonium-producing reactor, the need for which the committee felt
had been indicated by the military in repeated appearances and which
I think safely is something that the committee was unanimous upon.
I do not think that the Atomic Energy Commission was completely
unanimous on it even though the AEC had asked the Bureau of the
Budget for $120 million for a reactor.
I am not asking you to commit yourself on what you will do with
this item or some other item in the future, but have you any fixed
conviction we should not increase the amount of plutonium now being
manufactured in this country?
Mr. MCCONE. No; I have no conviction, nor have I any opinion,
because a person would have to study the most classified of all infor-
mation to develop an opinion as to plutonium requirement in excess
of our production capacity, and I have not done that.
Senator ANDERSON. Now, on the atomic-power program, there will
be, of course, requests for expansion of it and in the past it has tended
to get political. Therefore, I give you that warning in advance. I
think it is possible to have an expanded atomic-power program without
its becoming political; I hope it is.
I am wondering if you have any ideas on that that you care to give
us at this time, or will you desire to reserve judgment? .
Mr. MCCONE. I am happy to express some views that are more my
philosophy on the subject rather than to deal with any specific projects.
I know of the specific projects as a layman from reading of them in
papers, reports, and magazines, but I have not visited them and studied
them as one must do to thoroughly understand them.
I think that the development of nuclear power, atomic power, is
vitally important to this country. It is not so important in our own
immediate power needs because we do have cheap sources of fuel in
this country and conventional powerplants are adequate. That
circumstance may not always exist. This Nation must be most com-
petent, in my opinion, in this field. That does not mean that we
have to necessarily be the largest producers of power from nuclear
resources in terms of kilowatts, but we must be the most advanced
technologically; and I think that we must be energetic and recruit
all available technical resources to get along with that job just as fast
as we can, utilizing all sources of help, the scientists of the Commis-
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE 23
Sion, other scientific groups, and the engineering and scientific organi-
zations of private industry.
Basically, I feel that the recruitment of interest on the part of pri-
vate industry, the fact that there are some 120 or 130 power companies
that have joined in one group or another to advance the program, is
very gratifying. Whether the level of effort is sufficient, whether it
should be increased, whether there should be other approaches to
further facilitate the work, is a matter that I will have to study.
Finally, I think that we must in a matter as complex as this, as
costly as this, all agree on a long-term program and then work to that
end, varying it only as technological and economic developments seem
to dictate. I am not persuaded by the fact that in a matter of this
kind, which is in an experimental stage, a developmental stage, that
the question of public and private power is particularly overriding in
its importance. Perhaps down the road a ways it will be. I am not
so sure that it is right now.
Senator ANDERSON. May I say, Mr. McCone, that out in your own
State of California, many of us have been very much interested in the
results of the building of the Vallecito plant, which was done by private
industry with some Government research plans behind it.
I talked yesterday with officials of that private utility who are
encouraged to go ahead in the building of a plant near Eureka. They
call it another name, they have another term other than the Eureka
plant, but it is a very promising development resulting from the con-
struction of an earlier plant. I think only as we build these plants are
we going to got it down to where it is attractive abroad or here at
home.
I quite agree that the public and private power can very advan-
tageously wait until we get something that is economically feasible.
Certainly there is no great blessing in what we have in Shippingport
so far as preference clause is concerned, because that preference clause
only means they can buy it at 8 mills, whereas it is costing the Govern-
ment 80 mills to produce it, where the Government loses and they lose
on every kilowatt that is produced there, but I think it will lead to
something that I think will be very fine.
There is in the Atomic Energy Act a section 203 that it is the
obligation of the Atomic Energy Commission to keep the Joint Com-
mittee fully and currently informed. Have you had a chance to
examine that and come to any conclusion as to whether you feel this is
an obligation that must be carried out fully?
Mr. McCoNE. It is in the law, and certainly it must be carried out
fully.
I take it from your remark about the learning of a large weapon
explosion and test explosion through a report from Japan, that this
point concerns you. If confirmed and I take office, I would like to
develop with this committee and with my associate commissioners
some ground rules as to just how this clause in the act may be carried
out to your complete satisfaction, then we will adhere to that. It is a
little hard to say just what is fully and completely informed.
Senator ANDERSON. May I try to illustrate it this way: that you
will find in the hearings on this recent exchange of information bill a
chronology relating to the laws, and in that chronology it was pointed
out that the Joint Committee was talking almost every week with the
Atomic Energy Commission about its program. The discussions with
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Appr red For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
the British had been going on for months before word of it came to
the Joint Committee and then the committee was asked in a very
short time whether it would or would not approve the transfer of
secret knowledge to the British. Thereupon, the committee tried to
find out something about British security. The report did not get
back within the 30-day period we were allowed and the transfer was
made, even though the Joint Committee unanimously sent a letter
urging that the matter be carefully considered. I will not say delayed
because there was some language in there that could be either way.
Now, the newspapers of July 2 have a story reading: "French atom
role weighed by British.
Under a London dateline, it says :
A public debate opened today on whether Britain and the United States should
help France produce nuclear bombs.
Do you believe that debate should be only in Britain or might a
little of it be in the United States, since it is our bombs they will be
getting? That is my question.
I am just going to suggest to you that if we hear about it after it
is all over, it is not quite as satisfactory, I do not believe, to the
members of the Joint Committee. If the British Parliament can
discuss it openly on the floor of Parliament, it is not so much of a
secret but what the Joint Committee could hear about it in private
That is all I am thinking about as currently and fully informed.
I could give you a sample of it from former Chairman Cole and
from Senator Hickenlooper. I quote Senator Hickenlooper because
the Cole-Hickenlooper Act properly wrote in some safeguards on
this point:
I am not prepared to pass on the question of the individual right of an individual
member, as such, to exercise the prerogatives which the law gives the Joint
Committee. I do say that the Joint Committee, acting through its chairman, or
through any properly designated representative of the Joint Committee, has an
absolute right to the instantaneous production of any information on any subject
which is in the official purview or responsibility of the Atomic Energy Commission.
Mr. Cole said much the same thing.
When we come to deal with this question of the French getting
our nuclear weapons, I do hope the Joint Committee has some
knowledge of the discussion.
There is in the statute what has been called the Murray amend-
ment. It is section 21. It provides:
Each member of the Commission, including the Chairman, shall have equal
responsibility and authority in all directions and actions of the Commission, shall
have full access to all information relating to the performance of his duties or
responsibilities, and shall have one vote.
Are you in accord with that provision?
Mr. MCCONE. Yes; I am.
Senator ANDERSON. I do not want to get over into the province of
things that are not proper to discuss here this morning, but the
Senator from California asked you about your responsibility if you
became Chairman of the Commission.
Could you advise us, if you do become Chairman, whether you will
also wear another hat as the President's adviser on atomic matters?
Mr. MCCONE. There has been no discussion with me on that at all.
Representative HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman?
Senator. ANDERSON. Mr. Holifield.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE 25
Representative HOLIFIELD. On that point, Mr. McCone, the
Atomic Energy Act was set up originally to have the administrative
organization composed of five Commissioners. This was done for a
very definite purpose. It was to bring the abilities and various
backgrounds of the five Commissioners to this great problem. The
commission form was used rather than to have a one-man admin-
istration.
Now, in the case of the past few years there has been, in my opinion,
and I speak as an individual now, a conflict of function which has
nullified to some extent the five-man Commission. This came about
as a result of the former Chairman being also in this second-hat
capacity as the President's special adviser. While recognizing that
the President has the right to get anyone to serve as special Presi-
dential adviser, nevertheless, in instances where the Commission, by
a majority vote, voted against the Chairman, the Chairman, due to
his duality of office, could go to the President as the Presidential
adviser and obtain a reversal of the decision of the Commission.
Many of us thought that this was a conflict which affected the
independence of the Commission. Do you have any thoughts in
regard to such a conflict, whether it does constitute a conflict or not?
I ask you this because, if you are appointed as Chairman, there.
might be a possibility that you would also be appointed as special
Presidential adviser, and even though there was a 4- to l-vote against
you as chairman of the Commission on some policy, you could go as a
Presidential adviser and advise the President to overturn the decision
of the Commission.
Mr. MCCONE. I can see that there might be a conflict, Mr. Holifield.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. This is not a hypothesis on my part. This has
actually happened.
Mr. MCCONE. I have not given much thought to the question. It
has never been discussed with me. I rather assumed that Mr.
Strauss, having started as Presidential adviser before he was Chairman
of the Commission, continued on in both.. roles. The Chairman prior
to Mr. Strauss served the President directly as Chairman of the
Commission.
Now., whether there are some reasons why it is necessary to be a
special assistant to the President in addition to Chairman in connec-
tion with National Security Council functions, or something else, I
don't know. I would not think so.
As far as carrying out of .the mandates of the Commission, the law
is quite clear that the majority vote of the Commission is the rule of
the Commission.
As far as convincing or persuading the President to overrule a
decision of the Commission, if you are inclined to do that you can
do it as a Commissioner or special adviser and furthermore,. the
President's office is available to all of the, Commissioners if they want
to appeal to him.
I don't think there is any foreclosure on any one Commissioner
approaching the President.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Of course, this has not been the case. All the
Commissioners have not had the ear of the President and the fact
that the Chairman generally was considered as spokesman for the
Commission, and then in a dual capacity as special Presidential ad-
viser, has in my opinion, to some extent, nullified the independence
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approobed For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. McCONE
of the Commission, because once having been overruled by a minority
intervention on the part of the Chairman with the President, the
Commission cannot help but be cognizant of this precedent and in
future votes have some tendency, in my mind, to effect the inde-
pendence in further Commission action.
Mr. MCCONE. I would think that the President's views would be
reflected to the Commission through the Chairman whether he was
serving as Chairman or serving with two hats, so to speak.
I have not distilled my thoughts on this because I do not know
anything of the responsibilities that the special adviser to the President
has other than the responsibility to the President as the Chairman of
the Commission.
Senator ANDERSON. Maybe I can help you by pointing out and I
was going to say to you, I know there is nothing in the world as un-
pleasant as unsolicited advice. So I am not going to advise you not
to wear both bats, but to suggest to you that you will be happier if
you do not.
For example, the Commission makes the recommendation with
reference to a plutonium reactor to cost $120 million.
Now, if you are wearing both hats and the Commission has brought
that recommendation to the Bureau of the Budget, the Bureau of the
Budget then asks the Presidential adviser what he thinks about it,
then it comes back with an unfavorable report, it does put the pro-
ponent of it in a rather strange light, which could be a situation, at
least, where you recommended one thing as Chairman of the Com-
mission and then went around to the same people and said, "Now, I
have on my other hat. As the President's special adviser I would like
to cut that item out that the Commission acted upon."
I am not saying this has happened. -I am only saying it could hap-
pen and I believe it would make you unhappy in the role you assume.
You will have other troubles without involving this contradiction
of yours.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Mr. Chairman, I think it is only fair to
say that in any event if Mr. McCone becomes Chairman of the Com-
mission and the President asks him to go over to the White House
and give him his views, he would be bound to go and give him his
views whether he wore 1 hat, 2 hats, or 18 hats.
I presume the President can request any executive or administra-
tive official to give him his views. I do not see that it makes too
much difference.
Personally, I do not see any reason for two hats, myself.
Senator ANDERSON. That is exactly the point.
Senator HiCKENLOOPER. ButI do not think it makes the slightest
bit of difference. I do not think it changes the situation in the least
and I think if the President wants to know something about the work
of the Commission his natural inclination would be to send for the
head of the Commission and ask him to give him the facts.
Senator ANDERSON. I think history would indicate the difficulty.
We tried to find out why the Joint Committee had not been fully in-
formed on something.
The next question was why did not a member of the Commission
tell us. Because the information was not imparted to the individual
who had it as Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. He got
that as the President's special adviser.
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
 Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2
NOMINATION OF JOHN A. MCCONE 27
Therefore, lie did not tell the other Commissioners.
That is what I am trying to get to, the danger of it.
If you have access to material that you cannot tell the people who
are associated with you, I think your task will be an unpleasant one.
The outer space bill provides there can be no dual offices on the
part of the Chairman. I think that is a good provision, because I
do think it leads to a distinction which you would not enjoy, and
problems would never arise if you were left to yourself.
Mr. MCCONE. I do not imagine that this problem will come up,
Mr. Chairman. I think if it had to come up it would have been
discussed in one of my recent conversations. It has not been. I
don't think it is going to arise.
Senator ANDERSON. Are there additional questions?
Thank you very much for being a very fine witness.
Mr. MCCONE. Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator ANDERSON. The hearing is adjourned.
(Thereupon, at 12 noon, the Senate section of the Joint Committee
was adjourned.)
Approved For Release 2004/01/15 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000400080002-2