year's crop of suggestions for changes in national housing laws. We have 45 bills before us that we are trying to find our way through.

So I have a double interest in this particular hearing, and I am very happy to be here.

Representative MORRIS. Wallace, we are honored and happy that you could come.

I think a note should be made of the excellent judgment of some members of your family in choosing Albuquerque to live in. I want to commend you on that also.

Senator BENNETT. I am, of course, very happy for that. This has a double meaning because my son-in-law is the vice president in charge of research and development at Sandia Corp., which is related to the problems with which Los Alamos wrestles, so I am all bound up in this particular situation.

Representative MORRIS. We are honored and thankful that you could take the time to come to New Mexico. Of course, I realize you don't have these problems in Utah that would require your time; that the people of Utah are very happy and have no complaints. So we appreciate your coming out here to give assistance to our people.

Senator BENNETT. You shouldn't have given me another opening. However, it does give me the opportunity to tell you I am leaving Albuquerque tonight for Utah to be present when the State honors. the first Congressional Medal of Honor winner whom the Air Force has selected in this Vietnam situation. We are having a big ceremony tomorrow in honor of Maj. Bernard Fisher.

So not only have you given me the opportunity to be here this morning, but the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy is helping me with my expenses to get to Utah to attend this ceremony in honor of Major Fisher.

Representative MORRIS. That is a pleasure also.

Sitting on my left-and I don't mean that in a political or a philosophical sense, it just happens to be the physical position which he now occupies-is the ranking minority member on the House side of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy.

The gentleman comes from the State of California. He has been an intimate, personal friend of mine for the 82 years I have had the privilege of being in the Congress. I served on the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs with him. We always got along very well except when it came to the matter of the division of water in the Rio Grande River between the users on the lower part of the stream and the users of the water in the upper part of the stream. It has been extremely difficult for him to see the merits of some of the situations that develop in the division of this water. After trying for 811⁄2 years to convince him on that score, I have about decided I won't ever be able to do it.

In my opinion he is one of the most knowledgeable men in the country on atomic energy matters. As a matter of fact, he was formerly a lawyer for the AEC at Los Alamos, N. Mex. I don't know exactly when that was, but I suppose it was back in the early days.

I am honored and proud that Congressman Craig Hosmer of California would come here and participate in this hearing to help us. Congressman Hosmer, would you like to say a few words?

Representative HOSMER. Thank you, Tom. It is a pleasure to be back in Los Alamos.

However, from what I have seen of water around here last night and this morning, I would think you would be happy for southern California to get some of this out of your basements.

Representative MORRIS. You certainly are going to get your share

of it.

Representative HOSMER. As long as we are being candid this morning, this is kind of a sentimental journey for me. Twenty years ago I was living at 4130 Trinity Drive.

At that time a subcommittee of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy came through. The foundations of this place shook for about 2 months ahead of time. So I came to the conclusion that if you weren't a scientist and you wanted to have some influence in the development of nuclear matters in this country, the best way to do it was to get elected to Congress and serve on the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. Shortly after that I went back to California. I did get elected to Congress and eventually to serve on the Joint Committee.

I am delighted to be here today with one of its subcommittees conducting an investigation which, incidentally, I hope will solve one of the last problems in turning the city over to the residents' total control. Back in the old days we had a gate down the highway, and we lived up here in great exclusivity. I think the gate may have been somewhat of a status symbol. However, it helped to keep away unwelcome relatives and in-laws. [Laughter.]

Tom, I have had my say. Let's go ahead.

Representative MORRIS. Thank you, Craig. Once again, we do appreciate the honor of having you and Senator Bennett here.

I want to make one more statement before we start with our witnesses. Senator Anderson, Senator Montoya, and my colleague in the House of Representatives, Congressman Johnny Walker, regret that official duties in Washington prevent them from being present at this hearing.

We do have present in the room the field secretary of Congressman Walker, Mr. Reuben Miera of Santa Fe, N. Mex. Reuben, do you have any statement you would like to make in person or like to file with the committee.

Mr. MIERA. No, I would like to express the Congressman's regret for not being able to be here this morning, and also his appreciation to the committee and members of the Washington staff for having given their time to hear the views of our citizens of Los Alamos.

Representative MORRIS. Thank you, Reuben.

I would like to introduce now the counsel for the subcommittee, who is supposed to rule on all legal points and advise the subcommittee how we can avoid the problems that might confront a subcommittee in deliberations of this sort-our valuable counsel, Mr. Leonard Trosten.

Before we start with the AEC witnesses I would like to recognize the County Commissioners of the County of Los Alamos, and ask them if they would like to make any comments at this time.

Would you like to make a comment? Would you present your colleagues?

(Questions directed to Commissioner Gursky who is standing in the audience.)

Mr. GURSKY. Mr. Chairman, I am County Commissioner Martin Gursky. With me is Commissioner Steve Stoddard. Our third Commissioner, Dr. Loucks, is out of town and unable to be with us this morning.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for taking the time to visit with us today and to solve again one of the problems which is remaining in this area of transfer.

The commission has no comments to make on the substance of this bill this morning. However, I would like to urge the committee to consider the desirability of expediting the course of this legislation, and I do this because a substantial segment of our population has not yet resolved its housing situation.

I believe the comments I made earlier this year to the ad hoc committee, to which the chairman referred a while ago, are still relevant and I think represent the basis of the commission's concern in this

area.

Namely, they went something as follows: If Los Alamos is truly to function as a self-governing community, the people of Los Alamos must feel a sense of belonging and participation in this community. This sense cannot exist when so many people are insecure in so basic a need as shelter for themselves and their families. This insecurity then finds itself intruding upon every consideration including the ones necessary to evaluate the kinds and extent of local governmental services.

This, generally, is the concern of the commission and the entire community.

Again let me express the thanks of the community for your taking the time to come and to listen to the problems that we have.

Thank you very much.

Representative MORRIS. Thank you, Mr. Gursky.

The subcommittee will now hear from Mr. Herman E. Roser, Manager of the AEC's Los Alamos Area Office.

Mr. ROSER. Chairman Morris, Senator Bennett, Congressman Hosmer May I take just a moment to extend to you a very brief and very warm welcome to Los Alamos. All of us who have been residents here for a number of years remember with pleasure your earlier visits to Los Alamos. We appreciate the fact that you take the time from your busy schedules to be with us and help us try to solve some of the remaining problems in connection with the disposal of the community.

I will apologize to you for the weather because of the inconvenience it has caused; but since all of you are westerners, you recognize, as I do, the importance of rain to this part of the country. I will say we are delighted to have the rain and we hope that the difficulties it has caused in your transportation arrangements were not too unpleasant.

STATEMENT OF HERMAN E. ROSER, AREA MANAGER, LOS ALAMOS AREA OFFICE, U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

Mr. ROSER. Chairman Morris, Senator Bennett, Congressman Hosmer, in my prepared testimony, I will present a brief background on the inclusion of the "cooperative priority" for purchase of apartment buildings in Public Law 87-719, the amendment to the Atomic Energy

Community Act of 1955, to include Los Alamos, N. Mex. I will also summarize chronologically the most significant actions taken to implement this phase of the Los Alamos disposal program, up to the time of appointment of an ad hoc committee to study all aspects of the sale of multifamily housing at Los Alamos. Testimony covering the work of that committee and its recommendations, which are the basis for the proposed legislation being considered this morning, will be presented by Mr. Franklin N. Parks, Associate General Counsel, Atomic Energy Commission and the chairman of the ad hoc committee.

During hearings before this subcommittee on April 23, 1962, concerning proposed legislation for disposal of the Los Alamos community, several witnesses suggested that the Atomic Energy Commission should offer multiple-family dwellings for sale on a priority basis to the occupants of the buildings who could form a cooperative entity for the purchase.

Gen. A. W. Betts' reply to this suggestion, in a letter included in the hearing record, was that although the AEC did not object to the sales of apartment buildings on a priority basis to cooperatives formed by the occupants if mortages involved in such sales would qualify for FHA insurance under normal procedures, it did not favor such sales.

In a letter to Senator Anderson from the Housing and Home Finance Agency, also included in the hearing record, the question concerning the commission's offering of multiple-family dwellings for sale on a priority basis to the occupants of the buildings who could form a cooperative entity for the purchase was answered as follows: "While the housing agency considers it possible to sell multiple-family dwellings to cooperatives whose membership is made up of the occupants there are certain inherent problems which mitigate against such sales on a priority basis at Los Alamos. The demand by such purchasers may not be sufficient to make such a priority feasible."

In its report recommending passage of the disposal legislation for Los Alamos, the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy stated its belief that even though the demand for cooperative apartment purchases might be limited, the Commission should have the authority to meet such demand as might arise for cooperative ownership. The committee therefore added a new section 58 to chapter 5 of the Atomic Energy Community Act of 1955, authorizing the Commission to sell, on a priority basis, apartments, as appropriate to cooperatives consisting wholly of project-connected personnel.

On September 28, 1962, the Atomic Energy Community Act was amended to include Los Alamos, and shortly thereafter, development of a priorities regulation for Los Alamos was begun. A public meeting was held on December 4, 1962, to allow all interested citizens to express their views and participate in the drafting of the priorities regulation.

Prior to final classification of residential properties to be offered for sale, an intensive study was made of all buildings in Los Alamos containing more than one dwelling unit to determine which could be offered for sale as "single family units" in a multifamily building.

This study was directed to all aspects of the problem, including structural characteristics, utility arrangements, siting, and engineering considerations and cost estimates of construction which might be required to overcome any problems or deficiencies. Upon completion of the study, a determination was made as to which units would be classified for sale as single family units in a multifamily unit, which as duplexes and which as apartments. On February 28, 1963, a public meeting was held to explain the final classification and the basis upon which the final conclusions had been reached.

The classification as "apartments" embraced the following:

On April 25, 1963, at the regularly scheduled Joint Community Transfer Council meeting, a representative from FHA discussed cooperative housing and held a question and answer period. He explained advantages of cooperative housing, discussed mortgages, interest rates, financing, downpayments, carrying charges, FHA model forms, escrows, membership requirements, duties and responsibilities of members, title to property, management agents, and legal assistance.

Shortly after August 2, 1963, the date on which the priorities regulation was published in the Federal Register, copies of the priorities regulation were mailed to all residents in Los Alamos. Section 130.203 (f) defined "cooperative" and section 130.221 (c) set forth the first and second priorities for the purchase of Government-owned apartment houses.

On April 14, 1965, a preliminary brochure was prepared relating to "cooperative" purchase of apartments at Los Alamos. Section 58 of the amended Community Act, which deals with cooperatives, was quoted, as well as sections from the priorities regulation covering definitions and priorities for cooperatives. Copies were made available to any interested person.

An information package on cooperatives prepared jointly by AEC and HUD was released to the local news media on August 31, 1966. At the same time, copies of this material were mailed to occupants of all Government-owned apartment units in Los Alamos. This information triggered a series of some 18 questions by a local newspaper.