enough crew, for example, to go on an 80 or 90 percent ship availability basis. I think a lot would depend on whether she is going to be operating at 100 percent or 30 or 40 percent power. But I think that determination could be made, and we would be glad to assist in making such an assessment, if requested.

Mr. REINECKE. It might be interesting because, looking at the unofficial cost figures in the first year of operation with costs of $2.7 million with a loss of $1.4 million, if we could add another 20 percent operating time, assuming that revenues were proportional to time in operation, we could very nearly cover all operating costs simply by upgrading the useful time application of the ship.

Mr. SHAW. Yes, sir. This is one of the questions that we look at downstream. For example, what are the requirements for plant and ship availability. When you have a large economic investment such as this, you have to operate hard to break even on the economics. So we believe this is a very important aspect of any future program.

Mr. REINECKE. On the subject of the crew, I understand according to the bulletin that we have a total crew of 66 on the Savannah. The Otto Hahn calls for a crew of 43. Can you give us any reason why there might be such a drastic difference?

Mr. SHAW. No, sir. But I think it is very risky to deal with overall numbers such as these because the ship's functions, as such, could be the overwhelming factor rather than anything that deals with the propulsion plant.

Mr. REINECKE. Do you feel that the on-board service station of the Otto Hahn is a step forward as opposed to the Savannah using the shore station?

Mr. SHAW. Sir, I can't answer that because I am not familiar with that design detail. But I am sure that the Otto Hahn requires a dockside service activity just like the Savannah or any other nuclear ship does. I don't think the on-board service station is a substitute necessarily for a dockside activity. If they are counting on on-board service, this may affect crew manning numbers, depending on whether the functions are performed on board away from the dock, or on board at the dock. Again this is a kind of detailed design feature that you put your money up for and you can get it any way you want it. This is not something that requires innovations in technology.

Mr. REINECKE. The indication we received when we visited the Otto Hahn was, I believe, that their own crew was capable of handling this with a few minor exceptions and would be able to handle refueling, et cetera, and have access to the reactor completely on board ship.

Mr. SHAW. I think this again, sir, is a characteristic that can be built into any ship and its crew. I would think the crew would want shore leave when they came home and they would let somebody else maintain that facility.

Mr. REINECKE. How far do you think you can go on $100,000 for a development program with maritime application?

Mr. SHAW. Not very far.

Mr. REINECKE. I will reserve the balance of my time, if I may, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Ruppe.

May I interrupt before the bell rings? I was hopeful that we could sit this afternoon but we checked with the floor and the Independent

Offices, Department of Housing and Urban Development appropriation bill is up and I think both sides of the aisle would like to have their Members on the floor. We are advised that there probably would be objections to sitting this afternoon. Is it possible that you could come back tomorrow morning?

Mr. SHAW. Sir, I have a terribly difficult morning schedule. We have people from overseas, people that have traveled quite a distance to meet this commitment. I will be glad to come back next week if the chairman wishes, sir, but another session this week would be pretty difficult to make.

Mr. RUPPE. Mr. Shaw, in view of the costs to date, was it your opinion that the market was not well enough defined or recognized to give much promise for a nuclear application in the merchant marine field in the near future?

Mr. SHAW. Sir, we have been unable to get a clear picture on how many ships are required, what types of ship, what types of propulsion plants, and what service will be required. Out of those determinations will come clarification as to the market. Again, when a manufacturer says, "I am willing to invest in something," he is looking downstream as to how many and what and his risks. We are certainly aware that there are one, two, or three ships that can be put on the table, but these reactor plants do require a very continuing type of involvement. You can't just buy one and walk away from it.

Mr. RUPPE. Mr. Shaw, how many other countries are in the process of constructing a nuclear propulsion system for a merchant marine vessel or are in the final programing stages or will be going into it in the very near future?

Mr. SHAW. Actually I have a chart here that summarizes part of this.

Of course, the Russians have the Lenin, which I guess can be considered a maritime application; the Germans have the Otto Hahn. The shaft horsepower is indicated in the third column of the chart. The PWR in the second column stands for pressurized water reactor. The Japanese have indicated their intent to proceed with a 10,000 shaft horsepower oceanographic research ship. This summarizes, to the best of our knowledge, the actual activities, with the last item somewhat clouded because it has been on and off again. We, of course, have detailed summaries about other countries' expressed interests which we would be glad to provide for the record should you so desire.

(The information follows:)

FOREIGN MARITIME NUCLEAR POWER PROGRAMS

BELGIUM

The Belgian Belgonucleaire Company, in cooperation with the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority and the Belgian Centre d'Etude de l'Energie Nucleaire (CEN) at Mol, has undertaken a study of ship propulsion reactors in a project called "Vulcain". The name is derived from the fact that the Vulcain Syndicate was formed in 1959 from thirty Belgian companies to finance the detailed design study of a spectral shift reactor concept. Publication of a favorable report in 1962 led to the conclusion of an agreement for collaboration between the UK-AEA and the Vulcain syndicate.

The aim of the agreement is to carry the development work on the reactor through to the stage of design suitable for industrial application. Design work is being done both in England and Belgium; and experimental work, at the Mol Center.

Although the UK Government decided in 1965 to postpone the construction of a nuclear propelled merchant ship, the British are continuing their cooperation with the Belgians in research and development work on this concept.

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

A 38 MWt pressurized water reactor built by Arbeitsgemeinschaft Babcock/ Interatom will provide power for the first German nuclear merchant ship, a 15.000 ton bulk carrier named the Otto Hahn. The ship hull was launched in mid-1964 and completion is now scheduled for 1967.

In 1965, the United States entered into an arrangement with Gesellschaft fuer Kernenergieverwertung in Schiffbau and Schiffahrt mbh (GKSS), a non-profit company supported by the German Government, which is responsible for the construction and operation of the ship. Under this arrangement, the Atomic Energy Commission will lease fuel for the first core of the Otto Hahn and provided information on the NS "Savannah", and in return will receive detailed information on the Otto Hahn project. The Otto Hahn will probably be the world's second nuclear propelled merchant ship.

The $12.5 million project is being financed by a $8.5 million contribution from the West German Government and a $4 million Euratom contribution toward the construction of the reactor.

ITALY

A margin nuclear propulsion study on a pressurized water reactor plant is being carried out by the Italian FIAT Company and ANSALDO (shipbuilders of Genoa) under a contract between the Italian AEC (NEN) and these two firms, and another with Euratom. The firms are supplying about 60% of the funds and Euratom, about 40%. The study has been in progress since 1962, and present arrangements provide for its continuation to 1967 with a total cost of $5 to $7 million. Plans at present call for the construction of a 53,000-ton tanker, the power plant of which would consist of a pressurized water reactor capable of developing 25.000 b.h.p. Both the Italian Navy and Italian shipping companies have expressed interest, but in the absence of either definite plans or available funds, the future of the project is uncertain.

78-559-67- -13

JAPAN

The Japanese Ministry of Transportation and the Nuclear Powered Ship Research Association (a private industrial group) began studies on a nuclear powered ship in 1957. As a result of these studies and the recommendations of the Japanese AEC's Atomic Ship Committee, the Japan Nuclear Ship Development Agency (JNSDA) was established in June 1963 for the purpose of designing and building a small (6,700-ton) nuclear powered oceanographic ship. A 35 MWt light water moderated and cooled, indirect cycle reactor was selected for use in the ship, which was originally scheduled for completion in 1968. However, financial problems connected with its construction have resulted in a decision to delay the start of construction at least until FY 1967. Originally planned as an all Japanese project, indications now are that the Government leans toward U.S. Industry equipment.

THE NETHERLANDS

The Reactor Centrum Nederland (RCN), the Dutch National Reactor Center located at Petten, is the major nuclear research laboratory in the Netherlands. Activities there are largely concentrated on the development of a 60 MWt pressurized water reactor for ship propulsion. The work is being carried out under an association contract with Euratom.

A detailed reference design for a prototype marine reactor has been completed, and funds have been requested to begin the construction of a land based prototype pressurized water reactor. The Dutch Government is expected to hand down a decision in 1966.

NORWAY

A Norwegian nuclear propelled bulk carrier project was accepted by the European Nuclear Energy Agency for a joint European evaluation study in 1961. After submission of the study in April 1962, it was decided, late in 1962, to postpone further joint European nuclear propulsion efforts. Concurrently, the Norwegian Institute for Atomenergi, the Norwegian national atomic energy research organization, in an effort jointly supported by Norwegian and Swedish industry, has worked on the design of a 27,000 shaft horsepower ship reactor for a 67,000-ton bulk carrier. However, it has recently been reported that Swedish interests have been withdrawn from the project at this time. The Norwegians have not yet made a decision as to the future of the program.

SOVIET UNION

The USSR built and placed in service in December 1959, the nuclear powered icebreaker "Lenin", the first nuclear surface ship in the world. Powered by three nuclear reactors and developing a total ship horsepower of 44,000, the 16,000displacement ton “Lenin” has successfully completed six navigation seasons in the Arctic.

At the 1964 Geneva Conference, the Soviet Union announced construction of two additional nuclear icebreakers to be in service by 1971. The new ships are reported to be improved nuclear designs to the "Lenin" and will have two reactors each instead of three. Pressurized water type reactors will be used. The Soviet Chairman stated that the "creation of a nuclear surface fleet is very promising." He continued that the opening of the Arctic Ocean is their first priority and, "We want to make it passable in any season, 12 months in the year. For us, icebreakers, increase the load capacity of our merchant fleet."

UNITED KINGDOM

The main objective of the United Kingdom's nuclear marine program has been the search for a reactor concept which would be economically attractive to a wide range of shipping. A design and development program was announced in 1961 and, in 1962 a technical advisory panel, originated to assess and advise on six ship reactor designs, recommended that future development be concentrated on the Vulcain spectral shift concept, a type of pressurized water reactor being developed jointly by the UK Atomic Energy Authority and a consortium of Belgian firms (the Vulcain syndicate), and the integral boiling reactor. In 1965, however, after a re-evaluation of the program, the UK Government an

nounced the decision not to build a nuclear propelled merchant ship now because the prospects of building a ship that would be economic to operate did not justify the large expenditure necessary to build a prototype. A small research and development program on the present types of reactors for merchant ship use, and the joint UK-Belgian Vulcain effort are being continued.

New proposals for a British nuclear merchant ship were presented at the British Nuclear Forum late in March 1966. The proposals envision fast container ships of as much as 80,000 SHP; ore ships are being considered as "second string" candidates. The proposals are by a private group which will ask Government subsidy. The second ship is expected to be economic.

CHINA

It has been reported by French nuclear periodicals that the Chinese Nuclear Enery Commission and the Ministry of Transport began development in 1962 of a nuclear ship with the technical aid of Russia. They continued the development with further aid of Czechoslovakia, Rumania, and Poland during 1963. A Committee on Nuclear Propulsion was established at Tien-Tsin in 1963 and ship construction is reported to have begun in April 1964 at Tien-Tsin and may be already complete.

The ship is named "Zan Than" (Voice of the People) and described as 20,000 gross tons, propelled by two screws at 23.5 knots with two main propulsion units and two steam generators capable of 22,000 SHP each. The reactor is a 180 MWt pressurized water reactor with 98 fuel elements with zircalloy tubes containing UO2 pellets having 1.7% enriched uranium. An auxiliary propulsion engine is also provided. Refueling is to be accomplished in a special land based facility.

EURATOM

The present 1963-67 budget for the European Community includes a budget item for reactor development for merchant ship propulsion in the amount of $6,000,000. These funds supplement national support for active work on ship propulsion in three countries-Germany, Italy, and Norway.

NUCLEAR MERCHANT SHIP EXPORT CONTROL PERMITS
(U.S. Department of Commerce)

The following companies have applied for the export of nuclear reactor information for the purposes of foreign interest in merchant ship propulsion.

Mr. RUPPE. Do you feel that this construction is for prestige and national purposes rather than an evidence that other nations have reached a commercial economically feasible construction program for nuclear reactors?