FILM

The film which you just saw depicts activities on Route 17 in Panama. (This film has been clipped from the historical documentary at our operations.) Similar efforts are now underway in Colombia on Route 25.

Advance party construction includes:

Base Camps (slide).

Airfields (slide).

Weather stations (slide).

Hydrology stations (slide).

Access Roads (slide).

Supplies being Unloaded (slide).

Data collection will parallel that taken on Route 17 and is now in progress: In topography (slide).

Geology (slide).

The rest of the data collection will start following the construction of the facilities, for example, the weather stations.

DATA EVALUATION AND ENGINEERING STUDIES

A preliminary design for each of the alternate routes is being made. In the study of modernization of the present lock canal and conversion of the present canal to sea-level we are using, for the most part, existing data. Data being collected on the proposed nuclear routes will provide the basis for their design. These designs and associated cost estimates will include initial construction costs and annual operating costs projected throughout the economic life of the project. The study of the conversion of the existing lock canal to sea-level is proceeding on schedule. Alinement studies have been prepared for Routes 17 and 25 and are updated periodically to incorporate new data as collected.

Technical groups are providing guidance to the data collection effort and the data evaluation studies in the fields of seismic effects, acoustic waves, radiological hazards, nuclear cratering characteristics, slope stability and excavation systems.

I shall be followed by Mr. John Kelly of the Atomic Energy Commission.

NUCLEAR EXCAVATION TECHNOLOGY

Mr. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to appear before your Committee to provide information on the status of AEC's nuclear excavation program in relation to the Atlantic-Pacific Interoceanic Canal Study Commission's program. The AEC closely cooperates with the Canal Study Commission in the canal feasibility studies. As described by Chairman Anderson and General Woodbury, the AEC is performing nuclear operation studies, including nuclear safety feasibility, within the overall Canal Study Commission's Engineering Feasibility Study. The other important area is AEC's research and development program for developing a nuclear excavation technology within our Plowshare program. Our nuclear excavation research and development program is divided into two major activities, development and testing of nuclear explosives and other techniques that will minimize the release of radioactivity, and the further develop ment of a theory of explosive cratering mechanisms and capability of more accurately predicting crater characteristics.

Reduction of the amount of radioactivity released from nuclear cratering explosions has always been recognized as crucial to the ultimate success of the nuclear excavation program. To minimize the amount of radioactivity released, development is underway on two fronts, (1) special thermonuclear explosives which would produce a minimum of fission products, and (2) on special emplace ment techniques.

During the past year, three experiments were conducted to advance the design of low-fission explosives. Those tests were very successful. Experiments will be conducted to further develop the family of explosives most useful for excavation applications. We plan to continue the explosive developmental program concurrently with cratering experiments and verify through testing that radioactivtiy should pose no real health obstacle to large scale nuclear excavation. Our present knowledge of cratering mechanism is based on extensive laboratory studies and on several hundred chemical explosive tests and nine nuclear explosive cratering experiments. These were conducted in different types of rocks

and at varying depths of burial. It is very important to our program that the relationship that exists between the size and depths of explosive craters and the depth at which the explosion takes place be fully understood. There is a depth of burial of an explosive of a given yield at which optimum crater dimensions are produced. If the explosive is buried shallower or deeper than the optimum, the depth and/or diameter of the crater will be smaller. In the case of nuclear explosives, with a deeper burial a minimum of radioactivity is released since most of it is trapped in the rubble of the crater and in the debris deposited close to the crater.

To demonstrate the feasibility of nuclear excavation, we must have the capability to more accurately predict the characteristics of craters produced by nuclear explosives. Experience to date indicates that an empirically based predictive capability does not suffice for higher yield detonations or for detonations in different media. One of the most significant recent results of our studies on the development of the theory of nuclear explosion effects is a very promising approach to predicting crater characteristics for any new condition by use of computer calculations; further studies are needed to better understand the theory on which this method is based. In addition to the minimum number of cratering experiments needed to provide a nuclear excavation feasibility determination to the Canal Study Commission, we are planning a series of low yield experiments to test and refine this predictive capability. Also included in our studies and experiments is the development of a better understanding of the phenomena associated with the simultaneous detonation of rows of explosives and the connection of such row-charges to produce continuous, ditch-like craters. This is very important to demonstrating the feasibility of nuclear excavation of canals.

Because of their importance to the Canal Study Commission, primary attention will be given to performing those cratering experiments which will provide the data required for determining the feasibility, costs and other factors involved in excavating a sea-level canal by nuclear means. In this cratering work the AEC will continue to benefit from its close association with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in a joint research program. As in the past, the Civil Works research of the Corps will contribute valuable information, especially in the important area of engineering properties of explosion-produced craters.

We believe that successful execution of about six major cratering experiments with associated explosive and safety development activities will provide timely information for a determination of the technical feasibility of using nuclear explosives to excavate a sea-level canal. These can be conducted at a rate of about two per year.

Project Cabriolet is planned to be a 2.5 kiloton nuclear cratering explosion at a depth of 170 feet at the Nevada Test Site. This experiment will be an important step in providing essential data on basic cratering effects from a nuclear explosion occurring at the apparent optimum depth in hard, dry rock. Cabriolet was prepared for execution in February; however, it has been postponed until after this year's grazing season.

The Buggy I nuclear row-charge experiment as now planned involves the simultaneous underground detonation of five low yield nuclear explosives in even terrain at the Nevada Test Site and is designed to investigate the production of a smooth ditch-like crater. This experiment will be this country's first nuclear row-charge experiment and is very important in determining the feasibility of nuclear excavation of canals. With high explosives, it has been demonstrated that the simultaneous detonation of explosives appropriately spaced in a line and buried at the proper depth will produce a smooth-sided, ditch-like crater. If this effect can be duplicated in Buggy I, we will have taken a big step toward demonstrating that nuclear explosives could be used for canal excavation.

After Buggy I, a second nuclear row charge, Buggy II, is planned. This experiment is planned to be performed adjacent to the Buggy I crater and will be designed to investigate the joining of a second ditch-like crater to the Buggy I crater. This experiment is also very important because the current concept of nuclear excavation of canals and mountain passes calls for such inter-connecting of a series of nuclear row-charge craters. For this method to be proved feasible, it must be demonstrated that such craters can be reliably joined without the need for extensive clean-up operations.

Our plans include a higher yield single charge experiment such as Schooner, which is presently conceived to be about a 100 KT nuclear point charge in hard rock, possibly in the Bruneau River area of southwestern Idaho. Schooner would

provide the basis on which to extrapolate to the higher yields needed for practical large-scale, nuclear excavation.

The nuclear excavation experimental program each year depends on the results obtained from the experiments previously conducted. It is expected that at least one higher yield nuclear row charge in varying terrain and a major experiment or demonstration project combining several experimental objectives would be required for purposes of the canal studies.

Due to delays in AEC's nuclear excavation program, only a highly qualified determination on the technical feasibility of using nuclear explosives to excavate a sea-level canal could be provided by June 30, 1968, to the Canal Study Commission for consideration in its final report to the President. Extension of the final reporting date, in accordance with the amending legislation proposed by the Canal Study Commission, would provide the AEC with much-needed time to conduct the minimum excavation program in an orderly manner and to report the data and evaluation to the Canal Study Commission for consideration in its final report.

Atlantic-Pacific Interoceanic Canal Study Commission
STUDY SCHEDULE

* Obtained survey zgreement with Panima Commission appointed by President

CHART D

STUDY SCHEDULE

Chairman ANDERSON. I would like to illustrate the schedule of the Commission's investigation with Chart D. This chart covers the period beginning with 1964 when Congress authorized the establishment of the Commission and extends through calendar year 1970.

The upper bar represents the schedule upon which the Authorizing Legislation was based. It contemplated data collection to start in late calendar year 1964 with completion of the study scheduled for 30 June 1968. This schedule was overly optimistic in that it did not allow for delays in formation of the Commission, delays in securing survey rights from host countries, and stretch-out of related programs.

Following the appointment of the Commission in April 1965, a new schedule was adopted which attempted to adjust the study program to the loss of the favorable dry season in fiscal year 1965. The development of this schedule contemplated survey agreements in late 1965, which would allow full-scale data collection to begin in December 1965 with completion of the study still on 30 June 1968. Delays in obtaining survey agreements have so altered the schedule that completion of the study within the assigned scope by 30 June 1968 is no longer

possible. During the period of negotiation between the United States and the host countries, every advantage was taken to expedite those functions not requiring on-site access to survey areas. Supplies and equipment were purchased and stored, key personnel were mobilized, but full-scale data collection and full mobilization was necessarily postponed until January 1967.

The proposed new study schedule, shown on the lower bar on the chart, will provide the Commission with sufficient time to complete the study in an orderly manner. The schedule has been adjusted to compensate for the delays encountered in obtaining access to survey areas; it provides for a stretch-out of the Data Evaluation and Engineering Studies Program to match the delay in PLOWSHARE, and it will provide time for coordination of the Commissions' report with other Federal agencies prior to its submission to the President, something which earlier schedules did not provide.

The present estimate of funds required to complete the study is $24 million. This represents an increase of $6.5 million. I have prepared a chart showing the comparisons between the original estimate and the requirements estimate (Chart E). The major items contributing to the increase in estimated cost are shown on Chart F.

Delays in obtaining survey agreements.
Unprogramed Federal pay raises.

Vietnam situation.

Revisions of cost estimates resulting from actual field experience.
Program stretch-out.

In preparing the Commission's fiscal year 1968 budget, it was necessary to assume that an amendment to the authorizing legislation will be passed by the Congress. This amendment proposes to extend the study from 30 June 1968 until 1 December 1970 and to raise the appropriation ceiling from $17,500,000 to $24,000,000.