OFFICIAL USE ON... -6Dr. Schlesinger pointed out that the AEC has very much broader responsibilities as a result of the Calvert Cliffs decision. He felt that DBER could be of particular help to the regulatory side of the operation. He felt that basic research was fine so long as it helps meet the mission responsibilities. He indicated that DBER should work closely with both the regulatory staff and with the Division of Reactor Development. Commissioner Ray felt that books of the type put out in the Time-Life Series have had very little impact scientifically and doubted that this was a good route to go to increase public awareness of scientific problems. Dr. Schlesinger felt that the previous AEC publications were obsolete and were pitched at the wrong level, He felt that updated publications should be made available. The discussion returned to the role of the Advisory Committee and Chairman Schlesinger indicated that the function should probably be formulated by the Committee itself. He felt that biology is becoming increasingly important in the public mind and that the AEC should be responsive. The Commission would appreciate any advice from the Committee on this matter. At this point the Committee recessed for lunch. Dr. William Osburn discussed the concept of environmental research parks. In June the Commission designated about 200,000 acres in South Carolina around the Savannah River Plant as an environmental research park. This apparently was precipitated because the General Services Administration had proposed to sell off land around the Savannah River Reactors that was located more than 6 miles from any reactor. Dr. Osburn showed in detail how such a disposal of land would have wrecked the ongoing environmental research program at Savannah River. There apparently is the possibility that additional areas of federally-owned land may be designated as research parks. Dr. Osburn was of the opinion that such should be done. Dr. Totter discussed the serious problem of funding of offsite research by DBER, To illustrate the increasing crunch he gave the following list of figures. The funding level for off-site in 1950 was 21% of the total budget. By 1954 it had increased to 28%, and by 1961 to 35%. In 1972 it had fallen to 20%, in FY 1973 to 18.6%, and projected for 1974, 18.9%. He felt that any new studies undertaken in 1974 would probably have to go to on-site laboratories, Mr. Whitnah described the current financial status of the Atomic Bomb Gasualty Commission. The termination allowances for the employees which have been accumulating over the years and which were being held by the Commission have finally been turned over to the National Academy of Sciences for investment. This, of course, provides some help in funding. The basic problem is that the Japanese rate of inflation is about 10-12% a year and consequently the budget requirements of ABCC go up at a corresponding rate. A particularly devastating blow was the reevaluation of the dollar. The Japanese yen is now much more expensive than it had been previously. Negotiations with the Japanese government to see if they will assume a greater role in ABCC affairs are continuing. The Japanese Ministry of OFFICIAL USE ONLY