TRAVEL JUSTIFICATION Mr. COTTON. As I read this justification on travel, I realize it is essential, and in a sense it may be a minor matter, but I had the picture of those fairly large groups of engineers, experts, and technicians who were traveling hither and yon across the country to various laboratories. That is false? Dr. HUNSAKER. It is individual travel. Dr. VICTORY. The Director, for example, might make two or three trips a year to each laboratory, and that would be the same for the Associate Director and other Assistant Directors who perform specialty duties and who visit the laboratories two or three times a year. The Assistant Director on Propulsion might visit the Lewis Laboratory as often as once a month. Mr. COTTON. It did seem to me that this travel item, even for your extensive operations, was rather large, and I was just trying to get fixed in my mind why it was necessary to be so large. Dr. HUNSAKER. As far as I can see, from sitting as chairman, it probably is not large, because we have had frequent occasions when the matter came up of whether we could afford to have meetings of a technical subcommittee as often as the subcommittee wants to have them. They get enthusiastic and want to meet frequently. We say "No. Twice a year is enough for you fellows to be brought together at public expense." We make those decisions, because we watch our budget. RESEARCH CONTRACTS Mr. COTTON. I think the chairman brought out and, if he did not and you have those figures, I would like to know, omitting what you pay to other Departments and Bureaus for contract services, how much you pay to those 30 colleges and universities. What is that figure? Dr. DRYDEN. Eight hundred thousand dollars. Mr. COTTON. Is that work primarily to obtain scientific data for your use, or is it primarily to develop scientists so that you may have a reservoir of competent people to bring into your organization in the future? Dr. HUNSAKER. I should answer it is primarily and justifiably to make use of existing facilities and talent that we know about, to get a job of research done and reported to us. Incidentally, as a byproduct and no part of the contract, young graduate students and research workers do get trained in that way, and we may get a chance to hire them, but nothing is said about it in making the contract, for example, with Harvard University. Mr. COTTON. That is, it has to do with specific projects 'they do for you? Dr. HUNSAKER. It is a contract for services. DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTISTS FOR FEDERAL SERVICE Mr. COTTON. I am just wondering if it would not be a good idea to consider that aspect of it, You have expressed apprehension about being able to obtain and retain competent scientists for your work; if this sum of money is paid to colleges, it must be of considerable assistance to them and it must be of considerable assistance to the graduate students and scientists who do work for you; is there not some way of getting a lien on their future services, just the same as the Government does when it helps educate medical students. We have a priority claim on them when the Government needs them. Is there not some way you could use these contracts to secure some future service? Dr. HUNSAKER. That would be fine. I wish we had a way to do that. As a professor, I know what a great relief it would have been to have an NACA contract for a job, because some graduate students studying for a doctorate can work half time and be paid enough to feed themselves while working on this job. Mr. COTTON. They derive a financial benefit. Dr. HUNSAKER. They do. Mr. COTTON. It is not really granting a college fellowship, but in effect it is. Dr. HUNSAKER. It is better than a college fellowship. It is working on a real assignment and getting experience and may lead to contacts that will get him a job. Mr. COTTON. Have you ever considered trying to get a little quid pro quo by obtaining priority on him when he is ready to graduate and go out into the world? Dr. HUNSAKER. As you may know, these universities are extremely touchy on any strings being attached to what they do for the Government. So we say "Oh, no; there is no string on you. We are not trying to control you at all." So we have not invented or tried to invent any strings on fellows who work for us. Mr. COTTON. Well, they have not been touchy about strings on medical students; have they? Dr. HUNSAKER. I am not sure that the medical schools have not been pretty careful about strings on what they do. The string on the medical student has to do with his draft status; it has nothing to do with the medical school. That is between the individual and his Government, I think. If he is deferred in order to go through medical school, he may have some obligations as a Reserve medical officer. Mr. COTTON. Why should not that be done in this field? Why would an American university, if you used the taxpayers' money to pay the cost to get the work done and also to help them develop scientists in this important field-why should they resent the Government hoping to derive some benefit in this field which is so essential to the preservation of our country? Dr. HUNSAKER. If they were fellowships or outright grants, I am sure they could tie them up. Mr. THOMAS. Thank you, gentlemen. It is nice to see you all. A happy new year to you. MONDAY, JANUARY 21, 1952. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION WITNESSES HON. ROBERT RAMSPECK, CHAIRMAN FRANCES PERKINS, COMMISSIONER LAWSON A. MOYER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DAVID F. WILLIAMS, CHIEF, BUDGET AND FINANCE DIVISION C. L. EDWARDS, CHIEF, FIELD OPERATIONS ANNUITIES, PANAMA CANAL CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYEES AND LIGHTHOUSE SERVICE WIDOWS Payment of annuities to employees engaged in the construction of the For the purpose of paying the United States share to the retirement fund: 1951. 1952 1953 457, 869, 000 $305, 000, 000 310, 000, 000 457, 869, 000 Obligations by objects |