I cannot imagine a more favorable situation than to have keen competition between the automobile manufacturers in the field of safety, to have them advertise their brands of safety, and to have them vie with each other. If there is any harm that the patent feature in the bill could do, it could do the harm of handicapping the kind of competition we desire among automobile manufacturers to show the public that they are the safest and best in the field of safety. Mr. LONG of Louisiana. One of the best ways to promote automobile safety would be to get all of the automobile companies doing research in the field, making available to one another the information they know, so that we need not waste a great amount of technical talent trying to overcome technical problems which have already been solved in one shop or another. Insofar as the amendment applies, it would be effective. I am somewhat hopeful. The time between the discovery and the patent application is about 4 years. That is the period from the time of the discovery until the patent is applied for, because people desire to fence the patent in so that someone cannot get around the patent. The study by the General Accounting Office indicated that in the Department of Defense and other areas this had become a practice of contractors, holding out information for as long as 5 years, presumably in the hope of obtaining private patents on research they had done. That incentive to hold out safety information would be removed when the information is freely available to everybody. Congressional Record-Senate June 24, 1966, 14252 and 14253 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I should like to propound an inquiry to the Senator from Washington, the manager of the bill. There was very important testimony, which I think most Members will recall, to the effect that New York State had worked out, with an appropriation of $100,000 from the State legislature, the plans for the prototype of a safe car. It will be recalled that witnesses from New York State, led by Senator Edward J. Speno, one of our State senators, testifiled to the fact that, with an appropriation of $100,000 from the New York State Legislature, the plans for the prototype of a safe car had been worked out with the cooperation of the State authorities and private industry, as represented by Republic Aviation, one of our New York State companies. I submitted amendment No. 506 to the bill. The amendment proposed that $5 million be authorized on a 50-50 matching basis. It would be possible with the use of this money to procure a contract for the building of such a prototype under the auspices of the safety plan of the bill. Pursuant to this display of initiative, much progress has been made. I am delighted to see the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. RIBICOFF] present in the Chamber. He also was greatly impressed with this initiative. Would the provision contained in the bill, in section 106(a) paragraph 2, relating to "contracting for the fabrication of motor vehicle equipment for research and testing purposes" be sufficient authority for such a contract as I have in mind, or are there any other provisions in the bill concerning which the Senator can key me? Second, would there be any inhibition against the making of a contract with a State or State agency? Mr. MAGNUSON. I ask the Senator from New York to turn, please, to page 42, section 106(b). The committee thought it had taken care of this problem. Before I answer the Senator's question, I may say that the testimony of the New York witnesses was most impressive. What New York State was trying to do was impressive. But obviously one State cannot accomplish the purpose alone. So to get away from the suggestion of the Senator from New York that money be appropriated for a specific purpose, and that it could not be known to which State, if any, the money would be given, because each one seeks to take the leadin this case, New York has the committee provided: The Secretary may, by means of grant or contract, design, construct and test operational passenger motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment in demonstration quantities, embodying such features as the Secretary determines will assist in carrying out the purposes of this act. If that had not been made clear, it has been made clear now that this section is intended to cover the situation. Mr. JAVITS. And to include such possible contractees as the State of New York? Mr. MAGNUSON. Yes. It may be that a group of States might need to get together to carry out their efforts. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time yielded to the Senator from New York has expired. Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, I ask that the Senator from New York be yielded 2 additional minutes. The PRESIDING OFFICER. out objection, it is so ordered. With Mr. RIBICOFF. I submitted amend ments on this subject, also. I read this language with great care. There is a question in my mind whether a grant could be made to or a contract made with the State of New York; but I think a grant could be made by the Secretary to Republic Aviation or any other manufacturer in the country, and he would co ordinate it with a contract to the State of New York. I think there is a question whether the grant could be made to the State of New York. It is more likely that in procedure a grant would have to be made to Republic Aviation and a matching grant to the State of New York. Mr. MAGNUSON. I hope there will be no confusion. It is our intention that the Secretary could do either. Mr. JAVITS. That is correct. Mr. RIBICOFF. The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. NELSON] is deeply concerned with this problem. He is not here because he is abroad on official busi ness. Mr. MAGNUSON. Section 107 emphasizes the necessity of cooperative agreements between States, Federal agencies, and others. Mr. RIBICOFF. I hope that the Secretary, in his research, would definitely undertake such a contract to continue the work that is being done by the State of New York. I believe the State of New York deserves great credit, because it had the foresight, the imagination, and the courage to proceed when no one else was proceeding. The State of New York has made great advances. While I believe that the automobile 14253 industry should proceed on its own to make its prototypes, either individually or together, I believe it would be a spur to traffic safety if an independent agency were to make its own prototype, in order to determine what can be accomplished in this field. The senior Senator from New York, the Junior Senator from New York, and I have been interested in this matter. Great praise is due the New York legislative authorities and the New York safety group for proceeding as they have. Mr. JAVITS. I am grateful to the Senator from Connecticut for his comments. The Senator from Connecticut, the junior Senator from New York, and I have discussed this matter. I am grateful to the manager of the bill. Mr. KENNEDY of New York. Mr. President, Senator JAVITS has mentioned the pioneer work of New York State in studying prototype safety car designs and has asked whether under this legislation, Federal support can be provided for the continuation of this work. As I understand the legislation before Agency to use research and development the Senate, it permits the Traffic Safety funds for projects of the type sponsored by New York State and Republic Aviation. out, the Traffic Safety Agency will unAs Senator RIBICOFF has just pointed doubtedly consider the project sponsored by New York State as well as other proj ects having promise. I believe that New York State has done an excellent job in its prototype research and I believe that it will receive appropriate Federal recognition. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is all time yielded back on the two amendments? mainder of my time. Mr. MAGNUSON. Iyield back the re Mr. COTTON. I yield back my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back on the amendments offered by the Senator from Washington. The question is on agreeing to the amendments. The amendments were agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended. Senate Committee Report Senate Report 1301, Pages 9, 10, 14, and 15 RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TESTING, AND EVALUATION The Secretary is given broad authority to initiate and conduct research, testing, development, and evaluation in cooperation with other Federal departments and agencies. The bill expressly authorizes data collection, grants to States, interstate agencies, and nonprofit institutions; authorizes the acquisition of equipment and facilities and the fabrication of motor vehicle equipment for research and development purposes (§ 106(a)). In particular, the bill authorizes the Secretary to develop, through 10 grant or contract, experimental safety vehicles in limited but sufficient quantities to serve as demonstrations for the testing and development of safety features applicable to commercially manufactured motor vehicles. These demonstration vehicles are not to be limited to traditional methods of automobile design, styling, testing or production (§ 106(b)). Although this authority is discretionary, the committee expects the Secretary to initiate such development and the Department of Commerce has indicated that "work on experimental cars of this nature will start as soon as possible, both on a total systems basis as well as on selected systems components." While the bill reported by the committee authorizes the Secretary to make grants or award contracts for research in certain cases, a principal aim is to encourage the auto industry itself to engage in greater auto safety and safety-related research. In recent years the firms comprising the industry have spent substantial sums for research, but they are capable of doing more. In the area of auto safety, expenditures have been relatively small. COOPERATION AND TRAINING The Secretary is authorized to cooperate with and enter into cooperative agreements with other Federal agencies, State or other public agencies, manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment and other businesses, universities, or other institutions in the planning and development of safety standards, methods for inspecting or testing under safety standards, and methods and equipment for testing motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment (§ 107). The Secretary is also authorized to establish training programs for Federal, State, and private personnel for testing, inspection, and other purposes (§ 108). PATENTS In order to protect the public investment in research and development activities under the act, the bill provides (§ 106 (c)) that when the Federal contribution for any research or development activity authorized by the act is substantial, the Secretary must include in the contract or grant providing for such research or development provisions effective to insure that all information, uses, processes, patents, and other developments resulting from that activity will be made fully and freely available to the general public. It was the committee's judgment that when the Government finances safety research, the public is entitled to the fruits, including the right to any inventions discovered in the performance of that research. In dealings with their employees and subcontractors private business firms typically retain the right to any inventions discovered, on the understandable ground that the one who has provided financial support is entitled to the resulting product. Such a policy is especially applicable where taxpayer funds are involved and where the research is intimately associated with the public health and safety. On several occasions, running back more than a decade, Congress has provided for public retention of rights in inventions made in the course of Government-supported research. This policy is incorporated in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the Coal Research and Development Act of 1960, the Saline Water Conversion Act of 1961, the Arms Control and Disarmament Act of 1961, the Water Resources Research Act of 1964, and the Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965. Consistent with this approach the committee sought to secure to the public the benefits, accruing from research sponsored by the Secretary in accordance with section 106, that might help reduce accidents involving motor vehicles and reduce accompanying deaths and injuries. As set forth in section 106 (c), the bill provides that the Secretary shall include, in any contract, grant, or other arrangement, provisions effective to insure that all resulting information, uses, processes, patents, and other developments will be made freely and fully available to the general public, wherever the Federal contribution to that activity is substantial. Of necessity, this condition must be satisfied on a case-by-case basis; but it deserves emphasis that it is the particular activity from which the information, uses, processes, patents, and other developments "result" which is the basis for the determination whether the Federal contribution is "more than minimal." 14 Section 106(c), by denying contractors exclusive rights in the performance of research activities where the Federal contribution is "more than minimal," will help curtail unnecessary industry pleas for Government financial support where the companies can do the 15 research themselves. By doing their own research and securing patents on inventions which they discover, the companies in the auto industry can make substantial progress toward increasing auto safety without having to make substantial use of public funds. The committee considered a problem presented by automotive manufacturers relating to the dilemma that would be created if the |