We should like to suggest that consideration be given to adding the words after "The Surgeon General," the provison, "under the supervision and direction of the Administrator," the same phrase which appears in section 201 in line 20.

In general, Mr. Chairman, the language of title II carries forward existing law.

When the code was drafted, Public Law 184 had not been passed, but with minor exceptions which will be pointed out later, all the provisions of title II merely clarify and continue existing authority in law.

MR. REECE. Not that it relates particularly to this matter, but section 204 has a provision that is common to all of the services, where the chief of the service is not to be reappointed, he reverts to his former rank in the service, and without expressing an opinion, I have felt that that does not work out right in the Army or the Navy, and I should think the Public Health Service. It is hardly compatible for the chief of the service to go back, it seems to me, and take his former rank, after having served as chief of the service.

The result was that in the Army and the Navy a provision was made so that the chief of the service, without doing that, could retire, which most of them have done in peacetimes, because of the incompatibility of occupying their former rank, and I have felt that if the organization could be rearranged in some way so that these former chiefs of services could occupy a position somewhere between the former service and the chief of the service, some special provision could be made for them, it would be in the interest of the service and I am wondering if you have given any consideration to that? It probably does not apply as much to the Public Health as it does to the Army and Navy, where there are so many more of the chiefs of services involved.

Dr. PARRAN. As a matter of fact, we have done so, Mr. Reece, and at one time such language was drafted. I think there was no crystalized opinion among those who were drafting the law as to which provision should be made-for obvious reasons I took no active part in the discussions. Personally it would be equally agreeable either way.

I think that following passage of Public Law 184, in which Public Health Service officers are entitled to certain benefits which are now provided to medical officers of the Army, there is more reason for copying the Army procedure. In fact, perhaps inferentially the right might be had now by a Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to retire in a higher grade. I believe the Army law provides that an officer who has served at least 4 years in an advanced rank as the head of one of the major administrative divisions is entitled to retirement at that advanced rank.

We would have no objection to the committee giving consideration to a comparable provision-in fact, I think language has been drafted. Mr. REECE. I think-I am inclined to think that would be very good. And then I am inclined to think there should also be some inducement and provision made for that officer to remain in the service at an increased rate, if he should desire to, on active duty. That is, we should create an inducement for him to remain in the service rather than provide for him to go out of the service by way of retirement, after having had this additional experience.

I have never felt that it was quite compatible for the Surgeon General of the Army to have to revert to colonel if he chose to remain on active duty, and the same thing relates to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service or any of the other services. That is, we ought to make some provision by which we could continue to have the advantages of their services in an appropriate grade-I mean, a grade that would be compatible to them.

I am not asking you necessarily for an opinion on it, but I think we ought to do something more than to make a provision for them to

retire.

If they do retire, I think the Public Health Service ought to be placed in the same category in that respect as the Army, for example. Mr. PRIEST. Mr. Chairman, I want to endorse in general what Mr. Reece has said on that. I had given that one phase of the legislation some little thought myself, and particularly I agree with the position taken by Mr. Reece, that there should be some inducement to keep these men who have served in these administrative positions in the Service if they desire to remain. At least there should be some inducement to cause them to want to remain in, in order that the Nation and the Service might benefit from that experience. I hope we may get around to an amendment along that line as we proceed with this legislation.

Dr. PARRAN. I thank the gentlemen for the views they have expressed.

Mr. Chairman, the provisions of Public Law 184 are working out very well in enabling us to consolidate the activities of the Service in the four major administrative units and two major divisions. They

are:

Office of Surgeon General.

National Institute of Health.
Bureau of State Services.

Bureau of Medical Services.

Division of Sanitary Engineering.

Division of Dentistry.

The various sections of title II dealing with the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service are, in the main, the reenactment of existing law, especially the authority contained in the act of April 9, 1930. The grades, relative rank, and pay within the grades have been established since the first joint service pay bill of 1922, and reaffirmed by Congress in the pay bill of 1942.

One new provision is incorporated in this title, and that is the permission for the President to make temporary promotions of officers at any time to perform special temporary tasks. This authority would be used only in times of war or during peace when special emergencies arise, such as floods or epidemics. The provision to which I refer is contained in section 207 (a).

Mr. Chairman, this might be as good a time as any to say that since the code was drafted, further consultations have been had in the Federal Security Agency and with the Bureau of the Budget. As a result, in this title in one or two places and in other titles, further amendments will be suggested. I believe, however, that unless you have questions as you go along on existing provisions. with your permission, I should like to pass them over and have Mr. Wilcox

take them up perhaps with a letter from the Bureau of the Budget which I hope will be here tomorrow.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Very well.

Dr. PARRAN. I should like to emphasize the importance of the Reserve Corps of the Public Health Service. This was established under the act of 1918, at the time of the Nation-wide influenza epidemic. It was passed largely in recognition of the need for a broadening of the functions of the Service to meet emergencies of that type.

Our problem in the Public Health Service is somewhat different from that of the Army and Navy, which needs to call upon its reserve for war. The Public Health Service may be confronted in peacetime, as well as wartime, with extraordinary demands upon it. For example, now our Reserve Corps on active duty far outnumbers the Regular Corps. There are some 600 Regular officers and 1,580 Reserve officers on active duty. An additional group of 2,000 Reserve officers are on inactive duty.

The Reserve officers are serving on duties comparable with those of Regular officers with the Coast Guard, with the Army, with States in connection with emergency health and sanitation activities, and in various other capacities, some of which I enumerated in testimony when the reorganzation bill was under consideration by this committee. Public Law 184 gives to the Reserve officers in time of war essentially the same rights and privileges as are given to our own Regular officers and to officers of the Army and Navy.

It would be desirable to "spell out" these benefits in amendments to the pending code. I think Mr. Wilcox will suggest such amendments to this end.

My purpose in mentioning the matter at this time is to emphasize the importance of the Reserve Corps both in war and peace to the total operation of the Public Health Service.

The Reserve Act provides that the Reserve Corps is for use in times of national emergency, but Reserve officers are subject to call to active duty at any time. Actually, we have had some Reserve officers on duty every year between 1918 and the current war.

Attention should be drawn to the fact that our two advisory councils which are continued-the National Advisory Health Council and the National Advisory Cancer Council. The work of these councils has been of great value to the scientific problems of the Public Health Service, and we hope that they will be continued.

There is one specific amendment which I should like to suggest at this time. On page 17, section 214 (b), through an inadvertence the language there was not as carefully drawn as we would wish. It provides that

upon the request of any State, or political subdivision thereof, personnel of the Service may be detailed by the Surgeon General for the purpose of assisting such State or political subdivision in work related to the functions of the Service.

The amendment which I should like to suggest would be as follows: "Upon the request of any State" scratch the words "or political subdivision thereof" and insert "health authority."

Such an amendment would safeguard the problem which was brought to the attention of this committee by Mr. Keefe, for example; and this same suggestion also has been brought to us by a number of State health officers. Our intention is to continue our present law

which provides that our personnel shall not be assigned to a State, except on request of the State health authority, although they may be assigned for duty in a local political subdivision. We would wish the amendment to be made as I have indicated.

Unless there are questions, Mr. Chairman, may I pass to title 3, which is of considerable importance?

Part A deals with research and investigations.

From the early days of the Service in 1878, when Congress began the enactment of Federal quarantine acts, the research authority of the Service has always been very broad. In 1901 specific authority was granted for the investigation of infectious and contagious diseases and matters pertaining to the public health. Again in 1912 this authority was reiterated and broadened to provide-I think the exact words are that "the Public Health Service is authorized to study the diseases of man and conditions pertaining thereto, including the polution of navigable streams, lakes-" and other specified purposes. An attempt has been made in this title to elaborate but not to extend existing research authority; to elaborate present research authority by describing in more detail the methods which are to be used to accomplish the stated objective.

In other words, this is a delineation of existing authority.

In the language of section 301 there is one broadened purpose, which is contained in the authorization to establish fellowships. At present the Public Health Service is authorized to establish fellowships for the study of cancer. That device has worked extremely well. We should like favorable consideration to the broadening of that authority so as to include fellowships in other phases of research being carried out by the National Institute of Health.

Mr. PRIEST. General, may I ask just one question there for information? How many of these fellowships have been authorized and are now effective?

Dr. PARRAN. Since the enactment of the Cancer Institute Act of 1939 there have been approximately 30 or 35 such fellowships. Mr. PRIEST. I was just interested in knowing.

Dr. PARRAN. May I correct the figure if I am a little off, but I think that that is approximately correct?

Dr. PARRAN. These fellows are promising young scientists who are given appointments on an annual basis, generally speaking, a temporary basis, and brought into the National Cancer Institute for research work, or they may be sent to some other research institution for research and study.

We hope that present authority would be continued to assign them also to research institutions outside of the country for further investigation in order to bring back to us the best knowledge that may be had.

Mr. REECE. Do these fellowships all go to citizens of our country?

Dr. PARRAN. There is an interesting legal situation in that respect, Mr. Reece. The National Cancer Institute Act specifically provided that fellowships should be available to the most competent research scientists in this and other countries. A few months after the passage of that act, a general prohibition against the employment of noncitizens was contained in an appropriation act. As a result, all of

such appointments have been given to citizens. The provision of the Cancer Institute Act, in other words, was modified by a later provision in an appropriation act.

Mr. REECE. My inclination would be that this ought to be made an exemption to the general provision. For one, I would rather like to see some of the staff give attention to drawing an amendment for that purpose.

Dr. PARRAN. As a matter of fact, we were negotiating with a Nobel prize winner immediately after the passage of the National Cancer Council Act, but it was necessary to cancel our negotiation when the prohibition was enacted in an appropriation act that year.

Mr. PRIEST. Pardon me. That prohibition is only effective during the actual life of that particular appropriation bill, unless it is reenacted; is it not?

Mr. REECE. That all depends. I do not recall that particular amendment.

Mr. PRIEST. I agree with Mr. Reece that in this case particularly I would like to see such a prohibition lifted. I think it should be lifted.

Dr. PARRAN. May I point out in the same section, 301, a further broadening of authority in 301 (d), we propose to make grants in aid to universities, hospitals, laboratories, and other public or private institutions. The wording of section 301 (d) would extend the authority as regards cancer, under the same safeguards, to all other types of research which the Public Health Service is carrying out. This is a very important and much-needed extension of present authority.

There is being built up in this country the very finest relationship in connection with cancer research between the scientific institutions and the Public Health Service. It has furnished a pattern which I hope may be continued and expanded in respect of other research problems with which we are faced.

There is nothing else in section 301 which represents any expansion of existing law.

Part B of title III deals with the very important function of Federal-State cooperation. As a background, may I say that I think the relationship which the Public Health Service and the State health departments jointly have worked out over more than a generation represents a very fine pattern and one which in general we hope will be continued and perfected. The attempt has been made, therefore, in this part of the title to accomplish that objective.

We have been faced in the problem of drafting with the fact that two major grants-in-aid programs are carried on under different legal wording. Title VI of the Social Security Act authorizes a flat appropriation of $11,000,000 for grants to the States for public health work. Mr. BROWN. Dr. Parran, is that an increase over the present appropriation?

Dr. PARRAN. That is no definite increase, Mr. Brown. I was just about to point out that in attempting a codification, it was felt that it would be desirable, if possible, to harmonize more closely the language of the Venereal Disease Control Act, of 1938, and title VI of the Social Security Act of 1935. As drafted, the limit of $11,000,000 is eliminated from title VI of the Social Security Act. The committee may wish to consider that as a matter of policy.