Our Office of Highway Safety has recently established a limited program for highway safety trainees as a means for supplementing the present scarce supply of competent manpower in the field.

The Department of Commerce has had remarkable success with its other training programs in the highway field and we would therefore commend this provision of H.R. 133.

In summary, I would repeat that the Department of Commerce is sympathetic with the intent of the bill, and with the strengthening of accident prevention programs in the Public Health Service. However, as stated, we believe that the functions of the proposed National Accident Prevention Center should be more precisely identified. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROBERTS. Thank you, Mr. Prisk.

The Chair would certainly like to compliment your Department and the Secretary for getting the Interdepartmental Board set up and active and we are hoping, of course, that the fine work that has been done in the Department will be expanding.

I think this statement is a somewhat different approach from the statement that was made by the Department, with reference to this bill last year, that is, the last session. I take it that with the changes that you have suggested so as not to infringe on the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Public Roads and the Department of Commerce, or maybe I should say that the other way, you would go along with the bill, as I understand your position.

Mr. PRISK. This essentially is the case. I think that the judgments of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare with respect to the needed amendments along with the Department of Commerce letter and the suggestions I have presented here, would cover the situation.

Mr. ROBERTS. I appreciate very much your statement, and your appearance. The gentleman from Minnesota?

Mr. NELSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Perhaps this would not be regarded as a question, but one of the perplexing things to me, and I am sure that you may be aware of these problems as I am, is yesterday we were given this book of statistics on persons injured in the home.

Here I have a Government bulletin from the Department of Agriculture on Safety: "Watch Your Step, Avoid Farm Accidents", bulletins all over the place, and the thing that perplexes me a bit is, if the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is in a position to make a survey on injuries in a home, it would seem to me they would also be in a position to examine what other agencies of the Government are doing the same thing.

The thing I don't want to do is to become involved in setting up another agency to do something that some other agency is already doing and get a duplication with more and more agencies of the Government operating.

I am in sympathy with the idea of trying to find out what is being done and where and get it sort of coordinated, but we have to pick and choose between what is already being duplicated, and what we are trying to do in this bill, I don't know, but it is perplexing because we get bulletins all the time.

I want to thank you for your statement. I think it is very well put together and certainly one that indicates a good deal of study relative to this bill.

I haven't any further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROBERTS. I might say this in passing to the gentleman from Minnesota. He has touched on what I consider to be one of the main objectives of this type of bill, to pull together some of the activities that have in the past been scattered all over the lot.

I think that we can avoid a great deal of duplication of effort by this bill. I think it probably lends itself to some amendments.

Mr. NELSEN. If the gentleman would yield, the point I would like to make is if the HEW provides the personnel to accumulate information like this, which they can, it seems to me it would be very simple for HEW also to check over what other agencies are doing and get them into a report with the personnel they have rather than setting up more agencies at this point.

I am in sympathy with the chairman in his objective, but I am wondering if it can be done under present arrangements, and I think it is worth discussing and I am sure we will in executive session at a later point.

Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the gentleman. Thank you, Mr. Prisk. Mr. PRISK. Thank you.

Mr. ROBERTS. Our next witness is Mr. W. G. Johnson, general manager, National Safety Council, 425 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Ill.

Mr. Johnson, we are glad to welcome you to our hearings. We always found you to be very willing to cooperate with the committee in its efforts to achieve better results in the area of Safety and Public Health.

I know from your knowledge and long experience with the problems that this committee faces, that you are able to make a very fine contribution and we are very happy to have you.

STATEMENT OF W. G. JOHNSON, GENERAL MANAGER NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is W. G. Johnson. I am general manager of the National Safety Council. In order that there be no misunderstanding of the National Safety Council's position regarding H.R. 133, I will begin by stating that the National Safety Council's position remains unchanged from this committee's hearings February 6. 1962.

I have said on numerous occasions that it was highly unfortunate that certain objectionable features of H.R. 133 were clouding the principal issue the need of the U.S. Public Health Service for an intramural Research Facility or Laboratory.

We have been delighted to receive reports of public statements by the subcommittee chairman outlining the U.S. Public Health Service need for a research center, because these statements seem to indicate that the subcommittee chairman shares our view that a research center or facility or laboratory is the primary need.

The National Safety Council, therefore, urges that H.R. 133 be amended to eliminate the features objected to last year, and the Council then believes that the very strongest public support can be marshaled for the research facility.

97767-63-5

In an effort to clarify the Council's strong support for a research facility or laboratory, I wrote to the subcommittee chairman on February 27, 1963. Unless the subcommittee chairman considers my letter too informal for the committee record, I would ask that the letter and accompanying Council statement be made a part of this record. I would read at this time simply one short sentence which crystallizes the National Safety Council's strong support—

In order to provide a continuing program of directed and applied research to develop solutions to accident problems, there should be established in the Public Health Service an Accident Prevention Research Laboratory.

Mr. ROBERTS. Without objection, the letter will be made a part of the record.

(The letter referred to follows:)

Hon. KENNETH A. ROBERTS,

NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL,
Chicago, Ill., February 27, 1963.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR KEN: Prior to Al Chapman's departure, we had several discussions of the needs of the Public Health Service. From these discussions, plus the testimony you received on H.R. 133, we have come to feel that the attached suggestions would fill a major remaining gap in Public Health Service authorization and would also fulfill the principal objectives of H.R. 133. In drafting the attached recommendations we have also relief heavily on "Analysis of Responsibility and Capability of the Public Health Service in Accident Prevention," a report by Operations Research, Inc., dated June 11, 1958.

I also feel that these suggestions essentially fulfill the recommendations twice made by the Accident Prevention Advisory Committee of the U.S. Public Health Service, and would undoubtedly have the enthusiastic support of that group.

We have formed no judgment as to whether a formal Board of the type proposed in H.R. 133 or the present Accident Prevention Advisory Committee of U.S. PHS is the better instrumentality for supervision of all U.S. PHS accident prevention activities (including the proposed laboratory). From my participation in the Accident Prevention Advisory Committee, I'd say it has the capabilities for discharging any responsibilities placed upon it. However, we think your experience and the experience of the U.S. PHS should guide on this point.

I shall be in Washington next week, and shall phone you on Monday to see if we can get together some time on Tuesday.

If these suggestions meet with your approval, I feel confident we can rather quickly develop broad and strong support for this essential improvement in Public Health Service capabilities.

Best regards.
Sincerely,

W. G. JOHNSON,
General Manager.

Some elements of legislation needed to establish a Public Health Service Accident Prevention Research Laboratory

1. In order to provide a continuing program of directed and applied research to develop solutions to accident problems, there should be established in the Public Health Service an Accident Prevention Research Laboratory.

2. In carrying out the above purpose, the Surgeon General should be authorized to

(a) conduct a continuing intramural research program in the basic medical, clinical and behavioral sciences so directed as to meet research needs which become evident in the nondirected grants-in-aid research programs or in the conduct of accident prevention programs;

(b) assist in the coordination of research programs conducted by public and private agencies, organizations, and individuals;

(c) make available research facilities of the Laboratory to appropriate public authorities, and to health officials and scientists engaged in special studies related to the purposes of the Laboratory;

(d) secure from time to time, and for such periods as he deems advisable, the assistance and advise of persons from the United States or abroad who are experts in the field of accident prevention;

(e) establish and maintain research fellowships in the Laboratory, with such stipends and allowances (including travel and subsistence expenses) as he may deem necessary to train research workers and procure the assistance of research fellows from the United States and abroad;

(f) provide training and instruction, and establish and maintain traineeships in the Laboratory in matters relating to the study of, causes of, and the development of means of preventing accidental deaths and injuries, with such stipends and allowances (including travel and subsistence expenses) for trainees as he may deem necessary.

3. The Surgeon General should be authorized to accept conditional gifts for study, investigation, or research into the causes and prevention of accidental deaths and injuries, or for the acquisition of grounds or for the erection, equipment, or maintenance of premises, buildings, or equipment of the Laboratory.

4. Appropriations should be authorized for acquisition of land, erection of buildings, procurement of equipment, adequate staffing, and other expenses necessary to the establishment and operation of the Laboratory.

Mr. JOHNSON. In further support of the need for a research facility, I would like to introduce into the record a somewhat more lengthy statement which is currently under consideration by the Accident Prevention Advisory Committee of the U.S. Public Health Service.

This statement grew out of a meeting of the committee March 6 and 7. The statement and resolution are at this time being distributed to the members of the committee for final approval.

Consequently, I am unable to say on this date that the resolution is final. On the other hand, the discussions at the meeting were such as to indicate that the intent of the resolution will receive almost unanimous approval of the committee. I can say today that the draft resolution does represent the viewpoint of the National Safety Council.

I submit the draft resolution.

(The resolution referred to follows:)

The Advisory Committee reaffirms its conclusions as to the necessity for the establishment of U.S. Public Health Service Accident Prevention Research Facilities. It recommends that (a) steps be taken to clarify as fully as possible the purpose and objectives of the facility for other Federal and State agencies and private groups participating in accident prevention activities, (b) that such Facilities be established as soon as possible.

The purpose of seeking such facilities and staff for directed in-house research in the basic medical, clinical and behavioral sciences is to meet the day-to-day obligations and specific long- and short-term objectives essential to the fulfillment of the mission of the U.S. Public Health Service Division of Accident Prevention. The research to be accomplished within the Facilities, by its scientific staff and, when appropriate, by Federal, State, and local visiting scientists, is to provide a program of applied research directed toward the development of solutions to specific problems in support of public health accident prevention operations and services; provide for program continuity and effectiveness of directed research and grants operations; develop and maintain the necessary high degree of professional proficiency of the staff.

Accordingly the Accident Prevention Advisory Committee makes the following recommendations:

RESOLUTION

"1. That the U.S. Public Health Service undertake to clarify the purpose, intent, and plan of operation for a Public Health Service Accident Prevention Research Facility to increase the understanding of the concept of such a facility among Federal, State, and private groups sharing in the overall responsibilities for accident prevention and planning and conducting complementary activities in the various fields of safety research and operating programs.

"2. That the U.S. Public Health Service should proceed as expeditiously as possible to develop and operate U.S. Public Health Service Accident Prevention Research Facilities with an adequate staff to conduct continuing in-house research in the basic medical, clinical, and behavioral sciences looking toward development of new or improved methods of prevention of accidental injury and death essential for support of U.S. Public Health Service accident programs and services." Specifically, it is the judgment of the Accident Prevention Advisory Committee that the facilities for applied research in accident prevention should provide for essential experimental studies such as are listed as examples below.

(a) Laboratory research on: normal biological and disease mechanisms; physiological and psychological bases of behavior; and physical and mental growth and maturation as related to accident prevention.

(b) Clinical studies on: performance, behavior, physical condition, incapacitation, impairments, aging and disease as variables in accident causation.

(c) Feasibility or preliminary studies of various research approaches for accident prevention program development and for validation of reported findings. (d) Measurements and description of human capabilities under the conditions they will be exercised, i.e., practical real life situations as related to accident prevention.

(e) Computer studies of the influence of the variables in accident causation and prevention.

(f) Simulation studies of the requirements, behavior and performance in potentially hazardous tasks and situations, and in accident prevention measures.

The signifiance of this draft resolution for the subcommittee's deliberations lies, I believe, in two points:

1. The resolution endeavors to make it clear that a research facility is a necessary element for the fulfillment of the mission of the U.S. Public Health Service, Division of Accident Prevention. The Division cannot adequately perform its assigned tasks without the research facility.

2. The resolution provides in concise form an outline of the kinds of intramural research projects which could be undertaken in the basic medical, clinical, and behavioral sciences, and thus make an important contribution to our knowledge of accident prevention.

If the subcommittee's record of H.R. 133 remains open for the next month or so, I would suggest that the subcommittee get the final action of the Public Health Service Advisory Committee on this resolution, including a committee roster indicating the members who are giving their active support to this resolution.

Strong support for interdisciplinary accident prevention research facilities was given just yesterday when the President's Committee for Traffic Safety approved the report of its Research Subcommittee, and this important report now becomes a part of the action program of the President's Committee.

I might say, sir, that the Committee met at the White House with the President and this report was a part of those proceedings.

The Research Subcommittee of the President's Committee has worked for several years to prepare a basic policy statement on the role of research in traffic accident prevention. I would strongly urge that this subcommittee obtain copies of this new report, which is now at the printer's, because I know you will find that it is a valuable foundation for your subcommittee's consideration of many present and future problems in the area of research.

The report recommends, among other things, that we should "develop interdisciplinary accident prevention research facilities on a national basis."

This, in effect, gives support to the idea that there should be an Accident Prevention Research Facility in the U.S. Public Health