they are stored and announced in a semimonthly announcement bulletin, called the Technical Abstract Bulletin.

As to services, an individual may discover the existence of one of these reports in TAB and may thereby order it from DDC by number. Also, a person who is interested and who is a qualified user of DDC services may inquire about the reports in the DDC collection on a certain subject. He can make the request as broad or as narrow as he sees fit, depending on what he expects to get from such a request. A search is conducted by DDC, and he is given the titles or abstracts of all of the reports which pertain to his subject of interest. These are the primary services.

Mr. BRADEMAS. May I ask you this, Mr. Carlson: You used the phrase "a qualified user"?

Mr. CARLSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRADEMAS. What qualifies the user?

Mr. CARLSON. Because a significant percentage of our documents carry some form of military security classification, and only about 50 percent of them are completely unlimited and unclassified, we have to take special precautions as to the security clearances of the requesters and their "need to know." And there are certain laws that apply as well as internal regulations for security.

I would classify the customers qualified to use the services in this way: First of all, Department of Defense agencies, in general, have unrestricted access to this collection. Other Government agencies, with certain limitations based on security, have essentially complete

access.

Our contractors who are doing work for the Department of Defense have access to this collection according to their security clearances. Contractors of other Government agencies also have access to this collection, again with restrictions based on security.

Finally, there are users in a category which we call potential contractors. This is a company or a university that demonstrates they have certain capabilities; the fact that they don't now have a Government contract does not prohibit them from going to one of the armed services to be qualified as a potential contractor, at which time they can arrange to use the services of DDC.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Are any of these services paid for by any of the users, either Government or private?

Mr. CARLSON. They are not. We have an agreement with the Department of Commerce, and I don't know whether Mr. Green discussed this with you yesterday or not. Any unlimited, unclassified document which is in DDC's collection is automatically passed on to the Office of Technical Services in the Department of Commerce and announced for sale to the general public.

Mr. BRADEMAS. And is announced for sale.

Mr. CARLSON. And is announced for sale by the Department of Commerce.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Do they all have to pay, both Government and private?

Mr. CARLSON. No. Qualified users can receive documents directly from DDC free of charge.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I understand. Everybody else pays. Say another Federal agency, not a Defense Department agency, would they have

Mr. CARLSON. No, sir.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I don't understand. Who pays and who doesn't pay?

Mr. CARLSON. Any member of the general public who buys it from OTS pays.

Mr. BRADEMAS. That may be redundant, though.

Mr. CARLSON. I appreciate this. He is not a DOD agency; he is not a Government agency; he is not a DOD contractor; he is not a Government contractor; he is not a potential contractor.

As you can tell, these categories cover a wide collection of people. Mr. BRADEMAS. All nonqualified users must pay?

Mr. CARLSON. That is correct.

Mr. BRADEMAS. How do you make a distinction?

Suppose there is a business firm out in the country some place that thinks it may want to use your service. How do they get on the list? Is there a procedure through which they can become a qualified user? Mr. CARLSON. Yes, there is a procedure.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Is there any opportunity for a firm that qualifies as a user which may really want to use the information from DDC not so much for the performance of contracts for the Department of Defense, but for some civilian agency of the Government or for commercial use is there an opportunity for such a firm to use your services?

Mr. CARLSON. We require only that a person who does not now have a contract with DOD or with the Government be able to demonstrate to the Army, the Air Force, or the Navy-there are certain offices established just for this in those departments-that he is of sufficient technical capability that he might at some time become a contractor if he received this kind of current information.

Mr. BRADEMAS. With the Federal Government either defense or civilian?

Mr. CARLSON. That is right.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Then, I take it, it is completely open, within the limitations you have suggested of security and so on, for private industrial firms to qualify as a user-either to qualify as a user and to use the information it gets for commercial purposes-or, secondly, to pay you for the services and to use them for commercial purposes. Mr. CARLSON. He does not pay us. He pays OTS. He buys from the Department of Commerce.

Mr. BRADEMAS. That is what I mean.

Mr. CARLSON. Ile has this option. In any event, as far as I am concerned, he would have full access to all of our unlimited, unclassified material.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Your Office has been in existence since when?
Mr. CARLSON. Since the 1st of February.

Mr. BRADEMAS. What I am really getting at, as I think you will appreciate, is what is the extent to which the information available from DDC is made available to civilian industry for commercial purposes? I take it you have not been in business long enough to have this kind of record.

Mr. CARLSON. The ASTIA, the forerunner of DDC, has existed in one form or another for 12 or 13 years. At first, about 12 years ago it consisted of two parts-one operated by the Navy at the Library of Congress and one operated by the Air Force at Wright Field.

In 1956, if I remember correctly, they were brought together and called the Armed Services Technical Information Agency. ASTIA has existed as a single entity for 7 or 8 years.

All that I have accomplished, you might say, since I have been here is to change its name, and to clarify a number of restrictive prohibitions that had been placed on its acquisition and distribution policies. On first blush, some of the prohibitions did not seem to make sense, and ASTIA had been trying to divest themselves of these restrictions. We have now issued formal papers within the Department of Defense telling the Department that DDC is going to operate on a broader basis than it has.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Do I take it you are saying that some of the changes which you have been endeavoring to put into effect would make it possible for civilian industry to make greater use of the information for civilian purposes?

Mr. CARLSON. I don't really believe that what we have done addresses itself specifically to that question.

The Department of Defense has a very clear mission, as I am sure you appreciate. Despite the fact that we generate, if numbers mean anything, about 50 percent of the research and development product of this country, with very limited exceptions this is all work oriented toward the basic mission of the Department of Defense.

You can find a great number of people who will testify that, because of that orientation, our information is not automatically usable in the civilian sector and therefore requires considerable rearrangement and so on. It has been for this reason, primarily, that the Department of Defense has looked to the Department of Commerce to serve as its basic mechanism for getting information into the civilian

sector.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I really am talking about two general problems. One is the legal problem. That is, the extent to which it is legally possible for civilian industry to use the results of defense-supported R. and D. for civilian purposes.

And the second question is a substantive, nonlegal one, which is, would there be any value for civilian industry out of defense R. and D. anyway?

Yesterday I asked consent to read into the record the New York Sunday Times article of last Sunday which makes the point, which I take it you have made, that most of the R. & D. of the Defense Department is so narrowly restricted anyway that there is very little useful spinoff benefit for the civilian sector of the economy.

Just to reiterate, I have been questioning you about the legal and substantive aspects of the issue; can civilian industry benefit from Defense Department-supported R. & D.?

Mr. CARLSON. I hope you are not getting into the question of DOD patent policy.

Mr. BRADEMAS. No. I am not getting into that at all. I am not at all interested in that.

Mr. CARLSON. Once you mention the word "legal," I begin to back off.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Let us suppose a businessman in Indiana reads about the R. & D. you are doing, and reads you have a Defense Documenta

you had that might be useful to him for some civilian product, would you let him in the door?

Mr. CARLSON. May I answer your question on legal matters in this way: I am unaware of any law which directs the Department of Defense to take its R. & D. effort and place the results of that effort in a particularly useful form for the civilian sector.

Mr. BRADEMAS. That I appreciate. That is not the issue that I raised.

Mr. CARLSON. Have I begun to answer your question? I want to be sure we clear this up.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I will be candid with you. I am not altogether sure you have. I still don't really find myself clear on the two points. My two points are: Is it legally possible for a civilian industry to come here to Washington, to your Defense Documentation Center, and seek to make use for civilian purposes of the results of R. & D. data which you have put together in the Defense Documentation Center, forgetting for the moment the question of security?

My second question is: Assuming that it were legally possible for him to do so, would it be technologically worth his while to do it?

Mr. CARLSON. The answer to your first question is "Yes," as long as he qualifies according to the set of rules I discussed earlier. I can assure you they are not stringent. Anybody who has a basic technical qualification can exercise this legal right. He merely must pass certain tests in dealing with the armed services.

The answer to your second question is not easy. This begins to open up the whole question of: Can you read a document and get information out of it? Some scientists and engineers can because their technical qualifications and interests coincide with the technical content of the document. They immediately get the gist of what is reported, regardless of whether it is written about a missile, a weapon system or something of that nature.

There are many other members of the civilian sector who would not have this one-to-one correspondence, and it would be very difficult for them to read that document and get anything out of it.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I understand.

Mr. CARLSON. This is one reason we have gone to the concept of the Information Center to try to distill from the documents something of the technical matter concerned and make that freely available to the people who have a need to know.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I think I am right in saying that in the space agency, Mr. Webb has set up a particular office directed specifically to this fallout question.

I am frank to say, though I really don't know very much about it, that he probably is to some extent putting up a facade to give NASA a certain amount of political protection in that regard.

Mr. CARLSON. The Department of Defense has no such office.
Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you.

Mr. BELL. I was going to ask you, Mr. Carlson: As I understand your answer to Mr. Brademas' last question, the second one, is that if you had the technical knowledge and resources as a civilian or as an individual interested in this particular subject, and you could understand it, it would be available to you; is that right?

Mr. CARLSON. That is correct. There is no difference here, in my belief, between reading a journal article and reading a DOD report. You have to have the technical competence.

Mr. BELL. The same situation, as far as your knowledge is concerned exists; that is, the same kind of information is available, at the Commerce Department and NASA and so on. Isn't it similar to that? It is also technical language mostly, is it not?

Mr. CARLSON. It is.

Mr. BELL. So, anyone has the same access to it under Defense that you would have under Commerce or under NASA or under any other governmental agency that you know of?

Mr. CARLSON. Yes, sir. As long as you recognize these military security problems.

Mr. BELL. That is right.

I have one other question that I wanted to particularly delve into. As I understand, previous to the Defense Documentation Center which started in January, it was under the name of ASTIA.

Mr. CARLSON. That is correct.

Mr. BELL. It was primarily under the direction of the Air Force. Mr. CARLSON. And it still is.

Mr. BELL. If it is still under the direction of the Air Force, it is not actually a DOD agency. Is there any kind of problem of having this under the Department of Defense and yet under the Air Force's direction? In other words, if it is a Department of Defense agency, why isn't it under the Department of Defense instead of the Air Force?

Mr. CARLSON. There is a specified personnel level for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Defense Documentation Center is a fairly large organization in that there are 450-some people now engaged in its operation. It would be a terrific exercise to move that pool of manpower from one of the services to the DOD level. This is an administrative answer to your question.

Mr. BELL. It has been working under the Air Force for such a period of time that it is difficult now to change it because you would have to change the personnel and the whole setup organizationwise?

Mr. CARLSON. The logistic support and the administrative apparatus are there to conduct an effective operating organization within the Air Force. I see no reason to disturb this.

Mr. BELL. Then you are directly working for the Air Force?

Mr. CARLSON. I am not. I work for Dr. Harold Brown in D.D.R. & E. My direct connection with Defense Documentation Center is the tenuous one, if I remember the paper work correctly, of providing "policy direction."

Mr. BELL. You see no conflict or no problem having this not really in every sense under the direction of the Department of Defense but under the direction of the Air Force?

Mr. CARLSON. At the moment, no. There is always the question of whether or not the Army and Navy would recognize an Air Force activity as being in fact a DOD-wide activity and therefore would use