484 



III. The Technical Information Function in Political Decision- 

 iviaking: The Cases Summarized 



This section recapitulates briefly the essential features of the cases 

 discussed at length in chapters 3 through 16. 



case one: theai>-x2 battery additive 



Background. — -Mismanaged storage batteries failed prematurely; 

 scrapped batteries were in demand because of a shortage of lead. 



Problem. — A vendor of an additive powder to prolong battery life 

 was challenged by the Post Office Department and the Federal Trade 

 Commission (FTC), based on laboratory findings by the National 

 Bureau of Standards (NBS), that such additives had no merit. 



Access to Congress. — The vendor appealed to many Members of 

 Congress and to the Senate Select Committee on Small Business that 

 he had been unfairly treated. He claimed that he had many satisfied 

 customers, that NBS tests were unsound; and that battery manu- 

 facturers had inspired the campaign against him. 



The facts. — The additive had no fixed composition. It was sold in 

 a package containing instructions on battery management. There were 

 many satisfied customers. NBS tests of the additive had yielded nega- 

 tive results; tests by other laboratories showed results either inconclu- 

 sive or interpreted by the vendor as favorable. NBS staff members had 

 been in direct communication with tlie National Better Business Bu- 

 reau that circulated criticism of the additive, encouraged by battery 

 manufacturers. One panel of scientists recommended NBS reorganiza- 

 tion and an end to contacts with interested parties relatiA^e to testing 

 of products. Another panel of scientists found NBS battery-testing 

 procedures sound and the additive wanting in merit. The Post Office 

 dropped the case against the vendor, and FTC ruled in his favor. 



Sources., kinds of technical infoi'miation for Congress. — 



NBS Director : Principles and procedures in battery-additive testing, 

 assessments of findings of tests, worthlessness of testimonials, varied 

 composition of AD-X2, explanation of apparent differences in test 

 results, and description of findings of various NBS tests of AD-X2. 



Vendor: Personal narrative, literature prepared by his scientific con- 

 sultant, test data from commercial laboratories, correspondence 

 with NBS and others, testimonials, and repeat orders. 



Vendor's salesman : Personal narrative. 



Various technologists: Personal narrative descriptions of experience 

 in using the additive (mainly favorable), and some test data. 



MIT chemical engineer: Descri])tion of tests of AD-X2 (inconclusive 

 and not interpreted), personal narrative, and comments on labora- 

 tory versus field tests. 



Chemist (formerly vendor's consultant) : No testimony: consultant to 

 committee, and interpreted MIT tests as favorable to vendor's pro- 

 duct in a draft report for the committee. 

 Decision. — No finding as to the merits of the additive; urged fair 



treatment of the vendor, taking into account the reasonable doubt 



generated by the testimonials. 



Decision locus. — Committee and committee staff. 



