724 
Dr. Grirris. I think decisions need to be made and frameworks need 
to be established within this legislation as to what the ground rules 
really are. Presently I think there are some shortcomings in the clari- 
fication of what these ground rules are regarding the eligibility of 
certain kinds of cost sharing which might motivate the industry to 
pick up this part of the burden, and regarding the legal responsibility 
to which the universities are committed when they accept contracts 
with a fairly high percentage of non-Federal participation. 
Mr. Curvean. Thank you, Doctor. That is helpful. 
I have just one or two other brief questions. I won’t impose on you. 
I was interested in your statement on the top of page 8 where you 
say, “In order to avoid such pitfalls, means must be devised to relegate 
the initiative for utilization of research results to specially equipped 
institutes or applied research centers.” 
Would you expand on that a little for me, please? 
Dr. Grirris. The universities are not in a position of being all things 
to all people although some university administrations would like this 
to be the posture and image of the university. A university may be able 
to do certain things much better than other things. In certain geo- 
graphical localities, for example, universities are very close in their 
relationships with "the accompanying communities, industry, com- 
merce, and the general community. 
In other areas this interface is not nearly so intimate. 
What I am referring to here is that we not undertake to plan na- 
tional university laboratories just because universities have a fine 
image for conducting research, and we therefore assume that they can 
emphasize and undertake applied research of the sort that this program 
is going to require. There are some institutions that may be properly 
qualified or staffed or generally set up within their objectives to ac- 
complish this kind of result. 
There are other universities which, if they undertake this, are going 
to become less effective universities, "and, as I have mentioned, bases 
for campus disorder of various kinds. We have seen examples of this 
tragically in the last year and this is not a quieted problem by any 
means yet. 
Looking back a little into the history of applied research in the 
United States, we note that between 1925 and 1950, particularly, there 
was the creation, the growth, and the prospering of the not-for-profit 
research institute typified by Battelle Memorial Institute, Armour Re- 
search Foundation, and others. Some were associated closely with un1- 
versities, others were essentially independent and autonomous; most 
however benefited from some geographical proximity to a major 
educational institution. Analysis shows that the neutral, fact- finding 
research and development organization of this type played a major 
role in the growth of our “national scientific ‘and developmental 
streneth, during that quarter century. They were—and many still 
are problem-solving, applied research centers, active in the process 
of “technology transfer” into the private economy. I believe it is pos- 
sible that a modern organizational unit or concept, somewhat along the 
lines of these applied - research institutes, might be helpful in imple- 
menting our program of ocean research and ocean resource utilization. 
It is not clear, however, that the practical, applied, “spin-off” function 
toward which we are aiming, is automatically within the central 
