Var. Cte

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEFENSE RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING
WASHINGTON 25, D.C.

17 March 1961

 

Dear Dr. Lederberg:

I have at hand your letter of 2) January to Dr. Wiesner, which was
referred over to this office for further, comment.

As you indicate in your letter, the process by which developments in
military technology are converted into gains in the civilian sector is
going on continuously. Indeed, a great deal of our military technology
is directly applicable. For example, the heavy earth-moving equipments
developed by the Corps of Engineers, the technology for processing
titanium into shapes, the large transport aircraft developed by the
Air Force -- these are all directly accepted into commercial practice.

Mechanisms by which this process takes place include the ready granting
of patents to government employees for non-government use of their
inventions, the alertness of defense industries to extend military-developed
practices and designs into commercial areas, and the wetchfulness of
commercial interests over the granting of new patents. A comparatively
small number of patents are withheld from publication for security reasons;
it is not our understanding that this is a matter of great significance.

We have noticed that from time to time opportunities for commercial
development are not followed up as quickly as we would have supposed.
The reason generally turns out to be that a considerable further investment
is required for process development, elimination of processing variables,
pilot planting, or building of heavy equipment. This is, of course, very
expensive and speculative. ,

As a matter of broad public interest, it might be reasonable for the
government to underwrite or sponsor speculative development of this nature.
There is indeed an opportunity to select out promising and seminal lines
of development, in which cost and time considerations deter private
sponsorship, and to undertake government support of these. But I do not
believe it appropriate for the Department of Defense to undertake this.
The technical and management problems we face are large enough indeed,
without adding the responsibility for converting military technology to
civilian applications.
There are a few ways in which, entirely as a part of our military
programs, we are able to help nonmilitary development. For example,
military technology is made generally available to industry through our
system of technical evaluation centers, notably the ones at Battelle
(Defense Metals Information Center) and Picatinny Arsenal (Plastics
Technical Evaluation Center). Our military Standards and specifications
are also generally available. Exchange of technical personnel goes
on &l] the time.

As evidence of the acceptance of military technology into commercial
application, you might be interested to examine the two-volume study,
Defense Spending and the U.S. Economy, which deals directly and precisely
with the very problem you raise. This study was prepared by the Operations
Research Office, Johns Hopkins University, under contract with the
Department of the Army, and was issued in 1958. It contains hundreds
of examples of ways in which military research and development have
benefited the civilian economy. In fact, this was the first and principal
finding of the study.

I trust you will excuse the length of this reply. It is an interesting
subject and one that merits serious thought.

Sincerely yours,

Lb ae (olla

L. C. Van Atta
Special Assistant
for Arms Control

Dr. Joshua Lederberg
Professor of Genetics
Stanford University
Medical Center

Palo Alto, California

ec: Dr. J.B.Wiesner