Congressional Charter Research Articles

National Council on Radiation Protection (NCRP) 2024 annual meeting: advanced and small modular nuclear power reactors**The authors have confirmed that any identifiable participants in this study have given their consent for publication.

On 25-26 March 2023, the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) held its 2024 annual meeting in Bethesda, Maryland, USA. The NCRP dates from 1929, and this meeting celebrated the 60th anniversary of receiving a U.S. Congressional Charter. For this annual meeting the NCRP felt it was essential to provide a briefing about advanced and small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs). The Journal of Radiological Protection is delighted to publish the following synopsis of material presented at the U.S. NCRP meeting. This synopsis is divided into five sections. The first section provides an overview of the whole meeting together with summaries of two context setting overview papers. The following four sessions of this synopsis are specific to advanced and small modular nuclear power reactors. The meeting also included keynote presentations by three of NCRP annual award recipients. The meeting topical areas were Technology Overview and Critical Issues. The individual papers laid the groundwork to understanding reactor technologies, terminology, and the fundamental concepts and processes for electrical generation. The perspectives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and states, through the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors were provided. The papers included a discussion of diverse topics including potential emergency preparedness considerations, radiological survey requirements, an evaluation of the future of nuclear power, the economics of reactors (both large and small), and the critical issues identified by the recent National Academies of Sciences' study on advanced reactors. The summary papers were developed to briefly document the major points and concepts presented during the oral papers presented at the 2024 NCRP Annual Meeting. The meeting heralded the dawn of a new era for commercial nuclear power.

Creativity and collaboration: Revisiting cybernetic serendipity

> The Sackler Colloquium “Creativity and Collaboration: Revisiting Cybernetic Serendipity” was held at the building of the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, DC on March 13–14, 2018 (www.nasonline.org/Cybernetic_Serendipity). This Sackler Colloquium celebrated the 50th anniversary of the famed art exhibit “Cybernetic Serendipity” by reconsidering how disciplinary partnerships could more reliably produce breakthrough discoveries and powerful innovation (Fig. 1). The organizer’s ambition was to redirect the history of ideas, restoring the Leonardo-like close linkage between art/design and science/engineering through widespread use of internet-enabled creativity and collaboration. > > > > Fig. 1. > Poster announcement for National Academy of Sciences’ Sackler Colloquium on “Creativity and Collaboration: Revisiting Cybernetic Serendipity.” > > Abraham Lincoln founded the US National Academy of Sciences in 1863 by way of an Act of Congress. The National Academy of Sciences Congressional Charter stipulated a nongovernmental advisory organization of scholars whose role was to “investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or art.” That charter, which combined “science and art” came at a time in which those disciplines were seen as closely related, maybe still infused with the spirit of Renaissance thinkers, such as Leonardo da Vinci, whose brilliant integration of art, design, science, and engineering produced astonishing breakthroughs and bold creations that have endured for 500 y. Leonardo’s training as an artist enabled him to make more accurate medical drawings, see the movement of bird wings, understand the dynamics of flowing water, and much more. Leonardo’s integrative style inspired 19th century scientists, engineers, designers, and artists, such as Charles Darwin, Louis Pasteur, James Audubon, Ada Lovelace, Samuel Morse, and others who gracefully wove together these diverse disciplines. However, during the 20th century the pressures for specialization and the emphasis on rational thinking methods pulled the sciences away from the arts. This split led to C. P. Snow’s controversial essay that portrayed the gulf … [↵][1]1Email: ben{at}cs.umd.edu. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1

NCRP Vision for the Future and Program Area Committee Activities in 2018.

The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements' (NCRP) congressional charter aligns with our vision for the future: to improve radiation protection for the public and workers. This vision is embodied within NCRP's ongoing initiatives: preparedness for nuclear terrorism, increasing the number of radiation professionals critically needed for the nation, providing new guidance for comprehensive radiation protection in the United States, addressing the protection issues surrounding the ever-increasing use of ionizing radiation in medicine (the focus of this year's annual meeting), assessing radiation doses to aircrew related to higher altitude and longer flights, providing guidance on emerging radiation issues such as the radioactive waste from hydraulic fracturing, focusing on difficult issues such as high-level waste management, and providing better estimates of radiation risks at low doses within the framework of the Million Person Study of Low-Dose Radiation Health Effects. Cutting-edge initiatives included a reevaluation of the science behind recommendations for lens of the eye dose, recommendations for emergency responders on dosimetry after a major radiological incident, guidance to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration with regard to possible central nervous system effects from galactic cosmic rays (the high-energy, high-mass ions bounding through space), reevaluating the population exposure to medical radiation, and addressing whether the linear no-threshold model is still the best available for purposes of radiation protection (not for risk assessment). To address these initiatives and goals, NCRP has seven program area committees on biology and epidemiology, operational concerns, emergency response and preparedness, medicine, environmental issues and waste management, dosimetry, and communications. The NCRP vision for the future will continue and increase under the leadership of President-Elect Dr. Kathryn D. Held (Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, and current NCRP executive director and chief science officer). The NCRP quest to improve radiation protection for the public is hindered only by limited resources, both human capital and financial.

Eleventh annual Warren K. Sinclair keynote address-science, radiation protection and NCRP: building on the past, looking to the future.

The many reports and other authoritative documents developed and published by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) have been of great service to the nation and the radiation protection community since its Congressional charter was signed into law 50 y ago. There will be a continuing need for NCRP to identify the principles upon which radiation protection is to be based and to provide guidance on best practices for the practical application of those principles for the many beneficial uses of radiation in society. The unique and invaluable resource that is NCRP is in large part due to the selfless dedication and numerous contributions of its Council and scientific committee members. The multidisciplinary composition of these leading experts and their collective input on complex questions provide a unique synergy that results in a comprehensive and well-balanced approach to addressing current and future radiation protection challenges. Subsequent articles in these proceedings covering a broad range of relevant topics will review sentinel accomplishments of the past as well as current work and future challenges that are in keeping with NCRP's mission to advance the science of radiation protection in the public interest.

BEING COMPETITIVE IN THE GLOBAL MARKETPLACE

IT IS AN HONOR and privilege to have the opportunity to serve as the 2010 American Chemical Society president. The coming year will be exciting as together we explore new opportunities that will further define ACS as the premier organization for chemists and chemical engineers and help position us as a pivotal partner in ensuring our members are ready to take their place in the global marketplace. My role, and the role of all ACS elected officials and staff, is to serve our members and improve our society. Of course, that must be done in accordance with ACS’s congressional charter, which states, in part, that we also serve the overall chemical enterprise. In short, ACS has a dual role: to advocate for its members and simultaneously to serve the overall chemical enterprise. I believe there is congruence in these two aims. A key part of my decision to seek the society’s presidency was my desire ...

CHEMISTRY & PUBLIC AFFAIRS

BRINGING TO BEAR its formidable resources as the world’s largest scientific society, the American Chemical Society has a long, successful history of promoting public policies that advance the chemical sciences and its practitioners. The society also is called upon in its 1938 congressional charter to “investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject in pure or applied chemistry connected with the national defense.” Over the years, the society’s role in public affairs has evolved and broadened. ACS formed the Committee on Chemistry & Public Affairs (CCPA) in 1965 to oversee and guide its growing government affairs and science policy activities. The committee’s charge is “to create a mechanism for providing advice and recommendations for ACS action on public policy matters involving the chemical sciences,” says Kristin M. Omberg, CCPA’s current chair and a group leader at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). Today, the committee advocates primarily for increasing federal investment in science...

Letter from the Editor: Quality Health Care for Rural Residents

What is quality in health care? In 1990 the Institute of Medicine (IOM) defined quality of care as the degree to which health services for individuals and populations increase the likelihood of desired health outcomes and are consistent with current professional knowledge (Institute of Medicine, 2005, p.4) The Institute of Medicine (IOM) was established in the United States, in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. The Institute has had a long-standing focus on quality of care. In the first phase of the IOM quality initiative, the National Roundtable on Health Care Quality highlighted serious problems with the overall quality of care delivered in the United States. In the second phase, two reports, To ERR is Human: Building a safer Health System and Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century, were released. Both reports called for a fundamental redesign of the health care delivery system (Institute of Medicine, 2005).

Subsidies in a Context of Efficient Markets: A New Framework for Evaluating the Role of Fannie Mae

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been the focus of extensive Congressional, academic, and journalistic scrutiny in recent years. Much of this attention has been due to a claim that their shareholders and employees benefit inordinately from the companies' Congressional charter and that this charter permits unlimited portfolio growth. The impact of their status has been labeled an implicit in several controversial studies. The theoretical underpinning of the implicit observation is an application of the standard microeconomic model of subsidies for producers of tangible goods. The standard goods model concludes that the subsidized producer will capture all or most of the subsidy and will expand without limit until it becomes a monopolist. The goods model cannot be applied to financial assets. Because financial markets are efficient, Fannie Mae is unable to benefit through its retained portfolio from any lowering of debt yields because mortgage backed security (MBS) yields will be lowered by at least the same amount. Selling agency debt to buy agency MBS is accomplished at prices set in a broad and competitive market. The spread between these two securities reflects the prepayment risk in mortgages and liquidity differences between MBS and debt. For Fannie Mae's portfolio to earn above-normal returns, the spread between MBS and debt would have to be in some way too large. Because many investors are able to trade in these securities to capture any deviations from a market rate of return given the inherent risk, all abnormal returns are traded away. In fact, the sale of agency debt to finance MBS redistributes risks to those investors best able to manage them and thus lowers risk premiums, causing MBS yields to fall at least as much as debt yields. We note that the agency debt and mortgage-backed securities markets are predicated on the Congressional charter. That charter provides access to the market, opens up classes of investors to agency securities, provides stability to investors and lowers the yields of both agency debt and of MBS, thus fostering the 30-year mortgage.

Editorial

During the last month, the most important IAQ/health-related event was the publication of Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on indoor mould exposure and health. The IOM is a private, non-profit institution that provides health policy advice under a congressional charter granted to the National Academy of Sciences. The study was sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In the press release is stated: ‘An exhaustive review of the scientific literature made it clear to us that it can be very hard to tease apart the health effects of exposure to mould from all the other factors that may be influencing health in the typical indoor environment,’ said committee chair Noreen Clark, dean, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. ‘That said, we were able to find sufficient evidence that certain respiratory problems, including symptoms in asthmatics who are sensitive to mould, are associated with exposure to mould and damp conditions. Although the available evidence does not link mould or other factors associated with building moisture to all the serious health problems that some attribute to them, excessive indoor dampness is a widespread problem that warrants action at the local, state, and national levels.’ Pre-publication copies of the IOM report can be found on the Internet at http://www.nap.edu. In this issue we have a report from a European multidisciplinary ‘state-of-the art’ work on the same topic (Bornehag et al. 2004). We have earlier published a Nordic review of scientific studies published prior to July 1998 on the same issue (Bornehag et al. 2001). These three reviews result in the same conclusions. There are associations between living, being in a ‘damp’ building and health problems, such as, e.g. asthma, but the causative agents are not really known! Mould, may be an issue, but certainly not the only one. There are differences in how the work has been performed in the European and US reviews. In US the conventional way is to have authors assigned to different chapters (within their expertise), followed by a discussion in plenum, while in Europe all experts, from all disciplines, are discussing all articles in plenum, taking a decision on each article (relevant, good science from all disciplines?), and finally reach an consensus based on all articles. But, the results are similar! So, seemingly, the problem is ‘damp’ buildings, not ‘toxic mould’! For the scientific community, this is great! We have a mystery to solve! Nobel prizes to win! For practitioners it means that measurements of mould spores, etc. is not that important. Other agents (microbial or chemical) from ‘dampness’ are equally important. The focus should be on the causes of ‘dampness’. Historical studies will be dealt with in coming issues, as in the last issues. Please continue to send me articles, or other information of historical interest.

NASA Addresses Mental Health Of Mars-Mission Members

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article Professional NewsFull AccessNASA Addresses Mental Health Of Mars-Mission MembersJoan Arehart-TreichelJoan Arehart-TreichelSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:1 Feb 2002https://doi.org/10.1176/pn.37.3.0005Many Americans thought it was impossible. But in 1969 the United States got a manned spacecraft to the moon and back. During the 1980s and 1990s, some Americans had similar doubts about an international space station. Yet it too came to pass. So there is little reason to think that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) plan to send astronauts to Mars, perhaps as early as 2014, will not become a reality.A manned Mars mission will take two-and-a-half or three years, however, and would undoubtedly present mental and physical health risks that shorter space missions do not. So NASA asked the Institute of Medicine to prepare a report to help it identify the mental and physical health risks that astronauts would be up against during such a mission. NASA also wanted advice on how to mitigate those risks. The Institute of Medicine’s report, titled “Safe Passage: Astronaut Care for Exploration Missions,” has now been published.The three major health risks that astronauts will face on a long-term mission such as to Mars, the report stated, are exposure to radiation, bone loss, and mental/behavioral health problems. So, in the mental/behavioral health area, as in the radiation and bone-loss ones, it is important that NASA do three things before it sends astronauts on such a long-term mission, the report asserts.One of these steps is to conduct research to better understand the risks involved. A second is to conduct research to learn how to protect astronauts from such risks. And the third is to put a health care system into place that can protect astronauts from those risks.Here are several of the questions about mental/behavioral health risks that the report indicates should be answered:• What would happen to a person’s mental and behavioral health if he or she were cooped up with six or seven other individuals during a three-year period?• What would living and working together in such close quarters over such an extended time do to group interactions? “Schisms, friction, withdrawal, competitiveness, scapegoating, and other maladaptive group behaviors are found among highly competent men and women working together in normal terrestrial settings,” the report stated. “They can also be expected among astronaut crews.”• If mental and behavioral health problems arose among a flight crew, how could the ground crew intervene effectively, especially as it would take some 40 minutes for the flight crew to communicate with the ground crew and for the ground crew’s response to get back to the flight crew?• What sorts of mental/behavioral health supports would the flight crew need both from people back on earth and from each other?• How could the mental and behavioral performance of the flight crew be monitored from earth?• What kinds of tools might be developed so that flight-crew members could monitor their own moods and cognitive functioning?• Finally, what kinds of mental health care might the astronauts need after returning to earth from such a long journey in space?The Institute of Medicine is a private, nonprofit organization that provides health policy advice under a congressional charter granted to the National Academy of Sciences. NASA funded the preparation of the report.The 318-page Institute of Medicine report, “Safe Passage: Astronaut Care for Exploration Missions,” can be read online at www.nap.edu/catalog/10218.html. A summary of the mental/behavioral health recommendations contained in the report can be found in a box titled “Behavioral Health and Performance Research and Development Opportunities.” This box can be read online at http://books.nap.edu/books/0309075858/html/14.html. ▪ ISSUES NewArchived

GSE Debt and the Decline in the Treasury Debt Market

As a result of the economic expansion during the late 1990s, the size of the federal debt has declined significantly. Contemporaneous with this reduction in Treasury debt, growth in federal agency debt has been remarkable. Understanding the impact of the decline in federal debt outstanding on the GSE debt market is of critical importance to policymakers involved in the debate regarding the costs and benefits of the GSEs' Congressional charter. Thus, this paper separates the liquidity effect of GSE benchmark creation from the substitution effect resulting from the reduction in the Treasury debt market.

At Law: Scientists in the Sunshine

Thanks to a recent federal appellate court decision, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) may soon conducting much of its business in public. In January 1997, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA)[1] applied to one of the academy's committees, based on the court's reading of the statute and a 1989 Supreme Court decision interpreting this legislation. Animal legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. Shalala[2] addressed the status of the NAS committee that prepared the latest revision of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.[3] The Guide includes standards for laboratory animal housing, veterinary medical care, animal procurement and placement, staff health and safety, common experimental procedures, and other dimensions of a laboratory animal program. Federal regulations governing laboratory animal care and use require research institutions to base their programs on these guidelines, and other federal policy documents endorse them in various ways. The question for the appellate court was whether FACA applied to the committee that formulated these guidelines. Congress enacted FACA in the early 1970s so that its members and the public could better informed about advisory committee activities. Committees subject to FACA must conduct open meetings, provide public notice of meetings, allow interested persons to present written or oral testimony (subject to reasonable rules), and make committee records and documents available for public inspection and copying. Moreover, committee membership must be fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to performed by the advisory committee. The law permits exceptions to the requirements for open meetings and records based on exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act. The NAS was created by congressional charter in 1563 to advise the federal government on scientific matters. The Guide was prepared by a committee appointed by the National Research Council, the principal operating arm of NAS. The council and one of its components, the Institute for Laboratory Animal Resources (ILAR), produced the first version of the document in 1963 and prepared several subsequent revisions as well. In 1993, ILAR obtained public funding to revise the 1985 guidelines and selected for the committee sixteen individuals from academia and the private sector, including scientists, veterinarians, and one person with a religious studies and bioethics background. Although the committee held some open meetings, its deliberative sessions were closed to the public. Animal advocacy groups filed a lawsuit arguing that FACA required those sessions to open as well. The U.S. District Court granted summary judgment against the plaintiffs. On appeal, however, a three-judge panel ruled in favor of the advocacy groups. To support its finding that FACA applied to the committee, the court of appeals consulted two primary sources. First was the language of the statute itself. According to FACAs definitions section, the law covers committees established or by one or more [federal] agencies, in the interest of obtaining advice or recommendations for one or more agencies or officers of the Federal Government ... As the court noted, it was quite obvious that federal agencies made use of the committee's guidelines. But courts have interpreted the statutory term utilized more narrowly than its plain meaning might suggest. Most relevant is a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on FACA, Public Citizen v. United States Department of Justice.[4] In this case, the Supreme Court examined FACAs legislative history to determine whether Congress meant for the law to apply to an American Bar Association committee advising the Department of Justice on federal judicial candidates. Even though the department indisputably used materials generated by this committee, a majority of the Supreme Court found no congressional intent to extend FACAs provisions to a private group receiving no federal funding, such as the bar association. …

Institute of Medicine Calls for Coordinated Studies of Gulf War Veterans' Health Complaints

FEDERAL AGENCIES must redirect and coordinate data collection and research efforts, an Institute of Medicine (IOM) committee says, if answers are to be found to health questions raised by Persian Gulf War veterans (<i>JAMA</i>. 1994; 272:341). Following continued reports from some veterans that they (and sometimes their families) are inexplicably ill, apparently as a result of military service during the 1991 Desert Storm liberation of Kuwait, Congress turned late in 1993 to the Washington, DC—based IOM, a 25-year-old private, nonprofit organization providing health policy advice under the 1863 congressional charter to the National Academy of Sciences. An 18-member IOM committee now has recommended, among other things, some epidemiologic studies using a population-based survey (of those who served in southwest Asia) to learn whether, and how much, the frequency of these mystery illnesses in Persian Gulf veterans exceeds that in the civilian population. The committee also recommends a single service-connected health

Jeannette Meyers Thurber and the National Conservatory of Music

The National Conservatory of Music of America was the outstanding institution for professional musical preparation in the United States for some twenty-five years or more after its opening in 1885. At its height in the 1890s it boasted a faculty of international renown, attracted Antonin DvoiAk to New York, and initiated a course of study whose features became a basis for the curriculum now taken for granted in the colleges and conservatories of this country. Its achievements resulted from the endeavors of a single visionary: Jeannette M. Thurber, a wealthy, idealistic New Yorker who devoted most of her life to the school. In recognition of those artistic and educational attainments the National Conservatory won a congressional charter in 1891, the only such acknowledgment ever conferred on a school of the arts in the United States. Although her innovative design for the conservatory was influential in shaping the course of American music for the twentieth century, Mrs. Thurber and her school have slipped into undeserved obscurity, overshadowed by the surge in postsecondary music education that followed the First World War. This article outlines the history of that school and Mrs. Thurber's contributions to it.

Report of the Institute of Medicine

The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen from their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.The Institute of Medicine was chartered in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to enlist distinguished members of the appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. In this, the Institute acts under both the Academy's 1863 congressional charter responsibility to be an adviser to the federal government and its own initiative in identifying issues of medical care, research, and education.

The American Red Cross

The American Red Cross is an independent, voluntary body dedicated to performing the relief obligations entrusted to it by the Congress of the United States. The American Red Cross is required by congressional charter (Act of Congress of January 5, 1905, as amended, 36 U.S. Code 3, Fifth) to undertake relief activities for the purpose of mitigating the suffering caused by disasters. A disaster is an occurrence such as a hurricane, tornado, storm, flood, highwater, wind-driven water, tidal wave, earthquake, drought, blizzard, pestilence, famine, fire, explosion, building collapse, transportation wreck, or other situation that causes human suffering or creates human needs that victims cannot alleviate without assistance.Through internal planning, policy setting, and implementation, and cooperation with private and governmental bodies, the American Red Cross at all levels gives priority to preparing for and providing assistance in disasters of any size.

Progressive Resistance To Nationalism and the 1980 Boycott of the Moscow Olym Pics

Early reformers to the Olympic movement proposed subsidies for middle- and lower- class athletes and democratization in the governance and officiating of amateur and Olym pic sport. These reforms have come about. The new reforms called for putting a financial ex pert in charge of the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC), William Simon, rather than a sports ex pert. With this move came the infusion of corporate money, governmental subsidies, and the subsequent change in the definition of amateurism, Likewise, came an interference with USOC governance autonomy; through threat of rescinding their Congressional charter, ac cusing the USOC of disloyalty to the President, and demanding adherence to the governmen tal boycott for national security reasons. A democratic process for sport meant one-sided pressure by the government. Nationalism became more pronounced under the new reforms. A Citizens Fact Finding Tour from the U.S., Canada, and Puerto Rico visited the Soviet Union in early 1980: the tour was formed to promote Olympic internationalism and answer na tionalistic sentiment. Tour members interviewed high Soviet Olympic and sport officials, private citizens, and gained their response to the Olympics/Afghanistan Boycott. Progressive organizations formed throughout the U.S. during the boycott year to protect athlete's rights, challenge the governmental position on the boycott and assure the autonomy of the U.S. Olympic Committee.

NRC nutrient requirements and how they are established.

History and Organization of the NAS-NRC In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln signed a Congressional Charter which established the National Academy of Sciences dedicated to the furtherance of science and its uses for the general welfare of the United States of America and its citizens. The Academy was established as a private, honorary organization and currently has a membership of about 1170 distinguished scientists and engineers elected on the basis of outstanding contributions to the advancement of science and technology. Contrary to the opinion held by a number of persons, the Academy is not a federal agency. It does, however, regularly examine and report on any subject of science and technology upon request by departments of the federal government and other organizations. To enable the National Academy of Sciences to react to requests for information on scientific problems and study of scientific issues, the Academy established the National Research Council in 1916. Created as a working arm of the Academy, the National Research Council draws upon a very broad representation of scientists and engineers to help its activities.

Nursing in Disaster

THE care of sick and injured peois a primary concern in any disaster. During the past year thousands of nurses helped care for people in flood and tornado areas. Such disasters can strike any community at any time, and organizing and planning are essential if the victims are to be taken care of easily and quickly. It is obvious, however, that enemy action would greatly magnify the problems which we might be faced with, and that we need to plan now for better organization of our disaster nursing services. Under Congressional charter, the American Red Cross is responsible for helping victims of natural disasters, and the responsibility for all relief activities which enemy action might make necessary has been assigned to the Federal Civil Defense Administration. Because of the many elements which the FCDA and ARC emergency nursing plans have in common, the representatives of the nursing services and nurses' associations have agreed that there should be one joint committee for nursing in emergencies in each community. The nursing representatives who proposed this plan included personnel from the Federal Civil Defense Administration, the U.S. Public Health Service, which has responsibilities in both types of emergency care, the Committee on Nursing in National Defense of the American Nurses' Association, the Committee on Nursing Education and Service in National Defense of the National League for Nursing, and the American Red Cross. One Committee would help to avert confusion, prevent duplication of effort, and promote the best use of nursing re-

U.S. Research Board for National Security

ESTABLISHMENT of the Research Board for National Security by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences was announced on February 11 by Mr. Henry L. Stimson, U.S. Secretary of War, Mr. James Forrestal, U.S. Secretary of the Navy, and Dr. Frank B. Jewett, president of the National Academy of Sciences. The Executive Committee of the new Board will be headed by Dr. Karl T. Compton, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the Board will consist of seventeen civilian men of science and nine representatives each from the army and navy, including Major-General Norman T. Kirk, Army Surgeon-General, and Vice-Admiral Ross T. Mclntire, chief of the U.S. Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery. Civilian members include Mr. Herbert S. Gasser, director of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, Prof. E. O. Lawrence, professor of physics at the University of California in Berkeley, and Prof. Isador I. Rabi, professor, of physics at Columbia University. The Secretaries of War and Navy requested the president of the National Academy of Sciences under its congressional charter to establish the Board "to assist in providing for continued civilian participation in the longer-term scientific problems of national security when the Office of Scientific Research and Development proceeds to liquidate its activities as a temporary wartime agency.... The objective of the Board will be to continue, pending final consideration by Congress on creation of an independent agency, the close co-operation between civilian scientists and the armed services which has proven to be such a vital element in the prosecution of the war. Composed of high-ranking officers responsible for the needs and plans of the Army and Navy with an equal number of distinguished representatives of science, engineering, medicine and industry, this Board includes many of the features of the Office of Scientific Research and Development which has proven so successful as a war-time agency in mobilising civilian scientists and coordinating their work with the requirements and operations of the armed services...." The announcement pointed out that "science is here broadly interpreted to include the employment of scientific method of analysis, experiments and tests in any branch of science or technology including engineering, medicine, psychology and biology."