BILLIONS OF KILOWATT HOURS FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION UNITED STATES AS OF APRIL 9, 1949 BILLIONS OF KILOWATT-HOURS SALARIES AND EXPENSES BUDGET AND HOUSE ALLOWANCE FOR 1950 Senator O'MAHONEY. May I interrupt you to ask a few preliminary questions in order to get the matter clear. On page 16, line 25, of the bill, it appears that the House has allowed you $3,650,000 for the item for which the Bureau of the Budget estimated $3,861,000, and for which last year there was an appropriation of $3,649,550, plus $60,000 for printing and binding. So that the appropriation allowed in the House is less than that which you received last year, as well as less than the budget estimate. DEFICIENCY FOR 1949 I want to know whether you have asked for a deficiency appropriation this year. Commissioner SMITH. We have asked only for a supplemental appropriation, Senator O'Mahoney, to cover in part the Public Law 900 increases. The amount requested in the supplemental for that purpose is $228,000. We are presently absorbing, under instructions from the Bureau of the Budget, $42,160 of the cost of Public Law 900 increases, totalling $270,160. Senator O'MAHONEY. How are you absorbing that $42,000? Commissioner SMITH. We were required to set aside, in a reserve created by the Bureau of the Budget, that amount of money. So that it means, sir, that we are in fact Senator O'MAHONEY. You must have taken it from some planned expenditure, and from what did you take it? Commissioner SMITH. We have taken it from the functions of the Commission over-all, on virtually a pro rata basis, employing fewer man years than those authorized originally by Congress for the current fiscal year. Senator O'MAHONEY. Then you have absorbed it by reducing personnel expenditures? Commissioner SMITH. Precisely, sir. PERSONNEL REDUCTION Senator O'MAHONEY. How many persons had to be dropped? Commissioner SMITH. I cannot give you offhand the exact amount of reductions in force due to that item, but I can say to you that, as compared with the many-years originally provided by the action of the Congress in the 1949 appropriations act, which aggregated roughly 835 employees, that is, man-years, we have, as of our last pay roll 799 employees, including three part-time employees, so that there has been that reduction of 36. Senator O'MAHONEY. Here we have another example of the working of the pay-increase law. We have rewarded Government employees by increasing their salary, but have fired some of them. Commissioner SMITH. That is correct. And we wish to emphasize that, as compared with the appropriation and the original authorization of employment for fiscal 1949, the President's budget itself, taking into account the effects of the Public Law 900 increases, the Ramspeck law, and the like, to which you have referred, Mr. Chairman, the President's budget for 1950 would require a reduction of 43.6 man-years under fiscal 1949, with the cuts made in the House requiring a further reduction of 44.2 man-years. So that unless the cuts made by the House are restored in full, we shall have to operate in fiscal 1950 with 87.8 fewer man-years than were authorized for fiscal 1949. RECAPITULATION OF APPROPRIATIONS AND REQUESTS, 1949 AND 1950 Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, might I ask a question there. To put it in another way, in dollars, Mr. Smith, last year you had $3,649,000, in round figures, and you are asking for a supplementary item of $228,000. Commissioner SMITH. That is not quite correct, Senator, because in giving you the figures that I have given you, I have included in my figures both the departmental or regular appropriation and the flood control appropriation, so that our total for fiscal 1949 was $4,049,550. And my man-year figures, Senator, were related to that total figure, rather than simply to the departmental. Is that clear? Senator SALTONSTALL. What I was trying to do was to get it in the items that we have here. Perhaps I had better wait. But putting it this way, on the items "Salaries and expenses" and "Flood control surveys," the House allows you for salaries and expenses, $3,650,000. Commissioner SMITH. That is right. Senator SALTONSTALL. Which, as I get it, if you take the deficiency request away, and add your deficiency request this year, the House has granted you $228,000 for salaries and expenses under what you had last year, plus the request of your deficiency. Commissioner SMITH. That is substantially correct; and in addition to that, the House cut made in the recommendations submitted by the Bureau of the Budget, Senator Saltonstall, dollarwise, represents a reduction of $211,000 in the rgular or departmental, and $25,200 in the flood control, or a total of $236,200. Senator SALTONSTALL. So that dollarwise, that would give you $439,000, for salaries and expenses, less than what you believe you need this year to cover your employees plus your salary raises? Commissioner SMITH. I think, sir, it is a larger figure than that, because I think that you omitted the figure that was in for fiscal 1949, as separate item, of $60,000 for "Printing and binding," which has been combined with the "Salary and expenses" figure in the bill for fiscal 1950. Senator SALTONSTALL. That does not show here. I beg your pardon. So that you would have to add $60,000 to that, so that would then, in round figures, be just about $500,000 under what you have this year, if you get your deficiency. Commissioner SMITH. That is correct. Senator SALTONSTALL. So that what you are asking us to do, then, is to give you or restore you $211,000 for salaries and expenses, and will that bring you up to what you have at the present time? Commissioner SMITH. No, sir. That would bring us up to what has been recommended by the Bureau of the Budget, which is still, in terms of the effective man-years of employment, some 43 or 44 man-years under the present fiscal year. 90733-49-11 Senator SALTONSTALL. In numbers of employees, what does that mean? Commissioner SMITH. use the man-year figure, because aside from the rather difficult matter of adjusting for some lapses, the two are substantially the same thing. PERSONNEL REDUCTION EFFECTED BY BUREAU OF BUDGET Senator SALTONSTALL. So that the budget would cut you by 43 people? Commissioner SMITH. That is right, 43.6. Senator SALTONSTALL. Well, 44 men and women, even if you got your full $211,000? Commissioner SMITH. That is exactly right. Senator SALTONSTALL. You are not asking for more than what the budget request was? Commissioner SмITII. We are not permitted to do so. Of course, our budget request was submitted in accordance with the President's directive that we strip everything down to the bare bones; and I would like to point out that for fiscal 1948, for example, we were authorized to state to the Committees of Congress that the Bureau of the Budget and the President recognized that their recommendations of funds were not sufficient to permit us to do what the Congress has directed us to do in the statutes under which we are operating, but that they were recommending all that it was felt possible to recommend at that time. But it has been made very clear all along that we were not yet picking up to a normal or prewar level. COMPARISON OF FUNDS WITH PREVIOUS YEARS At that point I might, if I may just respond a little further to your question, state that in the House committee report there are various references to the last prewar year of 1940, or fiscal 1940, as a sort of standard of comparison. Now, actually, in fiscal 1940, if you take into account the effects of pay-raise legislation, the Ramspeck Act and automatic promotions, and the like, we will be operating for fiscal 1950, under the measure passed by the House, with 51 or 52 fewer man-years than we had in fiscal 1940. Yet, in fiscal 1940 the Commission had virtually no work under the Natural Gas Act. Congress has since given us that responsibility in its present form through the 1942 amendments. Senator SALTONSTALL. May I repeat, and just to make it clear in my mind, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, if we restore the $211,000 which you request, which was cut by the House, it will mean that your Department will operate in fiscal year 1950 with 44 employees less than you had in 1949, but will cover the pay increases of Public Law 900. Commissioner SMITH. That is true, with this exception, that we would need also $25.200 restored under the flood-control appropriation to balance out with that 43.6 or 44 man-year comparison. I do want to emphasize, though, in taking fiscal 1940 as a basis of comparison as the last prewar year, that since that time the Congress has given us the Natural Gas Act to administer in its present form, by the amendment to the act as approved in 1942, and it gave the Com mission the principal work it now has under the certificate section of that act; and in the last year we had about 80 man-years go into the administration of that act. So I want you to see that, not simply a dollar or man-year comparison should be made, but also that it is necessary to make a comparison with the Commission's necessary work load under the acts of Congress for the administration of which it is responsible. Senator O'MAHONEY. May I ask you how much you requested of the Bureau of the Budget for salaries and expenses and for floodcontrol work? Commissioner SMITH. For fiscal 1950, it was $4,644,000. Senator O'MAHONEY. For both together? Commissioner SMITH. Yes. That would have represented an increase over the man-years for fiscal 1944 of about 42. It would have represented an average employment of about 877. Senator O'MAHONEY. Now, let me see. The Bureau of the Budget allowed you $3.861,000 for salaries and expenses, and $350,200 for flood control, making $4.211.200, and you requested how much? Commissioner SMITH. We requested $4,644,000. Senator O'MAHONEY. So that the Bureau of the Budget cut you over $400,000? Commissioner SMITH. That is correct. We thought that we had been stripped down to the bedrock when we came out of the Bureau of the Budget, and we thought we had prepared a very modest figure for submission to the Bureau. HOUSE COMMITTEE REPORT REFERENCE TO DUPLICATION Senator O'MAHONEY. There are two statements in the House report that I would like to have you discuss. The first is under "Salaries and expenses": In line with its policy of effecting economy in the various items in the bill, the committee feels that the Commission should be required to absorb this reduction in connection with activities which are of least importance and that this ean be done without injury to any necessary activity. That would seem to be a recommendation that certain of the activities of least importance, which are not defined, should be curtailed, and it expresses the opinion that it can be done without injury to any necessary activity. FLOOD-CONTROL SURVEYS HOUSE COMMITTEE COMMENT The second statement, in connection with "Flood-control surveys," reads as follows: In line with its action on the preceding item, the committee feels that this reduction can be absorbed without undue impairment to flood-control survey work. The committee calls attention to the similarity of work performed by this agency and the Corps of Engineers of the Army and requests that the Commission use every care to avoid duplication of work being performed by the Army in this field. Let us have a little discussion about that duplication, or alleged duplication, when you get around to it. |