cured by the military and that could be used by the civilian agencies and have them with me on my next appearance.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. We will be very glad to have those figures.

If the greater percentage of the military expenditures are in the field of peculiar military items, is it not true, that H. R. 2781 does not interfere with that procurement at all, because that procurement, by exemption of the Secretary of National Defense, will still remain in the military?

Mr. ANDERSON. If I can accomplish the objective which I am seeking to accomplish under this set-up, this single cataloging systemMr. HOLIFIELD. (interposing), I am in favor of that objectiveMr. ANDERSON. (continuing). In the military service, I can see the day when this can be expanded to include all.

Now we may just as well be frank about all of this, because the natural corollary of single cataloging is single procurement, and, that of course will find objections from the various sections of the armed services, but I do not ask to have single procurement until we have a single catalog. In other words, to attempt to obtain single procurement first it seems to me is putting the cart before the horse.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. It seems to me, in referring to a single catalog, that it would be more logical to break it down into the military specification items and the common-use items and have it in two catalogs.

Mr. ANDERSON. Why do that when the common-use items will be in the same catalog that would be applied to the civilian agencies?

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Let me put it this way, I meant a separate section in the same catalog; I did not mean two separate catalogs, two separate books, but we do have those two problems in Government procurement. Mr. ANDERSON. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. We have the problem of the civilian procurement and the military procurement.

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. And certainly I would say that, in the field of military procurement, the military should have first sway over that; and in the field of the common-use items, if we are going to concentrate and consolidate all of these different purchasing agencies to prevent duplication and overlapping, and inefficiency and actual waste in times of emergency, in wartime particularly, it seems to me it would be necessary to bring the civilian and the military common-use items together.

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. In a standardized catalog.

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, that is quite true; I agree with it.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. And then it is a matter of policy as to whether the civilian agency shall use it to procure, the actual procurement of those items or whether it is the military.

Mr. ANDERSON. That is absolutely right.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. It is a matter of policy.

Mr. ANDERSON. A matter of policy to be established by the Congress. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes. Is there any further statement? Are there any further questions?

Mr. BOLLING. It seems to me that one of the things that may come out of this, if we were to establish all of these common-use items along with all of the military items, that is items peculiar to the military, in one catalog, the military establishment catalog, the conclusion

may be reached that we would be looking to the military to do the procurement, all of the procurement.

Mr. ANDERSON. No. Here is what I meant, Mr. Bolling: Under my bill you set up a Director of Cataloging under the Secretary of Defense, and if that is eventually set up and it works-and it can be made to work, I know that-it may be the policy of the Congress later on to include the civilian agencies and set up a director of Federal cataloging who would not be under the Secretary of Defense. He might be an independent director of cataloging, and as I say, the natural corollary to that is single procurement, and the Congress might, in its judgment, establish a director of procurement. Do you see what I mean?

Mr. BOLLING. I do.

Mr. ANDERSON. So there would be no conflict at all.

Mr. BOLLING. It seems to me that the basic problem is the one of handling the common-use items, because nobody can argue that the peculiarly military items should be procured by other than the people who are going to use them.

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes.

Mr. BOLLING. The question then resolves itself into whether the common, over-all procurement is to be dominated by the military or by the civilian, which I think is the key question.

Mr. ANDERSON. I will be glad to bring the figures to you, but again, may I say, it is a matter of policy for this committee to submit to the Congress, and one which the Congress will eventually have to settle.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. As a matter of fact there is involved the question of domination of our civilian economy in peacetime. We concede that the military must dominate the civilian economy, through certain civilian allocation bodies, that our whole economy will be brought to bear on the war effort during wartime, but it seems to me that is a far cry from the question of the domination of our civilian purchases of common-use items for the military and for the civilian agencies in peacetime, and I would be very loath to proceed along a line which would give strength to the Military Establishment over our civilian economy in peacetime. As you indicate, that is one of the difficulties, of course.

Mr. BOLLING. I think it is very obvious, as regards the common-use items, that the military use is very large, and I think that is the key point to the whole problem. Shall the military procure for itself all of the items of common use? If it does the military will inevitably dominate the whole procurement pattern of the Government. I think we need to very carefully delineate what the common-sense items are. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes.

Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, I certainly thank the members of the committee for giving me this opportunity to present this statement. Mr. HOLIFIELD. We appreciate very much your testimony, and the studies you have made in this field, and for sharing with us the benefit of those studies.

Mr. ANDERSON. Thank you. I shall be happy to come at the committee's convenience.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Admiral Ring, how long will it take you to complete your statement?

Admiral RING. Not more than 10 minutes.

Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Chairman, I was going to suggest that we might come back after lunch and have a little more time for Admiral Ring. Mr. HOLIFIELD. If it meets with the committee's approval we will stand in recess until 1:30 p. m.

(At 11 a. m. a recess was taken until 1:30 p. m. of the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Mr. HOLIFIELD. We will resume consideration of H. R. 2781, and we are pleased to have with us Admiral Ring. Will you please proceed in your own way, Admiral?

STATEMENT OF REAR ADM. MORTON L. RING, VICE CHIEF, OFFICE OF NAVAL MATERIAL, NAVY DEPARTMENT

Admiral RING. Mr. Chairman, I have a prepared statement which I will present, which will not take very long.

I would like first to identify myself. I am Rear Adm. Morton L. Ring; I am Chairman of the Procurement Policy Council of the Munitions Board.

I would like to first give you a statement with regard to the historical background of the Federal Government catalog efforts. (The statement referred to is as follows:)

THE MUNITIONS BOARD CATALOGING PROGRAM

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The first step toward the development of a common cataloging system for use by the various Federal agencies took place in March 1929, with the provision for the development and publication of a Federal Standard Stock Catalog (45 Stat. 1461).

The plan by which the Federal Standard Stock Catalog was to be developed provided that the head of each department concerned would be requested to report any articles which such department desired to be listed in the catalog. The scope of the Federal Standard Stock Catalog was never extended beyond the inclusion of those items submitted voluntarily for inclusion by various agencies. Its use by the military services was limited principally to standardstock items (general stores items) for the Navy and items of similar character for some of the services of the Army. However, to satisfy its own peculiar cataloging needs, it was necessary for each of the services, bureaus, and the Air Force to develop independently one or more systems of cataloging.

Due to the absence of a uniform cataloging system encompassing all items of supply, conditions which arose in the armed services during the war became so serious that both the War and Navy Departments took steps independently to establish their own uniform cataloging systems. These efforts on the part of the military departments emphasized the desirability for the establishment of a uniform Federal cataloging system. The grave need for uniformity in cataloging had been recognized also by the Bureau of the Budget, the Bureau of Federal Supply, and the War Production Board. Accordingly, President Roosevelt, on January 18, 1945, requested the Director, Bureau of the Budget, to take steps to establish a uniform Federal catalog system to include all items of Federal supply. In complying with the President's request, the Director established the United States Standard Commodity Catalog Board, consisting of a representative of the Bureau of the Budget, the War Department, the Navy Department, and the Treasury Department. This Board developed and submitted to the Director a plan for a uniform Federal catalog system.

The plan was submitted by the Director to President Truman, who in a letter dated July 15, 1946, expressed his desire "that further development of the Federal catalog system be continued through interdepartmental cooperation and joint working arrangements." He further requested that arrangements be made with

the Secretary of the Treasury for the Bureau of Federal Supply to organize a central staff to assist the Catalog Board in developing the details of a uniform system, and in the work required for the coordination of agency cataloging activities with this system. The War and Navy Departments agreed with these provisions, actively participated in the formulation of plans for a Federal catalog system, and contributed almost two-thirds of the funds to support a nuclear central staff in the Bureau of Federal Supply during fiscal year 1947. Provision for continued support of the central staff in fiscal year 1948 was not made by the military departments inasmuch as the United States Standard Commodity Catalog Board had secured the approval of the Director of the Bureau of the Budget for the Treasury Department to include in its budget for fiscal year 1948, the funds required to cover the entire cost of the central staff.

The Assistant Secretary of the Navy and the Under Secretary of War, on March 18, 1947, jointly addressed a letter to the Secretary of the Treasury emphasizing the urgent need of the armed services for a unified cataloging system, and requested his personal assistance in paving the way for complete activation of the central catalog staff in the Bureau of Federal Supply by a request to Congress for adequate funds to proceed with this project. The Treasury Department subsequently requested supplemental funds to support the central staff in the Bureau of Federal Supply in fiscal year 1948. The House Appropriations Committee rejected the request with the recommendation that planning and coordination be continued before resubmitting the proposal.

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MUNITIONS BOARD CATALOGING AGENCY

Meanwhile, on July 3, 1947, the Army-Navy Munitions Board had established the Army-Navy Munitions Board Cataloging Agency (subsequently renamed the Munitions Board Cataloging Agency), among the defined functions of which were the following:

(1) To ascertain the areas in which joint Army-Navy cataloging operations are practicable;

(2) To coordinate Army-Navy cataloging operations with the Federal cataloging system.

After the refusal of Congress to appropriate funds for the central catalog organization for the Federal catalog system, the Munitions Board Cataloging Agency proceeded immediately to develop plans for a uniform cataloging system to include all items of supply in the armed services. It incorporated the basic principles of the plan for the Federal catalog system which the services had participated in developing under the direction of the United States Standard Commodity Catalog Board. The Agency is employing a method providing for the performance of all technical functions in the bureaus, services, and commands within the departments, with only a small coordinating staff to be located in the Munitions Board.

PARTICIPATION OF CIVILIAN AGENCIES

Recognizing that the interest of the Federal Government can best be served through continuing close cooperation and working contacts between the cataloging activities of the civil and Military Establishments, an agreement for the development of a uniform Federal catalog system was reached on June 3, 1948, between the Chairman of the Munitions Board and the Director of the Bureau of Federal Supply, with the approval of the Director, Bureau of the Budget, the provisions of which, in general, are:

(1) That the present plans and procedures of the Munitions Board Cataloging Agency are satisfactory for initiating Federal cataloging operations, it being understood that the Agency is further developing the elements of cataloging in accordance with basic principles developed under the sponsorship of the United States Standard Commodity Catalog Board;

(2) That the Bureau of Federal Supply be represented on the executive group of the Agency, that civilian agencies having major supply problems be represented on the technical group of the Agency, and that the Bureau of Federal Supply be responsible for such coordination as will assure that cataloging developments initiated by the Agency are made available to interested civil establishments; and

(3) That upon completion of the Munitions Board cataloging program, the future respective responsibilities of the Agency and the Bureau of Federal Supply would, in the absence of legislative direction, be determined by agreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Treasury. 89579-49—13.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE MUNITIONS BOARD CATALOGING PROGRAM AND NORMAL
CATALOGING OPERATIONS OF THE THREE DEPARTMENTS

The Secretary of Defense has directed integration of the work already done by the services, bureaus, and commands with the Munitions Board program with the minimum interruption of normal operations. In accordance with this directive, scheduling of operations under the Munitions Board program, or, when necessary, rescheduling of normal operations is being effected to insure integration of the two programs to the maximum degree practicable, thus eliminating duplication of effort.

Utilization by the military departments of the cataloging data developed in the Munitions Board cataloging program will be initially effected by cross-referencing existing names, descriptions, and numbers to the uniform names, descriptions, and numbers developel under the Munitions Board program. Upon the completion of the commodity classification system, now under deevlopment, and as whole segments of the entire range of commodities to be catalogued are completed, the Munitions Board Cataloging Agency system may be placed wholly in effect in all supply operations of the National Military Establishment. It is my understanding that the civil establishments contemplate a similar transition to the new system.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Admiral Ring, this statement of yours is in accord with the official Hoover Commission report on the Office of General Services, supply activities, as outlined on page 6, is it not?

Admiral RING. May I say, Mr. Chairman, it was not drawn up for that purpose. I would like to look at page 6, if I may. This is the position of the Munitions Board and the National Military Establishment. Do you have reference to recommendation No. 4?

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I had reference particularly to the language in the fifth line—I am referring to recommendation No. 6, on page 32, which reads as follows, after explaining the thing has been done just as you have explained it; and I think it might be well at this time to read that, if you will.

Admiral RING. The last paragraph of that recommendation No. 6, under "Property Identincation," in the Hoover Commission report, reads as follows:

Since the war, the National Military Establishment has made some progress toward a coordinated system of property identification, and the Bureau of Federal Supply is now cooperating in this endeavor. Nevertheless, a declaration of congressional policy insisting upon a Federal commodity catalog is necessary to insure conformity of some of the old-line civilian agencies and to insure continued military cooperation.

I believe that my statement is in accord with the policy therein set forth.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. And it is also in accord with section 107 of H. R. 2781, which seeks to carry out the declaration of congressional policy as recommended in the Hoover Commission report?

Admiral RING. I believe it is in accord with the principle of section 107, yes, specifically with regard to (ii) of 107, which reads:

To establish and maintain such uniform Federal supply catalog system to identify and classify personal property under the control of Federal agencies as may be appropriate.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. In your opinion the language of the bill which sets out this policy does not conflict with the coordinated policy which has been evolved in the last few years by the Military Establishment, the Munitions Board and the Federal Bureau of Suuply; that is, there is no contradiction in section 107 on that point, is there?