Admiral RING. I would have to qualify my answer, Mr. Chairman, by calling to your attention something which I read in my initial statement, which is to the effect that upon completion of the Munitions Board's catalog 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. We do not know what the future will bring. Section 107, upon this bill becoming law, would establish under its provisions, the responsibility of the Administrator, and possibly establish it prior to the completion of the Munitions Board Catalog Agency work. I would personally like to see us complete that program which we now have under way, with the full cooperation of the military and other governmental agencies. Let us finish that and then determine the future of the agency. I think you will be able to go ahead faster by continuing the system which is now going, then immediately determine, if you will, what the future may be, that is, to whom the National Cataloging Agency will report in the future. I would like to see the present efforts continued for the time being. Mr. HARVEY. This is becoming a bit complicated, and I am sure you will permit me to ask you a question or two. We had discussion in the testimony this morning, I believe from Congressman Anderson, in which he said the work on this catalog program-and I am not sure he was referring to this particular Munitions Board catalog effort-would probably take 4 to 6 years to complete. Was it the Munitions Board catalog program to which he was referring this morning? Admiral RING. Both Congressman Anderson and I are referring to the same agency, and the speed that the agency is expected to make is the speed that the Congressman spoke of. Mr. HARVEY. In other words, it will take about 4 to 6 years to complete the work and the activities and responsibilities of this Board in this connection? Admiral RING. We hope to be completely finished with the socalled development phase of the catalog program by June 30, 1952, which will be roughly a little more than 3 years from now. That will only be the cataloging effort, and as new items come in, of course, will have to maintain the cataloging activities. Mr. HARVEY. I understand that it will probably never be entirely complete, because there will be constant changes. Admiral RING. Yes. Mr. HARVEY. Would it then be your opinion that this legislation, as presented in H. R. 2781, is premature? Admiral RING. You have asked me a very difficult question, Mr. Harvey, and I am not prepared to state that it is premature. It is possible, under section 107, for the Administrator to permit a continuation of the efforts that we are all making now, and I hope they can be effectuated. I am not saying that the enactment of this bill into law, with section 107, will interfere at all with the cataloging efforts. Mr. HARVEY. Except, if I have correctly interpreted what you have tried to present, you do not think that we should establish anything by directive, or through legislation, that would cause conflict or overlapping agencies to start out to do the same thing you are already in the process of completing. Is that right? Admiral RING. That is my feeling; yes. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Let me develop that point a little further. As I understand it now there is a voluntary committee, composed of representatives of the Army, the Navy, the Bureau of the Budget, and the Treasury Department that is working on this matter, with representatives from the Federal Bureau of Supply, and on a purely voluntary, cooperative basis. Admiral RING. NO. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Is that not correct? Mr. HOLIFIELD. Will you explain to us just who is doing the job of cataloging and which agencies are cooperating? Admiral RING. My only reason for saying it is wrong, Mr. Chairman, is that I do not regard the job as voluntary when the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Defense and the Director of the Budget have directed something to be done. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes. Admiral RING. That is high enough authority for me. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Let me revise my question to say that the work is being done under administrative orders rather than congressional direction. Admiral RING. That is correct. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Now we seek to change it from administrative into congressional or legislative directive. Admiral RING. Yes. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Now that we have brought up that point I think we should have in the record an explanation of who is doing the job of cataloging, identification, and standardization. Can you tell me at this point how many people the Navy has working on this program? Admiral RING. The whole program of cataloging? Mr. HOLIFIELD. Cataloging, identification—— Admiral RING. In cataloging and identification activities- Admiral RING. You are going to catch me there. I can give you the number of personnel required in the National Military Establishment for full-scale catalog operations. Under the Munitions Board Catalog Agency the estimate is as follows-and parenthetically we have not yet reached full-scale operation. Mr. HOLIFIELD. I understand. Admiral RING. The Department of Army, 576; the Department of Navy, 960; the Department of Air Force, 367; Munitions Board Catalog Agency staff, 176; or a total of 2,079. Full complement will be reached by all three Departments and the Munitions Board Catalog Agency staff not later than January 1, 1950. Mr. HOLIFIELD. All right. As I understand it, the Federal Bureau of Supply also is sitting in on a consultative basis, you might say, or on a liaison basis, in this cataloging effort? Admiral RING. It is a working basis, Mr. Chairman. The fact that it is limited to a very small number of people does not change my opinion of the position occupied by Mr. MacLeod, who will testify a little later, and Mr. Totten, who are full-time members of the Munitions Board Catalog Agency executive group. Then there is participation down the line in the technicians group of the Bureau of Federal Supply-I should have those details with me-but I am not sure about the number of people. I do know that Mr. Totten and Mr. MacLeod sit in with the executive group of the cataloging agency. Mr. HOLIFIELD. At this point, may I ask if Mr. MacLeod is in the room? Admiral RING. He is better prepared than I on that question. STATEMENT OF WILLIS S. MacLEOD, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, STANDARDS BRANCH, BUREAU OF FEDERAL SUPPLY Mr. HOLIFIELD. I want to interrupt questions of you, Admiral Ring, because I want this information in the record along with the discussion of this point, to ask Mr. MacLeod how many people you have in the Federal Bureau of Supply working on this job? Mr. MACLEOD. We have actively employed four people. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Four people against 2,079 in the military establishments. You also have some technicians. Mr. MACLEOD. There are some who are on part-time assignment. We have some technicians who are doing work on a part-time basis, which is extracurricular to their regular assigned duties. But I would say that we have on a full-time basis one and a half people— I do not think it would be more than that-who are technicians from the Specifications Division and who are given assignments to assist on a particular problem that is under way in this Munitions Board effort. Mr. HOLIFIELD. They are sitting in with these people on this cataloging effort, on the final justifications, final agreements on items and in approving of the results. Mr. MACLEOD. Yes. We have the status of a voting power in the executive group, in the cataloging agency. We are just members in all the others, along with the military, as Admiral Ring has told you. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Now up to date has there been any conflict on the part of your group in reaching decisions with the larger group? Mr. MACLEOD. No; we have no trouble in that respect. Mr. HOLIFIELD. If you did object to the nomenclature or description of some article, you could only make that known in the way of advising your views? Mr. MACLEOD. No; we have an equal voting power. We have two votes; each Department in the military has two, or a total of eight votes in the Executive group on matters of policy and procedure. Now of course, you understand that there might be instances when the civil establishment representatives will of necessity disagree with the military because there is a difference in the problem to be solved. Under those circumstances, because of the peculiar nature of their supply problem, we agree to conditions arising where they have to comply with certain requirements in the utilization of special equipment. We have an established procedure that is satisfactory to everyone, so there is really no disagreement. There are certain areas, because of the technical differences in military requirements and uses, where is it generally the custom for the civilian establishments not to do anything but participate in the development of policies as advisory members of the group. That is, on a matter which is obviously something requiring a military decision on a particular problem of military operation; and so we have no disagreement, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HOLIFIELD. At the present time this joint board of eight votes is the top authority in the cataloging effort; is that right? Mr. MACLEOD. That is true. Mr. HOLIFIELD. And under section 107 would that joint authority be transferred to the Administrator, as outlined in this bill H. R. 2781? Mr. MACLEOD. Yes; it would. The Administrator would have that authority, but there is a provision, a saving clause, I understand, that would make it possible for the decisions affecting the military supplies directly, to become a matter for determination of the Secretary of Defense. Paragraph (b) of section 107, if I may read it, states [reading]: Each executive agency shall utilize such uniform Federal supply catalog system and standard purchase specifications as far as practicable, taking into consideration efficiency, economy, and other interests of the Government. As I understand that, it means that each agency if it desires not to follow the system, would have to show that it was inefficient or uneconomical or adverse to the interest of the agency program. Mr. HOLIFIELD. All right, let us get back to (a); I think I understand (b) pretty well. Mr. MACLEOD. The fourth line of section 107 Mr. HOLIFIELD. There is a saving clause in there which says [reading]: with due regard to the requirements of the National Military Establishment as determined by the Secretary of Defense the Administrator is authorizedto do certain things. Mr. MACLEOD. Yes. Mr. HOLIFIELD. One is to make surveys of Government property and management practices with respect thereto, and to obtain reports thereon from executive agencies, and that includes the Military Establishment. Mr. MACLEOD. Yes, sir. Mr. HOLIFIELD. In your opinion that includes the Military Establishment, unless the Secretary of Defense exempts it; but the veto power is in the Secretary of Defense there? Mr. MACLEOD. The Administrator is required by this language, Mr. Chairman, as I understand it, to give due regard to the requirements of the National Military Establishment. Now, it seems to me that if the Secretary of National Defense determined that an action of the Administrator was adverse to the national security, it would be a matter for the Secretary and the Administrator to agree upon. If they could not agree, then the Executive office would perhaps have to determine how the matter stood. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Of course, as a matter of practical authority the Administrator of a bureau would not be on a par with the Secretary of Defense in an argument; would he? Mr. MACLEOD. I do not know. Admiral RING. May I interpose, Mr. Chairman? Mr. HOLIFIELD. Yes. Admiral RING. As I read line 6, section 107 (a), and read: As determined by the Secretary of Defense there is not any question in my mind. Mr. DAWSON. He has a deciding voice in any matter affecting the Military Establishment. Mr. HARVEY. He can veto it. Mr. HOLIFIELD. That is what I want to know. Admiral RING. He can more than veto, sir. Mr. HOLIFIELD. I want to know exactly how much authority this Administrator has. Admiral RING. My own reading of that, if I understand it, sir [reading]: The Administrator, after adequate advance notice to the agencies affectedwhich would include the Secretary of Defense and with due regard to the requirements of the National Military Establishment as determined by the Secretary of Defense— is fairly clear to me. Mr. HOLIFIELD. All right. I wanted to bring that point out because I think that is important. We have had some objection voiced that this would give to the Administrator the authority to take over and actually prescribe the work of the 2,079 people who are in the Military Establishment as far as cataloging and making surveys and establishing and maintaining this Federal property catalog system and so forth is concerned. It is my opinion that he would not have that authority; that he could only function on a cooperative basis with the Military Defense Establishment. I want to be sure that that is the understanding between the two agencies here. Admiral RING. Mr. MacLeod seems to take a little bit different interpretation than I do, sir. It is my belief that those words mean exactly what you have just said. I am not speaking for anybody but myself in that regard, sir. Mr. HARVEY. Just following that on through, might it not also be logical to ask the Admiral that in the event of the passage of this act, including section 107, in your opinion the Administrator could not very logically go ahead and start on the same program that your committee within the Munitions Board has been carrying on, duplicating all this magnitude of work? Admiral RING. I see nothing to prevent his doing so, sir. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Nothing except congressional appropriations. Mr. HOLIFIELD. Which has prevented him from doing this job before. That is why the Military Establishment is doing it, because the Federal Bureau of Supply has not been given appropriations by Congress to do the job. I want to be careful in writing this legislation. I do not want to write legislation here which will not be sustained by the Congress with appropriations, nor do I want to write legislation that is going to duplicate what is being done. |