Page images
PDF
EPUB

such an extent that we have 85 percent success with our boys compared to about 30 percent success in those boys sent to the State boys vocational school in Lansing. Our boy's farm is being assisted by another organization; namely, the Downtown Flint Optimist Club, which is an affiliate of Optimist International, whose slogan is, "Friend of the Boy." It either cooperates with other organizations or operates boys homes throughout the country.

These homes need assistance such as this bill will provide.

It is respectfully urged that you give favorable consideration to this worthy proposal before you.

(H. R. 13673 follows:)

[H. R. 13673, 85th Cong., 2d sess.]

A BILL To amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit donation of surplus property to volunteer fire-fighting organizations, and for other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) the first sentence of section 203 (j) (1) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U. S. C., sec. 484 (j) (1)) is amended to read as follows: "Under such regulations as he may prescribe, the Administrator is authorized in his discretion to donate without cost (except for direct costs of care and handling) for use in any State for purposes of education, public health, or civil defense, or for research for any such purpose, or for the purpose of aiding in the protection of life and property by volunteer fire-fighting organizations, any equipment, materials, books, or other supplies (including those capitalized in a working capital or similar fund) under the control of any executive agency which shall have been determined to be surplus property and which shall have been determined under paragraph (2), (3), or (4) of this subsection to be usuable and necessary for any such purpose."

(b) The last sentence of section 203 (j) (1) of such Act is amended by inserting before the period at the end thereof the following: ", except that notwithstanding a State agency is not designated under State law for the purpose of distributing property for use by volunteer fire-fighting organizations, such property may be transferred to such State agency for use for purposes of education, public health, or civil defense, or for research for any such purpose".

SEC. 2 (a) The first sentence of section 203 (j) (3) of such Act (40 U. S. C., sec. 484 (j) (3)) is amended to read as follows: "Determination whether such surplus property (except surplus property allocated in conformity with paragraph (2) of this subsection) is usuable and necessary for purposes of education or public health, or for research for any such purpose, or for the purpose of aiding in the protection of life and property by volunteer fire-fighting organizations, in any State shall be made by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, who shall allocate such property on the basis of needs and utilization for transfer by the Administrator to such State agency for distribution to (A) tax-supported medical institutions, hospitals, clinics, health centers, school systems, schools, colleges, and universities, (B) other nonprofit medical institutions, hospitals, clinics, health centers, schools, colleges and universities which are exempt from taxation under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or (C) to any incorporated or unincorporated volunteer fire department, fire company, or other smaller fire-fighting organization which is tax-supported or has been held exempt from taxation under section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954."

(b) The second sentence of section 203 (j) (3) is amended by inserting "or for the purpose of aiding in the protection of life and property by volunteer firefighting organizations in the State," after "in the State,".

SEC. 3. Section 203 (k) (2) of such Act (40 U. S. C., sec. 484 (k)) is amended by striking out "or" at the end of clause (D), by striking out the comma at the end of clause (E) and inserting in lieu thereof "; or", and by inserting immediately after clause (E) the following new clause:

66

'(F) the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, through such officers or employees of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare as he may designate, in the case of property transferred pursuant to this Act to volunteer fire-fighting organizations for aiding in the protection of life and property by such organizations,".

SEC. 4. Section 203 (o) of such Act (40 U. S. C., sec. 484 (n)) is amended by inserting "or volunteer fire-fighting organizations" after "educational or public health institutions".

APPENDIX-REPORTS FROM GOVERNMENT

AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS

EXHIBIT 1-REPLIES FROM THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., March 22, 1957.

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for a report on H. R. 242, a bill to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation of surplus property to certain community organizations.

We believe it inadvisable to enlarge the number of organizations or purposes for which surplus property may be donated. You may recall that the Government has had very unsatisfactory experience in the past under statutes authorizing donations for many different purposes. In 1949 those statutes were repealed because it had been found that the numerous claimants caused surplus property to remain in warehouses at Government expense for long periods, sometimes even for years, while first one group and then another examined the lists of available surplus. In the end, most of the property was not wanted by any group and had to be sold. In such instances the losses due to damage and deterioration of stock and the added costs of warehouse space, care, and handling, and administration seemed unjustified. The laws were repealed in order to speed up, simplify, and make less costly the task of surplus property disposal. We have therefore generally opposed bills proposing to expand the donation program to include such purposes and institutions as mosquito control districts, municipal water and gas systems, 4-H Clubs, municipal governments, and scientific and research organizations. For the same reasons we oppose extending the program to certain community organizations as proposed in H. R. 242. We have not questioned the worthiness of these purposes but have recommended to your committee and to the Senate Committee on Government Operations that, in view of the serious administrative difficulties involved, any further expansion of the donation program should be supported only for major purposes which are compelling in the national interest, and which are not primarily local responsibilities.

Sincerely yours,

PERCIVAL F. Brundage, Director.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., July 24, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for a report on H. R. 737, a bill to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the disposal of certain surplus property to State defense forces. The bill would authorize the donation to State defense forces of surplus equipment, uniforms, clothing, materials, and other supplies which are determined by the Secretary of Defense to be usable and necessary for such purposes, and would authorize the Secretary of Defense to allocate such property for transfer by the Administrator of General Services.

30975-58-6

75

State defense forces, as such, are not now eligible to receive donable property. However, it may be possible under certain conditions for such forces to receive property from State agencies established to distribute property donated by the Administrator of General Services. The Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended by Public Law 655, 84th Congress, authorizes the donation of property for use in any State for purposes of education, public health or civil defense, or for research for such purposes. States are authorized to organize and maintain State defense forces and to use these forces for purposes deemed necessary by the State chief executives. If these forces are employed for purposes for which property is donated, eligibility could then be established for available property determined to be usable and necessary for such purposes.

H. R. 737 would broaden the existing program to include State defense forces regardless of the purposes for which such forces may be used, and would necessarily increase operating costs and impede the orderly disposal of surplus property. You may recall that the Government had very unsatisfactory experience in the past under statutes authorizing donations for many different organizations and purposes. In 1949, these statutes were repealed because it had been found that numerous claimants caused surplus property to remain in warehouses at Government expense for long periods, sometimes even for years, while first one group and then another examined the list of available surplus. In the end most of the property was not wanted by any group and had to be sold. In such instances the losses due to damage and deterioration of stock and the added costs of warehouse space, care and handling, and administration seemed unjustified. The laws were repealed in order to speed up, simplify, and make less costly the task of surplus property disposal.

We have generally opposed bills to enlarge the donation program because they would increase the delays and difficulties of surplus property disposal. We believe that H. R. 737 would bring about a repetition of some of the difficulties experienced prior to 1949, and for these reasons should not be enacted into law. Sincerely yours,

PERCIVAL F. BRUNDAGE, Director.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., April 4, 1957.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for a report on H. R. 543, a bill to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation and other disposal of property to tax-supported public recreation agencies. Property involved in this amendment includes both personal and real.

In regard to personal property, we believe it inadvisable to enlarge the number of organizations or purposes for which such property may be donated. You may recall that the Government has had very unsatisfactory experience in the past under statutes authorizing donations for many different purposes. In 1949 those statutes were repealed, because it had been found that the numerous claimants caused surplus property to remain in warehouses at Government expense for long periods, sometimes even for years, while first one group and then another examined the lists of available surplus. In the end, most of the property was not wanted by any group and had to be sold. In such instances, the losses due to damage and deterioration of stocks and the added costs of warehouse space, care, and handling, and administration seemed unjustified. The laws were repealed in order to speed up, simplify, and make less costly the task of surplus property disposal. We have, therefore, generally opposed bills proposing to expand the donation program to include such purposes and institutions as mosquito-control districts, 4-H Clubs, volunteer fire departments and rescue squads, municipal gas, water and sewer systems, scientific research institutions and for general maintenance of cities and towns. For the same reasons we oppose extending the program to public recreation agencies.

In the case of real property, other considerations are involved. For various reasons dictated by national interests and programs, the United States owns a considerable amount of real property in certain areas and very little or none in others. Since surplus real property is not transportable, in contrast to personal

property, which can be evenly distributed throughout the country, those States or political subdivisions in which little or no real property is located are at a distinct disadvantage in obtaining an equal share of the benefits to be derived from disposals. As you know, the Surplus Property Act of 1949, as amended, provides that real property determined by the Secretary of the Interior to be suitable for park or recreational purposes may be sold to States and political subdivisions for 50 percent of its fair value. We believe that this arrangement should be continued, since it provides for a reasonable distribution of benefits derived from surplus real property disposal programs.

We do not question the worthiness of these purposes but hesitate to expand existing programs. This position, in part, grows out of the difficulties described above and, in part, is attributable to a belief that any further expansion of existing programs should be supported only for major purposes which are compelling in the national interest, and which are not primarily local responsibilities. Sincerely yours,

PERCIVAL F. Brundage, Director.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,

Washington, D. C., March 22, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for a report on H. R. 2504, a bill to provide that Government surplus property may be donated to 4-H Clubs for the construction, equipment, and operation of camps and centers.

We believe it inadvisable to enlarge the number of organizations or purposes for which surplus property may be donated. You may recall that the Government has had very unsatisfactory experience in the past under statutes authorizing donations for many different purposes. In 1949 those statutes were repealed because it had been found that the numerous claimants caused surplus property to remain in warehouses at Government expense for long periods, sometimes even for years, while first one group and then another examined the lists of available surplus. In the end, most of the property was not wanted by any group and had to be sold. In such instances, the losses due to damage and deterioration of stock and the added costs of warehouse space, care and handling, and administration seemed unjustified. The laws were repealed in order to speed up, simplify, and make less costly the task of surplus-property disposal. We have, therefore, generally opposed bills proposing to expand the donation program to include such purposes and institutions as mosquito-control districts, publicly owned water and sewer districts, municipal governments, fire-fighting organizations, and scientific and research organizations. For the same reasons, we oppose extending the program to 4-H Clubs as proposed in H. R. 2504.

We have not questioned the worthiness of these purposes, but have recommended to your committee and to the Senate Committee on Government Operations that, in view of the serious administrative difficulties involved, any further expansion of the donation program should be supported only for major purposes which are compelling in the national interest, and which are not primarily local responsibilities.

Sincerely yours,

PERCIVAL F. Brundage, Director.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., March 22, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for reports on H. R. 2552 and H. R. 3406, identical bills to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation of surplus property to volunteer fire-fighting organizations.

« PreviousContinue »