committee which has been set up under a grant from the Carnegie Endowment and the Ford Foundation to try to get back to a basic policy of assignment of people to Washington jobs on the basis of their demonstrated capacity and merit, hopefully with some less demand thereby for Foreign Service officers.

TOURS OF DUTY ABROAD

We are also working to lengthen the tours of duty abroad. We have a new tour of duty policy which, when fully implemented, although still flexible, will tend to lengthen tours of duty and perhaps fairly substantially to cut down on transfer and travel costs.

In some part, this will help also on the home leave thing, because under authorizations of the last Congress, it will be possible for us to give people paid leave overseas away from hardship posts.

TRAINING PROGRAM

We have been taking a hard look at the whole program of training which the Department has and I think, after the Herter committee reports next year, we will be able to come forward with not only very specifically spelled out criteria as to what we envisage our training programs to encompass, but also with some rather specific plans for the Foreign Service Institute itself.

ESTIMATED SAVINGS

A number of little administrative things we have been able to do have effected some savings which, again, unfortunately we cannot say to you are reflected in the budget that is before you, by reason of the figures the chairman read at the beginning. One of the items the committee knows of is the fact that we have reversed a general policy of using first-class travel by air for crossing the North Atlantic. Our estimate of what this would save us has turned out to be fairly precise, approximately $300,000 a year.

But every nickel of that has gone into other needs we simply had to meet.

UNEXPECTED SITUATIONS

Now, if I may, Mr. Chairman, I do not want to go on at great length, but I would like to indicate to the committee the great difficulty at the administrative level which we have in attempting to find resources to meet the unexpected situation.

In this last year, for example, so far as Mr. Crockett and I can analyze the figures-and I cannot be critical of the bureaus concerned with this-there was not built into their program enough money to take care of things like the Congo operation, like the renewed crises in Laos, Vietnam, the avoidance of other crises at least for the moment in other parts of the world, the long-drawn-out negotiations at Geneva on the test ban treaty, which had not been contemplated with very substantial increased costs of travel.

Then we have the OECD Common Market activities which came into focus more rapidly than had been anticipated, with extra demands for money there.

We also had the Cuban refugee influx, although we met this by shifting people around.

Nevertheless, it did involve small dabs of money for travel, for inspection activities, for coordination, for cooperation with other agencies of the sort that, although any one of them is small in itself, it all adds very materially to the costs.

We could have, of course, and have in the past, tried to reflect these as early as possible to the Congress through a request for supplemental appropriations. However, to a certain extent this is self-defeating because, in the meantime, you have had to meet the situation. You have had to take the money from somewhere else and you never know how much the Bureau of the Budget will accept of your justifications or how much the Congress will feel you have made a case for in the way of supplemental appropriations.

Mr. Chairman, all of our efforts have been directed primarily to getting the kind of administrative setup that would enable us at any given time to know how much resources we had, who has them under his control, and where the leeway is for readjustment of those to fit the rapidly moving situations we find all over the world every time we turn around.

I think that is all, in a general way, that I want to say, Mr. Chair man, and I would be very happy to answer any questions the committee may have.

However, I may not be able to answer detailed questions with respect to the entire content of both books here, but Mr. Crockett is here and other witnesses will be before you and we will do our best to answer anything the committee wants to know.

INCREASE IN NUMBER OF POSITIONS, 1961, 1962, AND 1963

Mr. ROONEY. Under "Salaries and expenses," how many positions are you requesting the coming fiscal year?

Mr. JONES. The total number of positions under "Salaries and expenses" for the next fiscal year is 13,955.

Mr. ROONEY. How many do you have in the current fiscal year? Mr. JONES. The figure for the current fiscal year is approximately the same.

Mr. ROONEY. No; it is not.

Mr. JONES. It is 23 greater; 13,978, if I recall correctly.

Mr. ROONEY. How many do you have on the rolls as of the last available date?

Mr. JONES. Under "Salaries and expenses"?

Mr. ROONEY. Yes.

Mr. JONES. I think the last date we have figures on that is for December 31, is it not?

Mr. LEWIS. We have figures as of January 31. The employment is 9,162.

Mr. JONES. No.

Mr. ROONEY. That cannot be.

Mr. JONES. That does not take into account a number of other things.

I do not have my figures on that. I do not have the December 31 figures with me.

Mr. LEWIS. I am sorry; I gave you the American figure and you have to add the locals to it.

Mr. ROONEY. What is the total figure?

Mr. LEWIS. 13,781, this includes 4,619 locals employed as of December 31, 1961, the latest data available.

Mr. ROONEY. How many did you have in fiscal 1961?

Mr. JONES. 14,200; I think.

Mr. LEWIS. Actual employment or positions?

Mr. ROONEY. Number of positions.

Mr. JONES. I do not have that employment table with me, Mr. Chairman. I apologize.

Mr. CROCKETT. The figure is 13,804 for 1961, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROONEY. How many new positions did you request for the present year, 1962?

You had 13,804 in 1961; right?

Mr. CROCKETT. 13,804 is the position figure, for 1961; yes, sir.
Mr. ROONEY. How many did you request for 1962?

Mr. CROCKETT. We requested an increase of 651, Mr. Chairman, in the regular budget.

Mr. ROONEY. How many new positions did you actually establish for 1962?

Mr. CROCKETT. We established 174, Mr. Chairman.

COST OF ANNUALIZATION

Mr. ROONEY. How much did you indicate last year that it would cost to annualize all of the requested new positions?

Mr. CROCKETT. $3,907,132, according to the figures submitted last year to this committee. However, this included $2 million annualization costs of the cryptographic program.

That did not include annualization for anything included in the supplemental or the budget amendment. When these are considered the annualization would have been only $1,989,110.

Mr. ROONEY. How much are you requesting in this budget for the so-called annualization?

Mr. CROCKETT. $1,085,844.

Mr. ROONEY. How much was your 1962 appropriation increased over the total you received for 1961?

Mr. JONES. 1962 over 1961?

Mr. ROONEY. Yes; 1962 over 1961.

Mr. CROCKETT. $10,700,000 considering the nonrecurring items. Mr. ROONEY. As you indicated yesterday, this increase of $10.7 million or the number of position increases which totaled $10.7 million, were not used in accordance with the request, and for the purposes submitted to both Houses of Congress; is that right?

Mr. JONES. Yes, sir.

The distribution of the $10.7 million was different, sir.

PROGRAM INCREASES REQUESTED, APPROPRIATED AND ALLOTTED

Mr. ROONEY. We shall at this point insert in the record a statement with regard to salaries and expenses, 1962, program increases requested, appropriated, and allotted.

(The statement follows:)

SALARIES AND EXPENSES, 1962

Program increases requested, appropriated, and allotted

Less Foreign Service retirement included 1962 but excluded in 1961.
All nonrecurring costs in 1961..

Net increase available 1962.

Estimated
funding

Program increases

Requested allowed in

appropriation

$135. 2 -125.3

9.9

-2.6

+3.4

10.7

Amount distrib

Distribu- uted comtion by De-pared with partment estimate

appropriated

Mr. ROONEY. This statement which has just been inserted at this point in the record was prepared by you folks, was it not?

Mr. CROCKETT. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. Do you have a later table than this?

Mr. CROCKETT. Mr. Chairman, there are some items that are not on that table that have been added since its preparation.

Mr. ROONEY. Unbudgeted items?

Mr. CROCK

Mr. Ro cost to a Mr.

last ye nuali

aid?

nge rate

ne, and travel__

had to take out

of home leg

to do so.

nal table

nome leave

PPLEMENTAL FOR FISCAL YEAR 1962

$0.2

1

1

4

.5

3

1.6

Chairman, might I add one thing to what Mr.

EY. Go ahead.

NES. The items to which Mr. Crockett has just referred are, in very substantial part, included in the supplemental approMr. ROONEY. Congress has never taken any action on that request? on request now pending. Mr. ROONEY. You used these funds appropriated for specific purtable which we have inserted in the record. pose for an entirely different purpose? This is apparent from the

T

sur

th

Mr.

JONES. No, sir.

Mr. JONES. That is correct.

UNDER SECRETARY'S CONFERENCES

Mr. ROONEY. For instance, Under Secretary's Conference, that was Mr. Bowles' conferences?

Mr. JONES. That is correct.

Mr. ROONEY. That cost how many dollars; I think it was indicated yesterday that $300,000 was only the downpayment on the cost of these conferences, but what was the total cost?

Mr. JONES. There is an additional cost of approximately $260,000. Mr. ROONEY. It cost almost $600,000 to have a couple of conferences?

Mr. JONES. It would be a total of four or five to date.

Mr. ROONEY. What came out of these conferences, if anything? Mr. JONES. I have not attended any of these, sir. I can only report to you what my superiors think have come out of this.