Food Preparation Equipment--- Knives, Ladles, Kitchen Hardware

1 Use of term "Army Type" does not exclude equipment of other branches of service.

1 Use of term "Army Type" does not exclude equipment of other branches of service.

PLUMBING AND HEATING EQUIPMENT, PIPE, TUBING, ETC.

Mr. AITKEN. Now, whether these these same kinds of items would be necessary for HEW I don't know, sir, at this moment.

Senator KENNEDY. Have you had any conversations with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare about it? Under the bill before this subcommittee now, unlike the bill in the House, you have priority over HEW.

Mr. MANNING. Senator, if I may speak of this bill before the subcommittee at the present time; it does not establish a priority, nor do we expect to be competing with the Department of HEW in their education and health program in the acquisition of property for civil-defense purposes.

We expect these questions to be resolved at the local level upon a determination between the State surplus property disposal officers,

the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the Department of Civil Defense at the same level as to who has the greatest need for the property.

If the Health and Education reasons for the disposal of the property seem to override civil-defense reasons, then the resolution of that problem will be made at the State level, and there will be no competition for other property within the State.

Senator KENNEDY. But actually there is a difference between the House and the Senate bill.

Mr. MANNING. There is, sir, in that the House bill did establish a priority for the Federal Civil Defense Administration and we object to that priority, we don't wish to be in that position.

Senator KENNEDY. Senator Malone suggested that what HEW will not have, and what you do not want, Soil Conservation would like to have.

Looking at it generally, do you feel that much will go through your hands that will be available for further use by other agencies such as Soil Conservation?

Mr. MANNING. Quite frankly, sir, we have not had the opportunity to examine it. We would prefer to defer comment.

Senator KENNEDY. What about the $2,500 limitation? I have heard from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be comparatively few items that figure, and therefore we might consider lowering it. Do you have any views on that?

Mr. MANNING. We presented our views to the subcommittee under date of February 23 on the amendment in the nature of a substitute. All we wish to do is to call to the Congress' attention that perhaps the same factors that led to the establishment of the $2,500 minimum for educational and health purposes do not apply to civil-defense purposes. However, sir, at the present time we do not have an experience table upon which to base what a satisfactory substitute for that minimum would be, and we have no real objection to the $2,500 being used for civil-defense purposes if the subcommittee and the Congress understand the problem; and if at the same time an experience table indicates that we should have a lower figure, then we would expect to come back to the Congress for a revision of that figure, should it prove necessary.

Senator KENNEDY. After we talk with the Bureau of the Budget we can find out whether they feel that it is essential.

In turning this property over to the State for civil-defense use what happens to the title? Do you keep the title on all items of all value that you turn over to the State civil-defense units, as you understand it?

Mr. MANNING. No, Senator. The title goes to the State.
Senator KENNEDY. You get no compensation for any of that?

Mr. MANNING. No; we do not.

Senator KENNEDY. It just passes through your hands?

Mr. MANNING. We are a conduit of title, that is all.

Senator KENNEDY. And you assign the priorities as to which States

will receive it, based upon

Mr. MANNING. The civil-defense needs and the civil-defense plan of the State.

Senator KENNEDY. As I understand it, the Federal Civil Defense Administrator reported that the Civil Defense Administration would suggest and recommend where the State, political subdivision, or instrumentality disposes of equipment donated under the proposed authority, the requirement be placed upon such State or political subdivision or instrumentality making the disposal that the proceeds be held to the use and benefit of the civil-defense program or such other program as provided by the Federal Civil Defense Administrator, and that expenditures of the proceeds be made only upon receipt of approval by the Administrator?

Mr. MANNING. That is correct. The benefit would still accrue or inure to the State. However, the funds received from a disposal under the program for civil defense purposes would be retained for the furtherance of the civil-defense program in the State.

Senator KENNEDY. Under your direction or the State's direction? Mr. MANNING. Based upon the plan in the State, subject to our approval.

Senator KENNEDY. But you would have the ultimate control?

Mr. MANNING. The discretion would be vested in the administrator, should the proposal be adopted.

Senator KENNEDY. Should the State board want to do something and you don't want them to do it, who would have the say?

Mr. MANNING. We would have the say, should that proposal be affirmed by the Congress.

Senator KENNEDY. Thank you.

Mr. SHRIVER. Mr. Manning, there was a question raised the other day regarding subparagraph 4, page 4 of this bill, regarding minimum standards. The question was raised as to whether there would be 1 set of standards for all 3 donees or 2 sets of standards.

What is you view on that?

Mr. MANNING. There would be only one set of standards, unless there were some overriding civil defense considerations which should go into the set of minimum standards.

However, we expect to utilize those standards already established by HEW on the problem of disposal. I see at the present time nothing further which we would put in from a civil- defense standpoint.

However, we would like to reserve the right to take a look at it to determine whether or not from the civil defense standpoint there would be additional factors. And there may even be perhaps some standards from a civil-defense standpoint that may be waived on the current minimum standards.

Senator KENNEDY. Thank you very much.

Next is the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Mr. Chester Lund, Director of Field Administration; accompanied by Mr. Mr. Willis T. Frazier, Chief, Surplus Property Utilization Division; Mr. Manuel B. Hiller, attorney-adviser, Office of General Counsel; and Mr. Theodore Ellenbogen, legislative attorney, Office of General Counsel.