Mr. MONAGAN. Mr. Gray, there are two more points we might have asked about. First, would you have any comment on service charges? Mr. GRAY. As we indicated in our statement, at the request of the former chairman of this committee, Congressman McCormack, we undertook a comprehensive survey of the costs of distributing this property and the relationship of those costs to the service charges. We are in the final stages of preparing this for duplication. This will show by State what their total costs were and will break it down by the significant items of expense. It will show what their total income was from the service charges. It will reflect a very complete picture of their operations. We gave you the broad figure this morning. The coverage cost is less than 4 percent of acquisition cost on a national basis. (See p. 5.) Mr. MONAGAN. I recall that now. Mr. GRAY. We will deliver that complete report to you within the next 10 days, I would say. We think this is a very healthy thing. It is the first time anything like this has ever been undertaken so that you could make an across-the-board analysis of these costs.1 Mr. MONAGAN. We will await that analysis with a great deal of interest. On the question of regional distribution, do you have any comments that you would like to make in that connection as to any improvement that might be made in that area? Mr. GRAY. Well, as you know, our program operates as a component of the Department's regional offices, of which there are nine. To a large extent each regional representative controls the property that is allocated from within his region. We have two exceptions to that, one of long standing out on the west coast, where for allocation purposes we have combined two regions. One man or one office allocates all of the property over that area. We have a modified version of that same arrangement in regions 1 and 2, Boston-New York area. We find some advantage to that system. We have given serious consideration to extending it so that we might, for example, reduce the number of allocating offices. This might have a great deal of merit. However, when we made a study of it, it would be quite expensive for us to undertake it. This would involve moving a lot of people and their families from here to there, acquiring new office space, and all this. We estimated it would cost well over a quarter million dollars just to make these moves. We would have two problems: first, we are not at all sure our Appropriations Committee would ever appropriate that amount of money for that purpose and, second, we are not entirely sure that such an expenditure would be justified. I know that some of the State agency people have felt this would be a desirable move. We think it probably would be but we are faced with the problem of: Would it be worth what it would cost us to do it? Second, even if it would be, could we get the money to make it possible? Mr. MONAGAN. That would be a matter for administrative determination, with the cooperation of the Appropriations Committee. Mr. GRAY. That is correct. 1 See appendix 3, p. 107. Mr. MONAGAN. It is really not a legislative matter that this particular committee should be concerned with. Thank you very much. Mr. Walker, did you want to clarify your statement that you made this morning? Mr. WALKER. Yes, sir. Mr. MONAGAN. This is Mr. Wakefield Walker, president of the National Association of State Agencies for Surplus Property. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate this time you have given me to come back. With your permission, I would like to make a clarification dealing with a portion of the statement on 201(c), the exchange sale provisions. Although we stated that the implementation of the use of 201(c) of the act is approved on a 1-for-1 basis of like items, it was not necessarily our intent to indicate that the association endorsed the wholesale use of this provision. The National Association of State Agencies for Surplus Property believes it was the intent of Congress, and it is our feeling, that the exchange sale provision should be used in emergency cases only. We are interested in further Federal utilization of all Federal property. However, property is of much greater value to the Nation as a whole through the utilization by schools, hospitals, and civil defense than the small monetary return that you normally receive from the sale of property. For example, the sale of an 8- to 10-year-old vehicle or a sedan in particular would return somewhere in the neighborhood of $150 to $200. This sedan could be used as a driver training vehicle from 1 to 5 years. Our question there would be whether or not this small monetary return you would get from the sale of numerous vehicles would be greater than the utilization value by the students of the donee institutions. Further, it has been pointed out that many schools make excellent use of specialized equipment. We have numerous institutions in the secondary and primary levels which must rely upon basic scientific equipment and common use items in order to realize any benefit from the program. This is the type of property that would be disposed of under the implementation of the 201(c) section of the act. Due to the decline of common use items in the program, we feel that the wholesale implementation of 201(c) would certainly injure the program for health, education, and civil defense. Mr. Chairman, I believe that is the main thing I had to clarify. I think it was somewhat unsettled at the time. Mr. MONAGAN. In view of the statement of Secretary Riley that the Defense Department was reconsidering the decision and also was going to differentiate between vehicles that were practically ready for disposal as nonusable and those which might be subject to rehabilitation, would that not solve this problem to a large degree? Mr. WALKER. Of course, we are concerned with the disposal of any of the property under 201(c) because it may become useful to us in our program if it is made available. Mr. MONAGAN. This changed defense policy would make the problem a lot easier, would it not? Mr. WALKER. It would certainly make it easier, yes. Mr. MONAGAN. Thank you very much. Are there any questions? We now have these letters that were sent out to the various secretaries and administrators in connection with this hearing and their request to appear. If there is no objection, they will be made part of the record. (The letters referred to follow :) Hon. BERNARD L. BOUTIN, Administrator, General Services Administration, MARCH 22, 1962. DEAR MR. ADMINISTRATOR: The Special Donable Property Subcommittee of the Government Operations Committee will hold hearings beginning Tuesday, April 3, 1962, at 10 a.m., in room 1501-B, New House Office Building. The purpose of the hearing will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the present donable surplus property program as authorized by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, Public Law 81-152, as amended. Inasmuch as the General Services Administration has important responsibilities with respect to the donable surplus property program and administers the related Federal utilization program it would be helpful if you will testify at the hearing with respect to (a) problem areas, if any, in administering the program, and, (b) suggestions for improving the program. It will be appreciated if your prepared statement (50 copies) can be available for the subcommittee by April 2, 1962. Your staff may communicate with Ray Ward, staff administrator, room 502, George Washington Inn, phone Capitol 4-3121, extension 5220, concerning any additional details relating to the hearing. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. MONAGAN, Chairman. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, Washington, D.C., March 27, 1962. FRANK M. BREWSTER, Director of Vocational Education, Norfolk County Schools, DEAR MR. BREWSTER: The Special Subcommittee on Donable Property of the Government Operations Committee will hold hearings beginning Tuesday, April 3, 1962, at 10 a.m., in room 1501-B, New House Office Building. The purpose of the hearing will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the present donable surplus property program as authorized by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, Public Law 81-152, as amended. Since you have had a great deal of experience in using surplus property for educational pruposes it would be helpful if you could testify at the hearing with respect to your experiences with the program. It will be appreciated if your prepared statement (50 copies) can be available for the subcommittee by April 2, 1962. Your staff may communicate with Ray Ward, staff administrator, Room 502, George Washington Inn, telephone CApitol 4-3121, extension 5220, concerning any additional details relating to the hearing. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. MONAGAN, Chairman, Special Subcommittee on Donable Property. MARCH 23, 1962. Hon. FOWLER HAMILTON, Administrator, Agency for International Development, DEAR MR. ADMINISTRATOR: The Special Donable Property Subcommittee of the Government Operations Committee will hold hearings beginning Tuesday, April 3, 1962, at 10 a.m. in room 1501-B, New House Office Building. The purpose of the hearing will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the present donable surplus property program as authorized by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (Public Law 81-152), as amended. In view of the relationships of the AID program as authorized by section 608, Public Law 87-195, to the domestic donable surplus property program, it is desirable that you express your views thereon to the subcommittee and on any other matters of relevancy. It will be appreciated if your prepared statement (50 copies) is available for the subcommittee by April 2, 1962. Your staff may communicate with Ray Ward, staff administrator, room 502, George Washington Inn-phone, Capitol 4-3121; extension 5220-concerning any additional details relating to the hearing. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. MONAGAN, Chairman. MARCH 22, 1962. Hon. ROBERT S. MCNAMARA, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The Special Donable Property Subcommittee of the Government Operations Committee will hold hearings beginning Tuesday, April 3, 1962, at 10 a.m. in room 1501-B New House Office Building. The purpose of the hearing will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the present donable surplus property program as authorized by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, Public Law 81-152, as amended. The Department of Defense has important interests in the program from the point of view of the principal holding agency of surplus personal property, administrative agency for the civil defense program which utilizes surplus property, responsible agency for the donation of surplus property for such special-interest activities as military academies, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, etc. and the selling agency for residual surplus property. It will be helpful, therefore, if you will send a suitable witness or witnesses to testify at the hearing on the following point and such other points as you may deem appropriate: (a) Problem areas, if any, from Department of Defense viewpoint in administering the program. (b) Suggestions for improving the program. It will be appreciated if your prepared statement (50 copies) can be available for the subcommittee by April 2, 1962. Your staff may communicate with Ray Ward, staff administrator, room 502 George Washington Inn, phone Capitol 4-3121, extension 5220 concerning any additional details relating to the hearing. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. MONAGAN, Chairman. Hon. ABRAHAM A. RIBICOFF, Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, MARCH 22, 1962. DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The Special Donable Property Subcommittee of the Government Operations Committee will hold hearings beginning Tuesday, April 3, 1962, at 10 a.m., in room 1501-B, New House Office Building. The purpose of the hearing will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the present donable surplus property program as authorized by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, Public Law 81-152, as amended. Since the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare administers the program to a large extent, you are invited to be our first witness. It would be helpful if you will cover the following points: (a) Extent of donations by States since passage of Public Law 61 in 1955. (b) Benefits derived from program. (c) Problem areas in administering the program. (d) Suggestions for improving the program. It will be appreciated if your prepared statement (50 copies) can be available for the subcommittee by April 2, 1962. Your staff may communicate with Ray Ward, staff administrator, room 502, George Washington Inn, phone Capitol 4-3121, extension 5220, concerning any additional details relating to the hearing. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. MONAGAN, Chairman. WAKEFIELD B. WALKER, Manager, Property Utilization Section, Department of Finance and Administration, Salem, Oreg. MARCH 22, 1962. DEAR MR. WALKER: The Special Donable Property Subcommittee of the Government Operations Committee will hold hearings beginning Tuesday, April 3, 1962, at 10 a.m., in room 1501-B, New House Office Building. The purpose of the hearing will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the present donable surplus property program as authorized by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, Public Law 81-152, as amended. As president of the National Association of State Agencies for Surplus Property you are invited to testify on behalf of your national association, particularly on the following points: (a) Benefits to education, health, and civil defense donees. (b) Problem areas in administering the program from the States point of view. (c) Suggestions, if any, for improving the program. It will be appreciated if your prepared statement (50 copies), can be available for the subcommittee by April 2, 1962. Your staff may communicate with Ray Ward, staff administrator, room 502, George Washington Inn, phone Capitol 4-3121, extension 5220, concerning any additional details relating to the hearing. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. MONagan, Chairman. MARCH 26, 1962. Dr. ALAN S. WILSON, Vice Chancellor for Administration, DEAR MR. WILSON: The Special Donable Property Subcommittee of the Government Operations Committee will hold hearings beginning Tuesday, April 3, 1962, at 10 a.m. in room 1501-B, New House Office Building. The purpose of the hearing will be to evaluate the effectiveness of the present donable surplus property program as authorized by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, Public Law 81-152, as amended. It is the desire of the subcommittee to get some testimony from recipient institutions as to the effectiveness of the donable surplus property program. I understand that you have recently made a presentation of this nature and therefore I invite you to appear and express your views to the subcommittee. Your staff may communicate with Ray Ward, staff administrator, room 502, George Washington Inn, phone Capitol 4-3121, extension 5220, concerning any additional details relating to the hearing. Sincerely yours, JOHN S. MONAGAN, Chairman. Mr. MONAGAN. If there is nothing further, gentlemen, we certainly appreciate your cooperation. I believe we have been able to clarify some of the problems in this field. I am confident that it will be helpful to have this up-to-date record of the administration of these programs. I am sure that the committee has been educated difficult as that may seem. Thank you very much. (Whereupon, at 3:50 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.) |