Page images
PDF
EPUB

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., March 26, 1958.

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. 105789, a bill to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation and other disposal of property to taxsupported 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. The Government has had very unsatisfactory experience in the past under statutes authorizing donations for many different purposes. In 1949 most of these statutes were repealed because it had been found that the numerous claimants caused surplus property to remain in warehouses at Government expense for long periods, sometimes even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 The laws were repealed in order to speed up, simplify, and make less costly the task of surplus property disposal. For these reasons, we have 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 and research organizations, and for general maintenance of cities and towns. For the same reasons we would oppose extending the program to include 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 distributed throughout the country, those States or political subdivisions in which little or no Government-owned real property is located are at a distinct disadvantage in obtaining an equal share of the benefits to be derived from disposals. The Surplus Property Act of 1944, 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. For the above reasons we would oppose enactment of H. R. 10789.

Sincerely yours,

MAURICE H. STANS, Director.

EXHIBIT 2-REPLIES FROM THE FEDERAL CIVIL DEFENSE ADMINISTRATION
FEDERAL CIVIL DEFENSE ADMINISTRATION,
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR,
Washington, D. C., May 9, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

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

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for a report on H. R. 4107 and H. R. 6316, 85th Congress, similar bills to amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation of surplus property to volunteer fire-fighting organizations, volunteer reserve services, squads, and first-aid crews.

H. R. 4107 and H. R. 6316 are similar to H. R. 10839 which was introduced in the 84th Congress before section 203 (j) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 was amended by Public Law 655, 84th Congress. (H. R. 10839 was pending in the Committee on Government Operations at the close of the 84th Cong.)

Public Law 655 authorizes the donation of surplus property for civil defense purposes and permits donations to the State agency designated for the purpose of distributing allocated property (act of July 3, 1956; 40 U. S. C., sec. 484 (j). Since the enactment of Public Law 655, therefore, surplus property may be donated to the States and used by volunteer fire-fighting crews, volunteer reserve services, squads, and first-aid crews, if these groups are integrated into civil defense, have an assigned mission in the civil defense plan, and use the donated property for civil defense purposes. The proposed bill, however, would authorize the donation of surplus property for the day-to-day operations of the aforementioned groups.

Public Law 971, 84th Congress, extended the authority of the General Services Administration to negotiate the sale of surplus property (40 U. S. C., sec. 484 (e); 70 Stat. 918). At the time of the hearings on Public Law 971, there was testimony that the General Services Administration continued to be in need of such legislation because some State and municipal governments cannot participate in the sale of surplus property for the reason that local law will not allow them to enter competitive bidding (pp. 60 and 61 of the hearings before the Subcommittee on Reorganization of the Senate Committee on Government Operations, 84th Cong., 2d sess., with regard to S. 3693, S. 1527, H. R. 7227, and H. R. 7855). Thus, one of the reasons for extending GSA's authority to negotiate the sale of surplus property was to make surplus property available for purchase by such groups as those mentioned in the proposed legislation. They can purchase surplus property through negotiation within the framework of the regulations promulgated by GSA under Public Law 971 whether or not they qualify under the civil defense program.

If surplus property were donated for the purposes of the proposed bills, the Federal Government would incur heavy administrative expenses. As we visualize the operation under the proposed authority, the additional donees would, of necessity, require the establishment of a system of priorities. The Federal Government would set up minimum standards for eligibility and would require the designation of a single State agency to receive the property. This would be a tremendous task because of the many groups that would be eligible all over the United States. In the past, a system of priorities has proved to be virtually unworkable. The Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government (Hoover Commission), in its report on surplus property, recognized that "the inclusion of other donees, such as cities and counties, would pose complex problems of determining priorities" (p. 45). From the standpoint of economy and better property management, we are of the opinion that the requirements of the aforementioned groups can be much better met by the sale of surplus property under the procedures of the General Services Administration. One final point is worth mentioning. The bills, as drafted, do not take into consideration the provisions of Public Law 655 and would, if enacted, repeal that law. We doubt whether this is the intention behind the proposed legislation because it was originally drafted before the enactment of Public Law 655 and, at that time, it was intended to authorize an additional donation authority rather than to repeal authorities already granted. Consequently, if these bills are to be considered by the Congress, they should be revised so as not to repeal the provisions of Public Law 655.

For the reasons above stated, this Administration opposes the enactment of H. R. 4107 and H. R. 6316.

Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this report.

Sincerely,

VAL PETERSON.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

FEDERAL CIVIL DEFENSE ADMINISTRATION,

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS,
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR,
Battle Creek, Mich., October 18, 1957.

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request for a report on H. R. 6537, 85th Congress, a bill to authorize the disposition of certain obsolete and excess property to the United States Volunteer Life Saving Corps.

H. R. 6537 would authorize the sale and donation of certain obsolete, excess, and other property by the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and the Commander of the Coast Guard to the United States Volunteer Life Saving Corps. The United States Volunteer Life Saving Corps is a corporation which was organized in 1870. It has its principal office in New York City. It consists of volunteer crews of lifesavers and boatmen for every important place where people congregate along the waterways in the State of New York and in other parts of the United States where there is no supervision. They assist in rescue work during hurricanes.

As drafted, there is no provision in the bill requiring that such property first be determined surplus to the needs of all Federal agencies in accordance with the provisions of Public Law 152, 81st Congress, as amended. In addition, no standards are set forth as to the types of property which would be made available for donation or sale. As we interpret the proposed legislation, the determination that property is usable and necessary for the United States Volunteer Life Saving Corps would be the responsibility of the respective Secretaries of the services and of the Coast Guard Commandant.

The control of the donation of personal property under the provisions of the proposed legislation would be entirely outside of the Federal Civil Defense Administration. The determination of usability and need by the service Secretaries and the Coast Guard Commandant would serve to add an additional "specialinterest group" and would result in increased direct donations by the Coast Guard and Department of Defense holding agencies. Such legislation would only add to the difficulty of administering the donation program and would extend and broaden the surplus personal property program beyond the concept of donations through a single State agency as provided under Public Law 655, 84th Congress.

For the foregoing reasons, the Federal Civil Defense Administration opposes the enactment of H. R. 6537.

Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this report.

Sincerely,

L. E. BERRY (For Leo A. Hoegh).

EXHIBIT 3-REPLIES FROM THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE
COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, February 6, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

House of Representatives.

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your letter of January 16, 1957, requesting our comments on H. R. 242.

The bill would amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation of surplus property to volunteer fire departments and volunteer rescue or lifesaving squads. We have no direct knowledge of the need of such organizations for surplus property of the Government, nor of the type, value, or quantity of such surplus property which might be used by those organizations. Therefore, we are not in a position to make a recommendation as to the merits of the bill. We note that this bill is one of several which have been introduced to permit donations for purposes not presently authorized by existing law. Such bills would authorize donations to 4-H clubs, youth camps and centers, and similar organizations.

We suggest, therefore, that if legislation to permit donations for such public purposes is deemed necessary or desirable consideration should be given to enacting general legislation rather than legislation on an individual basis.

Sincerely yours,

JOSEPH CAMPBELL,

Comptroller General of the United States.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, January 30, 1957.

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your letter of January 16, 1957, acknowledged January 17, requesting our comments on H. R. 543, 85th Congress, 1st session, entitled "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."

The need or desirability of the proposed legislation is not a matter on which we have any special information and, consequently, we are not in a position to make any recommendation as to the merits of the bill. We have noticed, however, that a number of bills have been introduced to permit donations of surplus property for purposes not presently authorized by law. Such bills would authorize donations to volunteer fire-fighting organizations, volunteer rescue squads, civilian defense organizations of the States, 4-H Clubs, and youth camps and centers.

In view of the number and types of organizations we suggest that consideration be given to the advisability of enacting general legislation on the subject rather than legislation on an individual basis.

Sincerely yours,

JOSEPH CAMPBELL,

Comptroller General of the United States.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, January 31, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your letter of January 16, 1957, requesting a report on H. R. 737.

The bill would amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, to permit disposal of certain surplus property to State defense forces. We have no direct knowledge of the need of the various State defense forces for the type of equipment proposed to be donated to them by the bill nor do we have any information as to the value or quantity of such surplus property which might be used by those organizations. We are not in a position, therefore, to make a recommendation concerning the merits of the bill. We note that H. R. 737 is one of several bills which have been introduced to extend the surplus property donation program. Such bills would authorize donations to volunteer fire departments, volunteer rescue squads, civilian defense organizations of the States and youth camps and centers. We believe, therefore, that consideration should be given to enacting general legislation rather than legislation on an individual basis.

If the bill is given favorable consideration it appears that the statute citation on pages 1 and 2 should be 69th Statutes at Large, page 686, rather than 64th Statutes at Large, page 1072. Also, it appears that the word "sentence" should be substituted for the word "section" following the word “first” in line 5, page 2, of the bill.

Sincerely yours,

JOSEPH CAMPBELL,

Comptroller General of the United States.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, January 28, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your letter of January 17, 1957, requesting a report concerning H. R. 2504, which would provide for the

donation of surplus Government property to 4-H clubs for the construction, equipment, and operation of camps and centers.

The need or desirability of the proposed legislation is not a matter on which we have any special information and, consequently, we are not in a position to make any recommendation as to the merits of the bill. We have noticed, however, that a number of bills have been introduced to permit donations of surplus property for purposes not presently authorized by existing law. Such bills would authorize donations to volunteer fire-fighting organizations, civilian defense organizations of the States, and youth camps and centers. In view of the number and types of organizations under consideration in those bills, we believe that general rather than individual legislation might be a preferable means of amending existing law.

Sincerely yours,

JOSEPH CAMPBELL, Comptroller General of the United States.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED States.

Washington, February 11, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your letter of February 1, 1957, requesting any comments we may care to offer on H. R. 4007.

The bill would amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation of surplus property to publicly owned water districts and publicly owned sewer districts. We have no direct knowledge of the need of such organizations for surplus property of the Government, nor of the type, value, or quantity of such surplus property which might be used by those agencies. We are not in a position, therefore, to make a recommendation as to the merits of the bill. However, we note that this bill is one of several which have been introduced to increase the scope of the donation program. There have been proposals to permit donations of surplus property for such purposes as volunteer rescue or life-saving squads, volunteer fire departments, and similar organizations.

We believe that, if legislation to permit donations for such public purposes is deemed necessary or desirable, consideration should be given to enacting general legislation rather than legislation on an individual basis.

Sincerely yours,

JOSEPH CAMPBELL, Comptroller General of the United States.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, February 13, 1957.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your letter of February 4, 1957, requesting a report on H. R. 4107.

The bill would amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 to permit the donation of surplus property to volunteer fire-fighting organizations, volunteer reserve services, squads, and first-aid crews. We have no direct knowledge of the need of those organizations for surplus property of the United States, nor of the type, value, or quantity of such surplus property which might be used by those organizations. Therefore, we are not in a position to make a recommendation as to the merits of the bill. We should like to point out, however, that recently several bills have been introduced which would permit the donation of surplus property to similar public organizations. While we do not question the worthiness of such bills, we believe that, if such legislation is deemed necessary or desirable, the enactment of general legislation is preferable to the enactment of legislation on an individual basis.

If the bill is favorably considered, it is believed that it should be redrafted since, apparently, consideration was not given to the recent amendments made to sec

« PreviousContinue »