of them completely because in some instances the information is not available in the Commission.

Question 1: Under section 101 (b) of Executive Order 10182 to what extent have consultants and experts been employed in other capacities? Section 101 (b) of Executive Order 10182 authorizes the appointment of experts and consultants with per diem compensation. Since the present administration came into office only three cases have been found where persons appointed under this section were serving in operating capacities. One of these occurred in the Defense Transport Administration and two in the Small Business Administration. All three were corrected voluntarily when called to the agencies' attention by the Civil Service Commission.

This was not always the case. In prior years there have been many violations reported by previous commissions to the President. The general trend in the number of violations has been sharply downward from the time of the first report in 1951 to the present.

Question 2: Have appointments under section 101 (a) of Executive Order 10182 been appropriately and properly certified?

The answer to this question, Mr. Chairman, is "Yes." Section 101 (a) of Executive Order 10182 authorizes the appointment of persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation. Surveys conducted by the present Commission have found only three cases in which the required certificates were not made. These were errors and all were corrected immediately by the agencies.

The CHAIRMAN. So that the only investigation you made is as to whether or not a certificate had been filed?

Mr. YOUNG. That is correct. And in all 3 cases they were the result of error and were conducted immediately by the agencies in those 3 cases.

Question 3: What steps have been taken by delegate agencies, including the Business and Defense Services Administration, to assure that in appointments pursuant to section 101 (a), "conflict between governmental duties and private interests of such personnel" will be avoided? Have these steps been effective? To what extent have WOC personnel been placed in positions revealing a conflict between Government duties and private interests? Have abuses arisen therefrom?

As I stated earlier, Mr. Chairman, copies of the report transmitted to the President in February 1952, which included the steps taken by each agency at that time to avoid conflict of interests have previously been made available to this subcommittee.

We have made a quick check with agencies employing WOC personnel under Executive Order 10182 and find that the steps taken today are substantially the same as those taken in 1952.

I suppose a specific example of the type of steps which are taken by the agency to prevent this conflict of interest will be found in the regulations of the Business and Defense Services Administration. And I have a copy of the four-point procedure which they follow, which I will be very glad to submit, if you do not already have it, or to read it into the record.

The CHAIRMAN. You can submit it at this time-put it right in at this point.

Mr. YOUNG. I will be glad to submit it for the record.

(The document entitled "Steps Followed by the Business and Defense Services Adminstration To Avoid Conflicts of Interest" is as follows:)

STEPS FOLLOWED BY THE BUSINESS AND DEFENSE SERVICES ADMINISTRATION TO AVOID CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Since the establishment of the National Production Authority in 1950, the Department of Commerce has taken the following steps to assure that possible conflicts in governmental duties and private business activities of persons appointed to WOC positions in the Business and Defense Services Administration will be avoided.

1. The incoming WOC is advised during negotiations in connection with his hiring that he will be expected to devote his full time and energies to Government work without the influence of any prejudicial interest.

2. Upon entrance, he is required to take the usual oath of faithful performance to the United States Government.

3. On taking the oath he is handed a document (Form POD-73) which sets forth his exemptions from the "conflict of interest" statutes and the limitations to such exemptions as set out in Executive Order 10182.

4. Shortly after reporting for duty at the Business and Defense Services Administration, the WOC is given a face-to-face indoctrination which includes à caution against acting upon any individual matter in which he or his company has any direct or indirect interest. He is told that he should withdraw from any matter which, if he acted upon it, would embarrass himself, his company, or the Government. In such cases he is instructed to refer the matter to the chief career employee of the division, who is specified and who is usually the deputy director. He is advised that if there is any question in the application of this rule, he is to consult with the legal staff or chief administrative officer. The CHAIRMAN. I am not so much interested in directives. It is a question of whether the directives are followed.

Mr. YOUNG. That is always a very good point, Mr. Chairman. And as the order specifically states, this is the distinct and specific responsibility of the head of the agency.

Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Young, with respect to question No. 3, the question had this to ask: "Have these steps been effective?" Namely, the steps taken in the document you introduced. Do you answer that question anywhere?

Mr. YOUNG. Well, we have no way of knowing, of course, because we do not try to go in and audit on a day-to-day basis the operations of a particular WOC individual in terms of his background, interests, and associations in order to try to determine whether there is any conflict of interest.

Mr. WALDEN. Further as to question No. 3 it says, "To what extent have WOC personnel been placed in positions revealing a conflict between Government duties and private interest?"

For the same reason you do not answer that question?

Mr. YOUNG. No, we do not answer it because these are directed entirely or are the specific responsibility of the head of the agency. Mr. WALDEN. The final question in question No. 3 is, "Have abuses arisen therefrom?" You do not answer that question, either?

Mr. YOUNG. No, of course, we would have no way of knowing, and would not regard it as our responsibility to determine.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose, Mr. Young, that it comes to your attention as Chairman of the Civil Service Commission that a WOC in a particular department is not one of "outstanding experience and ability"-what would you do under those circumstances would you take any action?

Mr. YOUNG. We would not have any authority so far as I know, to do that. We do in the case of the classified service, go in and direct the removal for incompetence or lack of ability or nonsuitability or anything of that sort.

The CHAIRMAN. Why not-why would you not, if you have a directive to approve of the WOC's on condition that they have outstanding ability and experience, if it develops that they have not-why would you not have authority to take some action as you would with classified?

Mr. YOUNG. We do not approve of the qualifications of an individual appointed to the WOC by the head of the agency.

The CHAIRMAN. You simply accept the certificate from the agency and let it go at that-that goes back to what I said before.

Mr. YOUNG. We believe the head of the agency is competent, in a written certificate, to meet these conditions laid down in the Executive order.

Mr. MALETZ. Do you not think that it might be a good idea, Mr. Young, to have the Executive order modified to give you increased responsibility in this particular area?

Mr. YOUNG. We are never one to look for additional responsibilities, sir, but on the other hand, we never duck our responsibilities if we are aware of them. Certainly any suggestions you may have in case a new Executive order is issued here would be very helpful.

Mr. MALETZ. Has the Civil Service Commission made any recommendations with respect to how far the new Executive order should go?

Mr. YOUNG. No, because I saw for the first time this morning the provisions of the new Defense Production Act. Those will require some study before any suggestions could be made with respect to any new Executive order.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it would be a good idea when the Executive order is to be drafted that you endeavor, if possible, to insert in the minds of those who are developing the order some of the ideas that have been developed here this afternoon, so that the Civil Service Commission might have a greater share of responsibility with regard to these WOC's. I anticipate and envision in the future that there will be more and more WOC's coming into the Government. And insofar as there will be more and more coming in, I think to that degree the Civil Service Commission ought to be in this picture. You have strong powers over the classified civil-service employees. I think you should have some degree of power over these WOC's because of their increasing importance in this Government.

Mr. YOUNG. Well, I will be very glad to take the points raised in this discussion and to keep them in mind and pass them on to the appropriate persons who will be working on this matter.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose you continue with your statement now. Mr. YOUNG. At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to give you my comments on questions 4, 5, 6, and 7 in your letter to me.

Question 4 is: Have there been appointments which have not been "necessary and appropriate in order to carry out the provisions of the act?"

Question 5 is: To what extent have there been appointments to positions not requiring outstanding experience and ability?

Question 6 is: To what extent have appointees under Executive Order 10182, section 101 (a) failed to possess the requisite outstanding experience and ability required by the position filled?

Question 7 is: What steps have been taken and are presently being taken by delegate agencies in general and the Business and Defense Services Administration in particular, before appointing WOC's, to obtain persons "with the qualifications necessary for the position on a full-time salary basis?

The CHAIRMAN. You have really answered all of those questions. Mr. Young. I think we have covered them pretty well. And the answer this time is just the same as it was before.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Mr. YOUNG. So, perhaps, you would like to go on to the next, or I can read the paragraph which I have, but it merely repeats what I have already stated.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. WALDEN. Before you leave that, the last sentence before ques tion No. 8 is:

In general the agencies report that a thorough search is made for qualified full-time salaried employees before WOC appointments are made.

Did BDSA report that to you?

Mr. YOUNG. I believe so, yes, and I can submit here, or read for the record the specific steps which BDSA follows in recruiting qualified persons for a full-time basis for these jobs before it hires WOC personnel. That is, if you would like to have that.

Mr. WALDEN. Would you put that in the record?

The CHAIRMAN. Place it in the record at this point.

(The document entitled "Steps Followed by Business and Defense Services Administration To Recruit Qualified Persons on a Full-Time Basis Before Hiring WOC Personnel" is as follows:)

STEPS FOLLOWED BY BUSINESS AND DEFENSE SERVICES ADMINISTRATION TO RECRUIT QUALIFIED PERSONS ON A FULL-TIME BASIS BEFORE HIRING WOC PERSONNEL The following action is taken by the Business and Defense Services Adminis tration in compliance with Executive Order 10182, which expressly requires that WOC's may be employed in positions other than advisory or consultative only when persons with the necessary qualifications are not obtainable on a full time, salaried basis. BDSA and NPA since its establishment in 1950, have continually searched for such persons through their contacts with industry, Ind-stry associations, and Government. As of this date. 3 wch men bead up industry divisions as directors and 7 as acting directors. The specific and current information and experience in particular industries, at responsive leseja, which are required to do the mobilization job expected of an indary divi-low head frequently make difficult or in one the task of finding enital e perwork on a full-time, salaried basis. Here are some of the reasons suitable persona are not found:

1 Retired industry officials have made their para and are we luctant to change them. They are often mane, for pineral ren wona or otherwise, to take on a new and demanding Goernment anzuzeit,

2. Experience has demonstrated that many who are w. litz to face wh salaried positions are diwards from inistry who (ali e se in positions.

3. Active indnery (Adrix of the the needed wi

these positions under the cirreta Government miary wale,

4. There is no real won't

These positions are camiided at male 18 and ab

service registers for zrade 18 or above, and there are no other men ja w of recruitment for gecialized positions of this type and starent.

The CHAIRMAN. Again, I say that I am not taking too much stock in these declarations. I am interested in how they are implemented. They are good declarations. And if the intentions were carried out by real action, then we would be all right, but I fear that is not the

case.

Mr. YOUNG. Well, I think that we both agree that probably the establishment of good standards is a first step.

The CHAIRMAN. That is right.

Mr. YOUNG. Toward getting greater effectiveness and efficiency in the service.

The CHAIRMAN. That is right. The first step is not enough. We want to worry about the last step.

Mr. YOUNG. Then to question 8: The number of WOC's presently employed pursuant to Executive Order 10182, section 101 (a) by each delegate agency. How many of these WOC's are full-time employees? How many are consultants?

I have had a tabulation compiled as of June 30, 1955, showing this information which I will be happy to make available for the record. In summary, there were 338 such WOC employees in all agencies. Ten of these were employed full time and 291 were serving as consultants. This means that 47 WOC employees were serving in operating assignments, some on a full-time basis and some on a part-time basis. This table I have here breaks this total of 338 down by the agencies concerned.

I think that there are 10 departments. It gives the total, the number employed, full-time, number serving as consultants, and the number in operating assignments, full- or part-time.

The CHAIRMAN. That will be received in the record.

(The tabulation entitled "WOC Employees Appointed Under Section 101 (a) of Executive Order 10182 as of June 30, 1955” is as follows:)

WOC employees appointed under sec. 101 (a) of Executive Order 10182 as of June 30, 1955

1 Some of these may be in operating assignments and some in consultant jobs.

* All such personnel shown for Department of Commerce are actually serving with BDSA.

Mr. YOUNG. Question 9: The number of WOC's presently employed by governmental agencies other than under the authority of Executive Order 10182, if any?

There were a total of 101,043 WOC employees serving in the Federal Government under all authorities as of May 30, 1955. We do