(b) Private industries and organizations outside of the Govern

ment.

Chart 3, the organization of the NSRB staff shows the internal. organization of the Board's own staff. The organization consists of four administrative and coordinating groups, including the secretary, general counsel, Information and Program Divisions.

Four groups of Mobilization Planning Staff divisions are included, one each for industrial resources, material resources, human resources, and organization and management.

Principal staff: The names of the persons thus far appointed to fill key positions on the staff of the Board are indicated on chart 3.

The special assistants to the Chairman and consultants assigned to undertake special work on behalf of the Board are indicated as follows: 15

The special assistants to the Chairman: Mr. Ferdinand Eberstadt; Fred E. Henderson, on production: Edward Hidalgo, foreign economics; Capt. Thomas J. Kelly, United States Navy, petroleum; Wallace E. Pratt, petroleum; Gen. Paul R. Hawley, medical; Matthew Robinson, economic problems; J. Garrett Scott, legal; Fred Searls, Jr., mining and stock piling; and Edmond F. Wright, personnel selec

tion.

Consultants: H. Nelson Moore, on patent law; Harvey C. Mansfield, resources mobilization; Wallace Sayre, resources mobilization; George Hopkins, petroleum; Norman A. Shepard, rubber and chemicals; Reginald W. Edmonds, nonferrous metals; Frank L. Fisher, nonferrous metals; Robert L. Sebastian, aluminum and magnesium; Leighton H. Peebles, communications; Paul R. Taylor, manpower; George Taylor, economic stabilization; James W. Fesler, organization; Elmer R. Henning, machine tools; Brig. Gen. Stewart E. Raimel, machine tools; H. Struve Hersel, industry relations; Herbert K. Oakes, special projects; Charles K. Leith, ferroalloys; Richard J. Lund, ferroalloys; Edward Falck, power and utilities, assisted by Constantine Barry, Walker Cisler, Arthur S. Griswold, Chandler Jones, William A. Lyons, V. M. Marquis, John E. Moore, C. J. Mueller, William S. Peterson, Barclay Sickler, Paul B. Valle; John R. Turney, Sr., transportation, assisted by Frederick M. Glass, Henry F. McCarthy, Chester G. Moore, Lorena H. Ristow, George E. Talmadge, John R. Turney, Jr.; Mark W. Cresap, Jr., organization, assisting William F. McCormick, Thomas Morris, Richard M. Paget, Ewing E. Reilley; Bertrand Fox, requirements; Milton Katz, requirements; Simon Kuznets, requirements.

(c) Under advisory committees: While extensive use will be made by the Board of advisory committees both outside and inside the Federal Government, every effort will be made to utilize existing committees in order to avoid overlapping and duplication of effort.

The committees thus far established to assist the Board together with the list of their members are:

Manpower Advisory Committee: Russell C. McCarthy, Robert C. Goodwin, William Haber, Ralph Hetzel, Jr., Maj. Gen. Lewis B. Hershey. Additional members are to be appointed to this committee.

A list of executive positions in the NSRB, revised as of August 12, 1948, is presented in the appendix, exhibit 19, pp. 1059 to 1063.

Economic Stabilization Advisory Committee: Marion B. Folsom, Charles O. Hardy, Henry M. Hart, Jr., Edgar M. Hoover, Jr., Paul M. O'Leary, George W. Taylor.

Informal conferences have been held with the following groups: Leaders of industry, small business, power, transportation, iron ore, ferroalloy minerals.

The names of those invited to participate in the iron-ore conference and the ferroalloy-minerals conference are as follows:

Mr. Chairman, I would be glad to read these names or to turn this list over to the reporter, whichever you prefer.

Mr. LEMKE. I think it would be just as well to turn it over to the reporter unless the committee wishes otherwise.

(The information, together with the list of membership of other conference groups are presented in the appendix, exhibits 17, 18 and 19, pp. 1051 to 1063.)

Mr. LEMKE. How were these men selected, and by whom?

Mr. HILL. They were selected by me after consultation with various members of our staff with respect to trying to secure the best and most able information we needed at that moment.

Mr. LEMKE. Were they selected with a view of their ability in the particular position that they were to function in?

Mr. HILL. They were, yes.

Mr. LEMKE. I did not notice among the transportation men any outstanding person. Maybe I am not familiar with the more recent people who have ability and who have had experience in that line.

Mr. HILL. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, the group on transportation which I read to you is really in no sense a formal committee. It is a task-group committee to undertake to present to us certain aspects of a program.

These men were largely men who were actively associated with the Office of Defense Transportation in a working capacity.

Furthermore, we have asked the Director of the Office of Defense Transportation likewise to give us his recommendations on the problems of transportation, and he is at the same time, conducting a series of studies with advisory committees in order to give us the benefit of his views.

Mr. LEMKE. Mr. Russell.

Mr. RUSSELL. I would like to ask one question, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Hill, were these advisory committees selected largely by you?
Were they selected from the different segments of industry?
Mr. HILL. An effort was made to do that, yes.

Mr. RUSSELL. The small man is represented as well as the large?
Mr. HILL. That was our intention, yes.

The matter of small industries is relative. Some industries are so large that a small representative may be quite a good-sized operator. Mr. RUSSELL. In other words, in the selection of the committee, in most cases there is a predominance of what we would call the larger industry represented, than there is the smaller group?

Mr. HILL. That may be possibly true.

I want to again call your attention to the fact that these are not officially constituted advisory committees. They have all been called in on an informal basis during the organizational period that the Board has been undergoing.

Mr. RUSSELL. They are purely in an advisory capacity?

Mr. HILL. Purely advisory, that is right.

Mr. LEMKE. Mr. Murdock, have you anything?

Mr. MURDOCK. No questions now, I believe, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LEMKE. If not, Mr. Hill, you may proceed with your statement.

FUNCTIONS OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESOURCES BOARD

Mr. HILL. Your question 2 reads as follows:

Functions of the National Security Resources Board with respect to strategic and critical minerals and metals.

Under section 103 of the National Security Act of 1947, the National Security Resources Board is responsible for advising the Presidentconcerning the coordination of military, industrial, and civilian mobilization, including programs for the effective use in time of war of the Nation's natural and industrial resources for military and civilian needs, for the maintenance and stabilization of the civilian economy in time of war and for the adjustment of such economy to war needs and conditions, the relationship between potential supplies of and potential requirements for manpower, resources, and productive facilities in time of war, and policies for establishing adequate reserves of strategic and critical materials and for the conservation of these reserves.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND METHODS USED BY THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESOURCES BOARD IN ARRIVING AT DECISIONS, POLICIES, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The third question was as follows:

Sources used by the National Security Resources Board in obtaining information and the methods used in arriving at recommendations, decisions, and policies.

The National Security Act of 1947 requires that the Board in performing its functions

shall utilize to the maximum extent the facilities and resources of the departments and agencies of the Government.

Section 103, paragraph (d).

Executive Order 9905 issued November 13, 1947, provides as follows:

The Chairman of the Board shall be responsible for the direction of the work and staff of the Board, including among other things the preparation and accumulation of factual data necessary to the formulation of the plans, policies and programs concerning the coordination of military, industrial and civilian mobilization, for the preparation of reports of such plans, policies and programs, and for submission of such reports to the President by the Board.

Pursuant to request by the Board, all Federal departments and agencies shall furnish the Board such information, reports, statistics and other data or documents in their possession or under their control or attainable by them, or in the performance of their normal and lawful functions, and make for the Board such studies, investigations and reports as are in the judgment of the Board necessary or desirable to fulfill the duties and accomplish the functions and purposes of the Board as prescribed by the National Security Act of 1947.

In arriving at its recommendations, decisions, and policies for advising the President, information from all possible sources is utilized by the Board. All available information is obtained from the various Federal departments and agencies. Where additional information is necessary, special studies are developed by the Board's own staff, by other governmental departments, or by consultants in private organizations outside of the Government.

All matters brought before the Board are subjected to intensive analysis and study on the part of the staff of the Board, and the views of the individual Board members are advanced at Board meetings.

Assurance is given that the recommendations, decisions, and policies submitted by the Board to the President are based on consideration of all relevant facts, issues, and factors that are involved.

NATURE OF DECISIONS, POLICIES, AND RECOMMENDATIONS RENDERED BY THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESOURCES BOARD

The fourth question:

The nature of recommendations and policies made and decisions rendered by the National Security Resources Board.

The Board has made a number of recommendations to the President, some of which he has acted favorably on and has ordered the implementation so far as the executive branch of the Government is concerned. I have reference there to our reports on the national rubber policy; the report on the stock piling of strategic and critical materials, in which the Board recommended an increased sum be asked by the President from Congress in order to increase the stock pile program for the current period. That has been effectuated in the form of a request for additional funds of $375,000,000 which is pending before the Congress at this time.

Mr. RUSSELL. May I ask a question there?

Mr. LEMKE. Mr. Russell.

Mr. RUSSELL. Are you at liberty to say what sum you recommended to the President for the stock pile appropriation for the fiscal year

1949?

Mr. HILL. We did not recommend a specific sum but additional

sums.

Mr. LEMKE. May I ask right there, do you think that $375,000,000 is adequate at this time?

Mr. HILL. Well, I was informed in consultation with the Munitions Board that, at this particular time, that was about all it would be able to make commitment on during the current and the forthcoming fiscal year.

Other recommendations include such matters as the following——— Mr. LEMKE. You have no objection, if it will not break your line of reasoning too much, if any of the members want to ask questions at specific points as you go ahead?

Mr. HILL. Not at all.

Mr. LEMKE. Mr. Martin.

NATIONAL SECURITY RESOURCES BOARD HAS STATED NO POLICY AS TO TIME FACTOR FOR OBTAINING STOCK PILE REQUIREMENTS

Mr. MARTIN. I understand you to say that $375,000,000 was about all they could make commitments on in the coming year?

Mr. HILL. That was the amount that they felt they would require. Mr. MARTIN. At that rate, how long would it take to acquire an adequate stock pile?

Mr. HILL. That would make the total amount in cash and contract authorizations for the year 1949, as I recall it, something in excess of

$600,000,000. Therefore it would appear that it would take perhaps 4 years or so of commitments at that rate.

Mr. MARTIN. That is your present plan, to aim at that objective in the course of 4 years or so?

Mr. HILL. We have stated no policy as to the time factor of making these acquisitions. I think it is largely governed by the ability to secure from the world markets the materials that they need.

Mr. MARTIN. Ability to what?

Mr. HILL. To procure from the markets of the world the materials that they need of a critical nature.

Mr. MURDOCK. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LEMKE. Mr. Murdock.

NO POLICY DETERMINATION BY NSRB REGARDING FOREIGN VERSUS DOMESTIC PURCHASES; MUNITIONS BOARD CLAIMED TO BE DETERMINING AGENCY

Mr. MURDOCK. I understand the $375,000,000 is for long-term contracts?

Mr. HILL. Yes, sir.

Mr. MURDOCK. Is it contemplated that those long-term contracts shall be for domestic production or for foreign production?

Mr. HILL. That is a matter for administration and determination by the Munitions Board, in their administration of the act.

Mr. MURDOCK. You are not able to say, then, what is the plan along that line?

Mr. HILL. We have attempted no definition of policy as to how they should be handled.

Mr. LEMKE. Mr. Martin.

NO ATTEMPT MADE BY NSRB TO DETERMINE FUTURE SUPPLY AND DEMAND CONDITIONS OR RESPONSIBILITY OF ALLOCATIONS RESULTING FROM STOCKPILING PROGRAM

Mr. MARTIN. I would like to ask further about this limitation of $375,000,000 on the program. Is that based on present conditions of supply and demand?

Mr. HILL. I think the amount of $375,000,000 is based on the figure which they hope to place under long-term contracts during the coming fiscal year.

Mr. MARTIN. The amount is governed by present conditions of supply and demand?

Mr. HILL. I do not believe I could say that it was governed by any present economic condition.

Mr. MARTIN. Have you been able to look ahead to any change in the conditions as to supply and demand?

Mr. HILL. We have not attempted to.

Mr. MARTIN. You have not attempted to?

Mr. HILL. No.

Mr. MARTIN. Who would attempt that?

Mr. HILL. That is a matter which, in the ordinary processes of fiscal matters in the Government, I assume, would come up from year to year in the light of the current economic situation and the supply-anddemand factor and would have to be determined each year on the basis of conditions as they existed at that time.