dollars of agricultural commodities, seems to be putting the cart before the horse economically, and it would be better, perhaps, to get these agricultural commodities exchanged for minerals to go into our stockpile of strategic and critical materials. Aside from that, I want to say I have not been satisfied from any testimony that has been given or any discussions I have had that in the procedure to dispose we have considered these nuclear war and rehabilitation requirements. I feel if there is justification for it, it would be slight. I would like your comment on that. Mr. MCDERMOTT. First of all, I appreciate your views and the views of this committee and appreciate the opportunity I had of discussing some of these problems with you personally. I agree it would be unwise to embark upon a major disposal program of any of these items, particularly lead and zinc, that we are discussing this morning, until we know more about our nuclear war requirements. But while we are talking here today about these requirements, no disposal plan except that going on in interdepartmental discussions has been conceived or begun in any manner. So the fact is that there is no disposal plan for lead and zinc under any stage of consideration today, July 8, 1963, other than the direct Government use program that I talked about. Mr. EDMONDSON. That is rather substantial, however. It is not inconsequential at all; 50,000 tons of lead is a pretty big item. Mr. MCDERMOTT. That is correct. I appreciate your views and certainly we shall consider those views along with all other factors as we go along with this, and we will ultimately have industry consultations if this becomes a reality in Government. Mr. EDMONDSON. I want it clear that my view on that is not confined to lead and zinc. It applies across the board to any strategic and critical materials that are in the stockpile that were felt 8 or 10 years ago to be pretty essential to our security. I have not seen our security improved to the extent we can start getting rid of some these things in quantity, and I certainly have not seen the potential damage from nuclear war reduced. In fact, I think with the new weapons the likelihood is we would suffer greater damage today than when the earlier levels were set. I personally am very much unsatisfied by what has been produced here today and I hope before there is any publication with regard to conventional war levels and before there is any procedure adopted for the disposal of strategic and critical war materials, there will be further review of this policy. I do not think the Government is so hard up that we need these dollars that will be produced by this disposal, particularly when the record shows we are losing more on the disposal of agricultural commodities than on strategic and critical materials. Any further comments? Mr. WHITE. I think the Office of Emergency Planning should have some closer.connection with the domestic industry before proceeding. I think you have been remiss in not having done so before this point. I would suggest you do that as soon as possible. Mr. MCDERMOTT. I appreciate your comment. On that, within this interdepartmental advisory committee the procedure for consultation and industry input in these questions has been to rely on those departments of Government that have the logical contacts with these groups, importantly the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce, as it relates to producers and users. But the methodology of having industry consultations is under consideration and we all consider it important and realize improvements can be made. Mr. EDMONDSON. If there is no objection, the report I referred to previously on the cost value of stockpile inventories by major category, which appears in the Congressional Record of May 21 at page 8560, will be made a part of the record of these hearings at this point. There being no objection it is so ordered. (The matter follows:) [From the Congressional Record, May 21, 1963] REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON REDUCTION OF NONESSENTIAL FEDERAL EXPENDITURES-FEDERAL STOCKPILE INVENTORIES Mr. BYRD of Virginia. Mr. President, as chairman of the Joint Committee on Reduction of Nonessential Federal Expenditures, I submit a report on Federal stockpile inventories as of March 1963. I ask unanimous consent to have the report printed in the Record, together with a statement by me. (There being no objection, the report and statement were ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:) FEDERAL STOCKPILE INVENTORIES, MARCH 1963 INTRODUCTION This is the 40th in a series of monthly reports on Federal stockpile inventories. It is for the month of March 1963. The report is compiled from official data on quantities and cost value of commodities in these stockpiles submitted to the Joint Committee on Reduction of Nonessential Federal Expenditures by the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, and Health, Education, and Welfare, and the General Services Administration. The cost value of materials in inventories covered in this report, as of March 1, 1963, totaled $14,025,156,888, and as of March 31, 1963, they totaled $13,814,451.525, a net decrease of $210,705,363 during the month. Different units of measure make it impossible to summarize the quantities of commodities and materials which are shown in tables 1 2, 3, and 4, but the cost value figures are summarized by major category, as follows: Summary of cost value of stockpile inventories by major category 1 Cotton inventory valued at $128,409,100 withdrawn from the national stockpile and transferred to Commodity Credit Corporation for disposal, pursuant to Public Law 87-548, during August 1962. Detailed tables in this report show each commodity, by the major categories summarized above, in terms of quantity and cost-value as of the beginning and end of the month. Net change figures reflect acquisitions, disposals, and accounting and other adjustments during the month. The cost value figures represent generally the original acquisition cost of the commodities delivered to permanent storage locations, together with certain packaging, processing, upgrading, et cetera, costs as carried in agency inventory accounts. Quantities are stated in the designated stockpile unit of measure. The appendix to this report, beginning on page 19, includes program descriptions and statutory citations pertinent to each stockpile inventory within the major categories. The stockpile inventories covered by the report as tabulated in detail as follows: Table 1: Strategic and critical materials inventories (all grades), March 1963 (showing by commodity net changes during the month in terms of cost value and quantity, and excesses over maximum objectives in terms of quantity as of the end of the month). Table 2: Agricultural commodities inventories, March 1963 (showing by commodity net changes during the month in terms of cost value and quantity). Table 3: Civil defense supplies and equipment inventories, March 1963 (showing by item net changes during the month in terms of cost value and quantity). Table 4: Machine tools inventories, March 1963 (showing by item net changes during the month in terms of cost value and quantity). |