Mr. COLLINS. That is for sure.

Mr. BROOKS. It is always a possibility. [Document handed to Mr. Collins.]

Mr. COLLINS. This is issued on September 8.

Mr. BROOKS. Do you think it is a possibility that you must have called them prior to the day he wrote that letter, on the 8th, because he seemed to think that you knew all about it, and talked with him, and were going to do something about it. So it might be, don't you think, that you did find out about it prior to this letter? Mr. COLLINS. It could have been. It could have been in line. It was early in September, but to the best that I could find out, pinning down, I thought it was the 10th. I told Mr. Moore, I believe originally, that it was early and could have been as early as the 1st.

Mr. BROOKS. Who suggested that you went out there September 10? Mr. COLLINS. No one, except the fact that I had talked to Mr. Burns and he said that they had some-they had the work practically complete on the new part and they had finished a lot of partition work out there, and would I like to go out and see it; if so, he would like to show it to me.

Mr. BROOKS. This letter was sent to the regional office direct. What information was sent to you?

Mr. COLLINS. I don't recall seeing that letter before.

Mr. BROOKS. I sort of thought that.

When you transmitted the information on the job requirement to Mr. Patterson in the regional office, did you request in your transmittal memo that a job order be prepared?

Mr. COLLINS. Yes. Reimbursable job order be prepared.

Mr. BROOKS. We didn't locate a copy of it in the central office file, or in your file. You are sure that you did work up a job order for that?

Mr. COLLINS. I would have transmitted-I would have transmitted normally the letter that I received from the Commodity Stabilization. That would be the basis for the whole thing and which would give them the information. Otherwise, the regional office would have nothing on which to base the issuance of a reimbursable job order.

Mr. BROOKS. You don't remember getting a letter from Commodity Stabilization, but you do think you must have gotten one and that you did prepare a job order request and send it along?

Mr. COLLINS. I feel sure that there must have been one because I normally have to have that to transmit.

Mr. BROOKS. And the information that you received and would have forwarded along with your job order request would have been used as a basis for the job order which they did send to you September 11? Mr. COLLINS. Well now, as to the dates, I don't know, because my file on that, all that part, was transferred.

Mr. BROOKS. I think we have a copy of this job order, dated September 11. This is the one you probably sent, ordering the installation of movable partitions for the Commodity Stabilization office, estimated cost of the job shown as $5,794, and shows PBS approval by Mr. Kerlin on September 11, 1959. It directs the work to be handled by the area manager. It shows that Mr. Collins certified the work as completed on

Mr. COLLINS. It should be the 15th.
Mr. BROOKS. September 15, 1959.

That we will put in the record. Your memory was right on that date.

(The document referred to follows:)

Mr. BROOKS. After signing the job order and noting that the work was completed on September 15, did you call Mr. Patterson again? Mr. COLLINS. No, not Mr. Patterson. I didn't call him. Not after that.

Mr. BROOKS. You didn't call him and tell him that you were signing this even though it exceeded your limit?

Mr. COLLINS. No. I will tell you what happened. If there was a goof on that it had to be mine because of the fact that these were portable cubicles and the work had been completed. Mr. Moran mentioned that they were very much in trouble and he wanted to know if it was possible that they could comply with it.

Mr. BROOKS. This is approved by you on this signature, and it is for materials, $5,794 actual job costs. You approved it. Your limit

is how much?

Mr. COLLINS. $2,000. That is on construction. I can go up to $7,500 on materials alone, on such as that, where there is no labor involved on it.

Mr. BROOKS. There wasn't any labor involved in this at all, this installation?

Mr. COLLINS. It was finished and completed at the time that I found it.

Mr. BROOKS. There was no labor involved in putting it in?

Mr. COLLINS. There had to be.

Mr. BROOKS. Of course.

Mr. COLLINS. But so far as I was concerned it was furniture, and it isn't fastened to the floor, not fastened to the building, and it isMr. BROOKS. Not considered

Mr. COLLINS. That is my opinion. It hasn't been substantiated, so don't lay it on anybody else.

Mr. BROOKS. Did it go to the regional counsel?

Mr. COLLINS. No, I didn't do that because as an engineer we have followed that in GSA for a long while.

Mr. BROOKS. Partitions are always furniture?

Mr. COLLINS. No; oh, no. If a partition is fastened or anchored to the floor or the building, any way anchored to the building, it becomes a part of the building. If it is

Mr. BROOKS. These are not anchored in any way?

Mr. COLLINS. No, they are just braced among themselves and can be lifted up, pushed over, moved around. Did you know that? Mr. MOORE. No, sir. I thought they were attached with screws. Mr. COLLINS. They are not.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. These are called cubicles?
Mr. COLLINS. That is right.

Portable cubicles, and that is the correct name for them, and it is a steel proposition assembled on that basis.

Mr. BROOKS. Then you weren't concerned about a $2,000 limit at all? Mr. COLLINS. Actually, I wasn't. I thought I was doing a good job here, up until this time.

Mr. BROOKS. Do you generally order the furniture and pay for it that comes through your office?

Mr. COLLINS. No, that doesn't, because that should have been to the agency itself. Normally, I wouldn't handle anything furniturewise at all. But this came right to the--I would call it a borderline case, because the furniture normally is handled out of a furniture account by the agency itself and purchased with their money direct, and not through GSA.

Mr. BROOKS. Did you send this Henges Co. invoice with your signed approval at that time?

Mr. COLLINS. I don't recall an invoice on anything at that time.

Mr. BROOKS. About what date was it that the Henges Co. bookkeeper asked you to ask why they hadn't received payment?

Mr. COLLINS. That was-I would just guess it was in October, sometime.

Mr. BROOKS. What did the comptroller's office tell you when you inquired of them why they hadn't sent that money along? Mr. COLLINS. That the matter was being held up.

Mr. BROOKS. Did they tell you why?

Mr. COLLINS. It was being studied. It really wasn't any of my business. It really should have been our Chief of Buildings Management, or the regional director. But I wanted to find out if I could to save disturbing them; maybe I could get an answer.

Mr. BROOKS. Following that, did Mr. Lund call you and tell you that you and he were in trouble for signing the job order?

Mr. COLLINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Did he say you were all in trouble for signing?

Mr. COLLINS. He said in bad trouble.

Mr. BROOKS. Why did he say that? He wasn't kidding, was he? Mr. COLLINS. No, he wasn't, as I find out now. He told me he thought it was a partition proposition.

Mr. BROOKS. What kind of proposition?

Mr. COLLINS. It was partitions.

Mr. BROOKS. He sort of thought it was partitions, not chairs?
Mr. COLLINS. At that time, none, not portable cubicles.

Mr. BROOKS. He sort of thought it was partitions, like the specifications said?

Mr. COLLINS. I don't know what the specification called for.

Mr. BROOKS. How about the job order that said, "Install movable partitioning"?

Mr. COLLINS. That is right.

Mr. BROOKS. It does kind of make you think it is partitions.

Mr. COLLINS. I called them.

Mr. BROOKS. Go ahead. I didn't mean to interrupt.

Mr. COLLINS. Really, it is a question, and I would like to see you decide it, because a portable cubicle is what they term it now.

Mr. BROOKS. When you wrote that job order you called it movable partitioning?

Mr. COLLINS. I did.

Mr. BROOKS. We haven't used the term "cubicle" yet.

Did Mr. Lund say why he thought there would be some problem? Mr. COLLINS. He said, "You have exceeded your limit,” and that "We are going to have a hard time getting any payment for these ple because it is not handled in the right way."

peo

Mr. BROOKS. This call from Mr. Lund, was it after the comptroller had written his memo of October 22, 1959?

Mr. COLLINS. As to that I wouldn't know, as to what he had or did not, because I didn't see any copies of anything like that, nor was I advised about it particularly.

Mr. BROOKS. Did you have a conference at the regional office with Mr. Lund and Mr. Jay, when they discussed this problem?

Mr. COLLINS. I had a problem with Mr. Lund, and while I was there I talked to Mr. Jay about the same thing.

Mr. BROOKS. What conclusion did you all reach?

Mr. COLLINS. With Mr. Jay I just went in and told him that it looked like I had goofed all over the place and that I was sorry, and if there was any blame for it that I wanted to take it, because evidently they didn't agree with my interpretation.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Pardon me. What was your particular goof, that you exceeded your authority?

Mr. COLLINS. They felt that I had exceeded my authority of $2,000, and certainly on the basis of which they proceeded, I had. But I still

Mr. WALLHAUSER. But you had done it with honest intent?

Mr. COLLINS. That is right. And I thought we were handling it as portable cubicles, which we still call movable partitions in some sense. Mr. WALLHAUSER. Your basis, I judge, from your testimony so far, is that the commodity stabilization office was in a little bit of trouble and you were trying to help them out.

Mr. COLLINS. That is the truth. I thought I could help to get them off the hook insofar as it could be possible, and I thought we were clear on the thing.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Are you familiar with costs and prices?

Mr. COLLINS. Yes, and the prices concerned there were really a little under what would be normally priced as partitions there, by $1. That was our experience, at least.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. So you knew that financially the Government was getting its

Mr. COLLINS. The Government was not losing. In fact, they were gaining on that.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Thank you.

Mr. BROOKS. Did you ever get any facts on whether they met the minimum wage requirements on installations? The other details of your usual contracting procedures?

Mr. COLLINS. Not on that installation, although I have on many others where I have seen their wage reports, weekly reports, maybe go through our office. They wouldn't be for us but for D. & C. We would just transmit them through. But on that particular deal, that I don't know because that work had been completed, so far as I was concerned.

Mr. BROOKS. In this conference with Mr. Lund, in which you also talked with Mr. Jay, did they decide then that maybe they ought to have competitive bids? How did they come to that conclusion?

Mr. COLLINS. As far as I know, that decision wasn't made then. Mr. BROOKS. Was it discussed then?

Mr. COLLINS. I was really on the reduced side after the conference with Mr. Lund, because he really let me have it.

Mr. BROOKS. They were not pleased?

Mr. COLLINS. Sir?

Mr. BROOKS. They were not overly pleased?

Mr. COLLINS. They were not overjoyed, let us say. But actually, I deserved what I got, and Mr. Lund didn't give me as much as thought I deserved, to be truthful with you.

Mr. BROOKS. You didn't tell those people to put those partitions in?

Mr. COLLINS. Definitely not; that is for sure.

Mr. BROOKS. And you didn't think anybody in GSA did?

Mr. COLLINS. That I would be reasonably sure of.

Mr. BROOKS. Reasonably sure?

Mr. COLLINS. I would say this: that no one in GSA, I don't believe, knew about them prior to their installation.

Mr. BROOKS. Did Mr. Jay indicate that he didn't know that you had signed a job order and the invoice until the Comptroller's memo called it to Mr. Lund's attention on October 22?

Mr. COLLINS. He said when I talked to him that he saw my name on it and said, "Why you should put your name on that I will never know. I thought you knew better than that."

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Mr. Chairman, I don't believe I can help but comment at this point that I admire any witness who will sit down and admit he has made a mistake, and I want to commend this witness.

Mr. BROOKS. I think that is very kind of you.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. I don't think it is kind; I think it is fair.

Mr. BROOKS. We think you have a very pleasing manner, Mr. Collins, but I can't say that your memory between September 1 and September 10 has been as concise as it might have been. You have got to admit there has been a little vagueness in your testimony as to whether or not you found out about it on September 10, and then as to whether or not you knew about it prior to that man writing that letter on September 8 saying he talked to you about it.