Mr. GARCIA. Stewart Kemp? Mr. MECKLING. He just got a degree from Harvard. He was employed directly by us but was not from Mr. GARCIA, J. Houston McCulloch? Mr. MECKLING. He was from the University of Chicago. Mr. MECKLING. Oh, no. He was employed by CNA as a part of the subcontract, that is correct; I am sorry. He came from the University of Chicago and was employed by the Center for Naval Analyses. I am sorry. Mr. GARCIA. Dr. Dave O'Neil? Mr. MECKLING. He was from CNA. Mr. GARCIA. John Rafuse? Mr. MECKLING. He was from CNA. Mr. GARCIA, Dave Reaume? Mr. MECKLING. He was from CNA. Mr. GARCIA. Dr. Larry Sjaastad? Mr. MECKLING. He was from the University of Chicago. Mr. MECKLING. I think he was an attorney that CNA had a contract with, a consulting contract. He was not actually a full-time employee of CNA; he was employed by them as a consultant. Mr. GARCIA. Nevertheless, a member of the Commission staff and associated wtih the CNA? Mr. MECKLING. He had a subcontract with the Center for Naval Analyses. Mr. GARCIA. Dr. Rodney Weiher? Mr. MECKLING. Rodney Weiher. He was with the Center for Naval Analyses. Mr. GARCIA. Dr. Desmond P. Wilson? Mr. MECKLING. He was with the Center for Naval Analyses. Mr. GARCIA. I won't name the research assistants, but these were the research project managers; is that correct? Mr. MECKLING. Well, not all of those are managers. Some of those were working for other people. They were all research people, but there really were four people that were what I would call directors of research. Senator BYRD. Is this the group that put together the Gates Com mission report? Mr. MECKLING. That is not the whole group; no, sir. There wer some names I think he didn't read. Maybe he read them all, but I don' believe he did. Senator BYRD. I am not speaking of the Commission itself but the staff that put together a report for the Commission. Mr. MECKLING. Yes, sir. Senator BYRD. CNA had quite a stranglehold over that; every othe name read out was from CNÂ. Mr. MECKLING. I don't believe it is true that they dominated th research of the commission, if that is what you are suggesting fro this. There were also people from Rand and some people from IDA that is, I don't think those were all of the names. Senator BYRD. I had the impression that the Gates Commission wa a much broader base group than it appears to have been. Mr. MECKLING. The commission itself, sir, was a very Senator BYRD. I am not speaking of the Commission, I am speakin of the staff that put the Commission report together. I imagine t staff did the bulk of the work and drafted the report? Mr. MECKLING. Well, the staff, I guess, drafted everything in t back of the report and did the basic computations, but it did not dra the first two chapters of the report. Those were done word for word the commission members. Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Meckling, two volumes such as this represent t studies performed by the CNA; is that correct? Mr. MECKLING. No; other people besides CNA were involved those. As I pointed out in my testimony, I think that is representati of the extent of the work. There are 27 papers in there. Of those 27, were either authored or coauthored by people from CNA. So that the didn't write all of the papers. Mr. GARCIA, The Gates Commission report was based on the stud Mr. MECKLING. The estimates in the Gates Commission report. want to distinguish between the data and estimates in the Gates Con mission report and the material. Some of the material that was in the is really based on what the Commission members agreed to. As to t estimates in the Gates Commission report, the description of how tho were made is contained in the backup volumes. Mr. GARCIA. I refer to the introduction which you signed as exec tive director. In it you state that the papers presented here were pr pared for the Commission, and the research that underlies them was many cases used by the commissioners. The studies represent the wo of the individual authors, however, and should not be interpreted reflecting the official opinion or policy of the Center for Naval Ana yses. Yet they had a contract for $160,000, and they put their stamp approval on their own studies. Is that what you are trying to tell u Mr. MECKLING. I think that is a standard kind of statement that th make no studies which are done by members of their staff. Mr. GARCIA. Do you mean that they don't stand behind the studi prepared by the members of the staff under the employment of t center? Mr. MECKLING. I think you really might ask Mr. DiBona about th instead of me. Mr. GARCIA. You wrote this. Mr. MECKLING. Yes, sir. But what I am saying about that being standard statement is that in a case where members of the staff publi things, because of the problem of the association of CNA with t Navy and the role it plays there, CNA frequently says about indepen ent studies done by members of the staff that it is not the opinion the center; and that is also done in other institutions, it is also done other Federal Contract Research Centers. Just as at the University Rochester, when a member of its faculty publishes a piece of resear in a journal, the university doesn't take any responsibility in a sense f that piece of work. The same thing is true of some of the research do by people at CNA, and they want to make it clear that they are n saying that it constitutes CNA policy. Mr. GARCIA. In other words, the Center for Naval Analyses w awarded a contract by the Gates Commission and paid an approxima sum of $161,000 and submitted a number of studies to the Gates Commission, but the studies represent the work of individual authors and not the official opinion or policy of the Center for Naval Analyses; is that right? Mr. MECKLING. Yes, sir; and that means just exactly that, that they do not represent official policy. If one of the study members, for example, came out in favor of, or what he wrote in those studies came out in favor of, or opposed to, the All-Volunteer Armed Force. OK. But what the CNA was saying in that statement was that that is not CNA as an institution making a policy decision, but that is what this individual says. That is what the individual himself says about that. Mr. GARCIA. Mr. Meckling, are you familiar with the President's Executive order on conflict of interest? Mr. MECKLING. Well, I am familiar with it. I am not an attorney. Mr. GARCIA. Wherein he prescribes standards of ethical conduct for Government officers and employees. Do you think these standards should apply to representatives of the President's Commission? Mr. MECKLING. Yes, sir: I do. Mr. GARCIA. The Executive order dated August 8, 1967, signed by the President. There is a House Concurrent Resolution 175 of the 85th Congress on the code of ethics on Government service, and the Federal regulations dealing with the Executive order have a digest of conflictof-interest laws. Are you familiar with them? Mr. MECKLING. No, sir; I am not. Mr. GARCIA. Let me read you what it says about section 208, title 18, United States Code: This section forbids certain actions by an officer or employee of the Government in his role as a servant or representative of the government. Its thrust is, therefore, to be distinguished from Section 203 and Section 205 which forbid certain actions in his capacity as a representative of persons outside of the government. Subsection (a) in substance requires an officer or employee of the executive branch, including a special government employee, to refrain from participating as such in any matter in which, to his knowledge, he, his spouse, minor child, or partner, has a financial interest. He must also remove himself from a matter in which a business or nonprofit organization with which he is connected or is seeking employment has a financial interest. Mr. MECKLING. I have not read that, sir. As you know, as I mentioned to you earlier, the administrative matters in the Commission were handled by Mr. Callard, and I do know we had a contract with the General Services Administration that included management generally and legal counsel, and that Mr. Callard himself was an attorney. He consulted with the GSA about the question of conflict of interest in this case, and we were assured there wasn't a problem of conflict of interest, and we proceeded on that basis. Mr. GARCIA. I discussed this matter at some length with Mr. Callard on August 26 this year. I made a memorandum of our conversation and I read it back to him, and he agreed that what I have here i correct, and I quote: Mr. Callard informed the undersigned there were no other contracts awarde by the commission other than the one to the Center for Naval Analyses, that h had assumed his responsibilities as Deputy Executive Director for the commis sion staff on or about May 5, 1969. Mr. Callard informed the undersigned tha all arrangements for conduct of studies had been arranged prior to his assum tion of duties in early May. According to Mr. Callard, the groundwork had a been accomplished by Mr. William H. Meckling, the Executive Director of th commission staff, who was on leave from his position as Dean of the School Business, University of Rochester. It was Mr. Meckling who suggested to M Callard that the Center for Naval Analyses be the organization to conduct wha ever studies were necessary for the Gates Commission. Do you want to comment on that? Mr. MECKLING. The decision to engage the Center for Naval Analy ses wasn't made by the Commission until the first Commission meeting where it was discussed on the 12th of May or the 15th of May. It wa later in that month; it was after David had come aboard. Mr. GARCIA. I will go into that later. Mr. MECKLING. So that I mean so far as any decision was concerned certainly no decision about that had been made at the time. Mr. GARCIA. Did you discuss with anyone the possibility of th existence of a conflict of interest in your suggesting the Center fo Naval Analyses? Mr. MECKLING. As I said yesterday, Mr. Wallis and I and Mr. Gate discussed this and we discussed this at the commission meeting. I think in fact, we have some memos that refer to that issue. Mr. GARCIA. Did you ask anyone whom you actually represented since you were employed by both the university and the Federal Gov ernment at the time? Mr. MECKLING. It was very clear to me I was representing, insofa as that situation was concerned, the Gates Commission and not th university. Mr. GARCIA. It would seem so to me, too. Do you believe that your actions while serving with the Gates Com mission in any way influenced the award of the contract to the Uni versity of Rochester? Mr. MECKLING. I am sure that I was the one who recommended t Mr. Gates that we undertake the contract with the CNA. Mr. GARCIA. So you did recommend that the contract be awarded t CNA? Mr. MECKLING. Yes, sir; I did. Senator SMITH. May I ask a question? Senator BYRD. Senator Smith. Senator SMITH. Mr. Meckling, would you furnish for the record, i you please, the name of the White House counsel who advised you tha there was no conflict of interest in this matter? Mr. MECKLING. I don't believe it was a White House counsel; believe it was GSA. Senator SMITH. I understood you to say "White House counsel. Mr. MECKLING. No; it was the General Services Administratio which acted as our counsel under the general administrative contrac we had with them. Senator SMITH. And you did give us the name of that counsel ? Mr. MECKLING. I am not sure whether I would know the name o that counsel; I am not sure that I have any record of that. I think M Callard probably would know who the counsel was. Senator SMITH. There would have to be some record of a matter a important as this, if one representing the White House or Governmen advised that there was no conflict of interest. Mr. MECKLING. Well; just as I said earlier, I was not involved in that. Mr. Callard was the one whom I relied on for that sort of thing, and he would know who the counsel was that he talked to. Senator SMITH. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the reporter if he will check back and see if I am mistaken about that White House counsel? Can you give us the name? Mr. MECKLING. I don't believe I would know. You mean in that case there? I think that was Mr. Krogh. I believe that was his name. Senator SMITH. From the White House? Mr. MECKLING. I believe that was his name. But you are asking me now to remember a name. Senator SMITH. Will you check it for the record, if you please. I think this is very important, Mr. Chairman. Senator BYRD. Yes. You will supply that for the record? Mr. MECKLING. Yes, sir. Mr. GARCIA. Is that Mr. Krogh? Mr. MECKLING. That is probably right; yes. Senator SMITH. You will check it for the record, won't you? Mr. MECKLING. I am not sure that I can find it someplace in writing. I can try to check up on it. I will do the best I can to check that. Senator BYRD. If you are not able to ascertain it, perhaps you can make a statement for the record to that effect. Mr. MECKLING. All right. Senator BYRD. I think it is important to clear this (The information follows:) up. There follows a letter from the law firm of Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle, general counsel for the University of Rochester, and supporting documents. The letter identifies Mr. Krogh and the supporting documents will be found at the appropriate place in the record. NIXON, HARGRAVE, DevanS & DOYLE, Re Subcommittee of Senate Armed Services Committee on the Center for Naval Hon. HARRY F. BYRD, Jr., U.S. Senate, Senate Office Building, DEAR SENATOR BYRD: We are general counsel for the University of Rochester, and Mr. McCrory of this firm represented the University as counsel at the hearings conducted by your Subcommittee on September 20, 21 and 22, 1971. During the course of the hearings, you requested that we furnish to you certain supplementary information and documents for inclusion in the record. We wish to advise you that the University has not discovered any correspondence with Mr. DiBona concerning his appointment to the Center for Naval Analyses, and we do not believe any such correspondence exists. We understand that CNA is forwarding to the Subcommittee staff the documentation which they have with respect to his appointment, together with the other material which the Subcommittee asked Mr. DiBona to furnish for inclusion in the record. It appeared to us after the hearings that further clarification was appropriate with respect to the issue of a possible conflict of interest arising out of the research contract between the President's Commission On An All Volunteer Armed Force and the Center for Naval Analyses. In this regard, we enclose four supporting documents, which we believe are relevant and which, on behalf of the University, we would respectfully request be included together with this letter in the hearing record. The first document enclosed is a letter to you from Thomas S. Gates, Jr., who served as Chairman of the Commission, and which confirms that the contract with CNA was specifically approved by Mr. Gates, was fully discussed by the Commission, and was deemed by both the Commission and Mr. Gates to be in |