Estimated cost of report on experts and consultants employed 33 39 43 Letter from John T. Walden, Assistant Commissioner for Public From the Federal Register, Jan. 19, 1976: FDA Notices_ Excerpts from minutes of an October 1973 meeting of the Sea Memorandum for chief legal officers of Federal agencies from Fred J. Emery, General Services Administration, Nov. 13, Letter from Judith S. Feigin, attorney, Appellate Section Civil Energy related advisory committees in selected agencies---- 159 139 Text of S. 3013: To amend the Federal Advisory Committee Act.. Text of S. 2947: To amend the Federal Advisory Committee Act and The effectiveness of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.. Open and closed advisory committee meetings in 1974. Statement for the written record by the Association of American Medical Food and Drug Administration compliance with the Federal Advisory Com- Commission for the Advancement of Public Interest Organizations: U.S. Office of Education Advisory Councils: Summary of a doctoral dis- Veto by neglect: The Federal Advisory Committee Act. Barbara W. Tuerkheimer, the American University Law Review, volume 25: No. 1, fall 1975.. Newspaper and magazine articles about Federal advisory committees: Biomedical Panel: Urging a Move to Bring Cancer Back into the NIH Sailing Through Cups of Oolong. Washington Star, February 4, 1976- Page 296 310 342 352 361 394 526 558 560 563 566 568 Use of False Identity To Obtain Passports, Credit Cards Grows. Wall 570 Paperwork Jungle: U.S. has 1,242 Federal boards. Column by Kevin 1976.. 572 Some Delaware Advice Is Costly. Delaware State News, November 23, 573 Advisory committees: the invisible branch of Government. Industry 577 Should U.S. Know-How Be Exported Only to U.S. Military Allies? 584 Dangers of Tailgating *** Braking standards lowered despite more 586 587 NIH to Open Budget Sessions to Public. Science, April 9, 1976- 589 590 591 "Privilege" Is Worry For NCI. Washington Star, October 29, 1975- 592 Why Advise?-To Get Ears of High Officials. Washington Star, 594 "Bottom Line" Data on Payments Balance Held Meaningless by U.S. 597 599 Agency comments on S. 2947, the Federal Advisory Committee Act Energy Research and Development Administration_ General Accounting Office.. Government Printing Office.. Interstate Commerce Commission_ Library of Congress.---. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. National Endowment for the Arts. National Endowment for the Humanities Office of Technology Assessment.. U.S. Civil Service Commission.. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.. U.S. Postal Service Decided court cases involving the Federal Advisory Committee Act: Decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Brief for plaintiffs-appellees... Consumers Union of the United States v. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Memorandum and order of the U.S. District Court for the District of Memorandum of points and authorities in support of plaintiff's cross- Ralph Nader v. William J. Baroody, Jr. Page 600 602 604 632 636 641 646 651 656 658 661 663 670 674 678 680 683 687 692 697 713 745 755 Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.......... 782 832 Louis Lombardo v. Philip B. Handler— Memorandum opinion and order of the U.S. District Court for the 838 Center for Auto Safety v. Norbert T. Tiemann__ 859 TO AMEND THE FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT-P.L. 92-463 MONDAY, MARCH 8, 1976 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON REPORTS, ACCOUNTING AND MANAGEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10:08 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 3302, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lee Metcalf (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators Metcalf, Percy, and Brock. Also present: E. Winslow Turner, chief counsel; Gerald Sturges, professional staff member; Jeanne A. McNaughton, chief clerk; John B. Childers, minority counsel, Committee on Government Operations; and Lyle Ryter, minority counsel. Senator METCALF. The subcommittee will be in order. I am going to apologize for a rather long preliminary statement, but it does set the pattern for the next 3 days of hearings, for today's and the next 2 days of hearings. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR METCALF Today the Subcommittee on Reports, Accounting, and Management begins 3 days of hearings on two bills to amend the Federal Advisory Committee Act. They are S. 2947, introduced by Senator Hatfield and me, and S. 3013, introduced by my distinguished colleague on my right, Senator Percy. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92–463) went into effect on January 5, 1973. It set standards and prescribed uniform procedures to govern the establishment, operation, administration, and duration of the committees, boards, commissions, councils, task forces, and other citizen panels which advise the President or agencies or officers of the Federal Government. It also stipulated that each advisory committee meeting be open to the public unless it is concerned with matters which the Freedom of Information Act exempts from mandatory public disclosure. I think the Federal Advisory Committee Act has gotten off to a better start in its first 3 years than the Freedom of Information Act did, for two reasons: 1. The Advisory Committee Act directed that the Office of Management and Budget establish and maintain a committee management secretariat to be responsible for all matters relating to advisory committees, whereas the Freedom of Information Act was expected to be more or less self-executing. 2. The Advisory Committee Act required the President to make an annual report to the Congress on the activities, status, and changes in the composition of advisory committees, whereas the Freedom of Information Act made no provision for an annual report. Over the past 3 years, the administration of advisory committees has improved substantially under the guidance of OMB, and Congress has been kept informed of advisory committee activities through the President's annual reports. For all the improvement, there are problems and questions, some of them summarized by the graphic displays in use here today. For example, from the end of December 1972, when the first inventory of advisory committees was taken, to May 1, 1975, a span of 28 months, the number of advisory committees fell from 1,439 to 1,250, a net decrease of 189. Since 525 advisory committees were newly created or belatedly discovered during this period, the act in the first 28 months actually caused termination or merger of more than 700 advisory committees. However, the advisory committee tide began to turn late last spring, and the number of advisory committees rose from 1,250 on the 1st of May to 1,341 on the 1st of October. How and why this happened is a matter of congressional concern, although I understand that the Director of OMB, James Lynn, will testify this morning that the number of advisory committees dropped back to below 1,300 by the end of 1975. Another chart here gives the breakdown of advisory committees, by type, for the years 1972 through 1974. The breakdown shows a percentage increase in the number of advisory committees directed by statute. It also shows that most committees, by far, are established at the discretion of Federal agencies. That is, the committees are authorized-but not directed-by statute, or are established by agencies purely on their own initiative. However, let me make a parenthetical statement here. When I appeared before the Rules Committee and was talking with the Rules Committee to get the appropriation for our subcommittee, Senator Percy, we were talking about advisory committees, and I suggested that over in the Legislative Counsel's Office there is boilerplate language, and any time any of us send over some suggestions for legislation, they always grind in an advisory commit tee. Some day some of us are going to have to stand up and say, "Gentlemen, What is the special need for the advisory committee in this agency?" |