This book made available by the Internet Archive.

The resources of the Science Information Exchange offer important possibilities for contribution to high priority national programs. Currently the Exchange is assisting the National Cancer Institute with an analysis of current cancer research programs and, in support of a Department of State program, is compiling a directory of international energy research in progress. User fees paid to the Exchange currently represent one-third of the total budget for this high priority activity.

A National Anthropological Film Center has been established within the Center for the Study of Man. It is charged with the preservation and study of visual information on vanishing and changing ways of life. In establishment of this Center, the Institution is responding to long-standing requests from leading American anthropologists who have come to recognize that films made by expert anthropologist-film makers constitute a priceless record of disappearing tribes and cultures. Over $200,000 of support from the National Institutes of Health and the National Endowment for the Humanities has been received for this project.

After many years of behind-the-scenes activity, carried forward with the encouragement and generous support of the Congress, our program of activities for the Bicentennial produced its first public manifestation in June, 1974. The occasion was the presentation by the National Portrait Gallery of the exhibit: "In the Minds and Hearts of the People--Prologue to the American Revolution: 1760-1774." This exhibit is the first in a series of exhibits, publications, and festivals with which the Institution will mark our Nation's two-hundredth birthday.

A major program of exhibit improvement has been initiated by the Museum of Natural History with the creation of the exhibit "Ice Age Mammals and the Emergence of Man." The new, multidisciplinary approach to exhibits will enrich considerably the Museum's educational impact. An educational resource of a different nature is Natural History's Discovery Roam, an area in the museum where visitors may handle exhibits and collections. Its popularity has been impressive.

Communications and Public Outreach

The increasing use of the electronic media by Americans for purposes of information and education poses new challenges as well as new opportunities for the Smithsonian. A series of prime-time television specials, produced by the David L. Wolper Organization in association with the Smithsonian, was inaugurated on November 25, 1974. The first presentation, "Monsters! Mysteries or Myths?" drew an audience estimated at 50 million people, making it the highest rated television documentary in history. "FLIGHT: The Sky's the Limit" was aired in January and the third presentation, "The Legendary Curse of the Hope Diamond," appeared at the end of March. Plans are underway for further programming in the coming season. All production costs are the responsibility of the producer.

Other communication activities include radio, motion picture programs, the successful magazine, Smithsonian , which now has over 900,000 subscribers, and the Archives of American Art Journa l. In addition, beginning in 1975, we will assume the publishing of the Art Quarterly , probably this country's finest and most important scholarly art history journal. The Art Quarterly exhibits a commitment to scholarship of the highest quality and will lend additional strength to the public offerings of the Smithsonian art programs.

In addition to our outreach programs of a national nature, we have continued to emphasize activities and programs for our local audience. In the past two and a half years, our Resident Associates Program has grown from 8,500 to more than .•^1,000 memberships, representing approximately 65,000 individuals being served. The Associates conducted 381 classes during the past year which were attended by 24,193 students and to which 423 scholarships were awarded—359 to inner city youths and 64 to Smithsonian volunteer docents. We have also advanced our contact with elementary and secondary education through more personalized and direct communication with the six county school systems in the metropolitan area and have conducted 66 workshops for teachers, supervisors and administrators with a potential of reaching a minimum of 60,000 school children.

New Facilities

Construction of the National Air and Space Museum continues to proceed on schedule, and within the budget approved. Employees will begin moving into the building this Spring in preparation for the opening one year away.

As you are well aware, we have a continuing problem of overcrowding in the museums on the Mall. This has led over a period of years to the leasing of space in various buildings scattered throughout the metropolitan area. While wc hope ultimately to solve this problem with the construction of a consolidated off-Mall facility, certain interim measures have been instituted. Employees and collections located in three separate facilities are being relocated to a newly leased building at 1111 North Capitol Street, and significant benefits are anticipated in the form of improved efficiency and accessibility.

Privately financed renovation has begun at the Carnegie Mansion in New York in preparation for its use as the site of the Cooper-Hewitt Museum of Decorative Arts and Design. We anticipate opening the museum to the public in the winter of 1975-1976. Possessing a collection of more than 100,000 objects ranging from textiles, drawings, wallpaper, furniture, and jewelry to glass, ceramics, and silver, the Museum will be devoted exclusively to the display and study of historical and contemporary design.

Construction of an education building at the Chesapeake Bay Center, also financed with private funds, has just been completed. Functioning as a visitor center, exhibit area, children's activity room, and housing for college students and visiting scientists, this facility will greatly expand the educational potential of the Center.

The National Museum of Natural History has for some time felt a growing need for restaurant facilities and a tc^ur orientation center in its building. The substantial increase in visitors anticipated during the Bicentennial year has given urgency to these needs. Additionally, a more suitable reception center for our National and Resident Associates would add greatly to the value of this program. With the approval of our Board of Regents, we are proceeding with construction improvements in the West Court of the building, designed principally to provide public, staff and Associates' dining rooms, a tour orientation center, and additional areas for a new museum shop and office and training quarters. I am pleased to inform you that the major aspects of this construction will be financed entirely with private funds.

Budget Request for FY 1976

I would now like to suinmarize and highlight our budget requests for FY 1976. In total, we are requesting appropriations of $97,300,000 compared with $92,421,000 estimated for FY 1975. This represents a total increase of only 5.3 percent, or $4,879,000 distributed over six appropriation accounts.

Our budget to you is a comprehensive one, detailing with substantial care the accomplishments, plans, and resource requirements of well over half a hundred operating and construction programs. Too often, perhaps, when we have these valued opportunities to meet with you, we must of necessity speak of needs for new and additional resources. This emphasis on growth leaves unstated the actions that we take to assure the productive use of what we have--or what we can provide for ourselves. Earlier in this presentation, I have mentioned certain of our self-help actions. In the former category, an important aspect of our budget process is the thoughtful preparation and careful review by senior management officials of detailed planning statements and base analyses prepared by each of our organization units. We believe that this effort results in a careful charting of our course and thorough knowledge of where our resources go and what they produce. Furthermore, as detailed in the opening general statement in our printed budget, we are constantly studying and, if deemed wise, adopting reorganizations of existing organizations to strengthen the functions they perform. We believe that recent actions involving resources for exhibits preparation, custodial operations, and others have resulted in using current manpower and funds more effectively by aligning them with the programs they are meant to serve.

Salaries and Expenses

As detailed in our budget submission, we are seeking an operating budget of $79,408,000 for 51 separate entities, including museums, art galleries, a zoological park and animal conservation center, research laboratories, special programs, and supporting activities. This is an increase of $8,702,000 or 12 percent above our estimated FY 1975 base of $70,706,000 which includes supplemental requests totaling $2,917,000 for utility and pay raise costs.

There are five broad Institution objectives which will be served by the requestec increase, most notable of which are the opening of the National Air and Space Museum and implementation of a local and national program of activities in commemoration of the Bicentennial of the American Revolution. In addition, a portion of the requested increase is for certain uncontrollable expenses. I will speak to each of these six areas briefly.

Meeting Public Commitments - The largest increase in the Salaries and Expenses account, 145 positions and $3,060,000, is directed to the opening of the National Air and Space Museum, perhaps our most important single event during the Bicentennial year.

The new National Air and Space Museum building will open on July 4, 1976. Thus, this next fiscal year presents our final opportunity to complete the opening exhibits and presentations and ready the museum for the public. By the opening date, 40 to 50 percent of the exhibit space will contain long-t-erm exhibit units while the remaining space will be occupied by temporary installations. An increase of 8 positions and $1,250,000 is required to raise our current level of performance to meet this goal. An additional 137 positions and $1,810,000 are required to provide for janitorial runctions, facilities maintenance, communications and transportation functions, utilities and telephone services, and protection coverage at levels comparable to our other large museum buildings.

In less than one year, the official observance of America's 200th anniversary begins. Six years of intensive planning and research have been invested in the development of the Smithsonian's Bicentennial Program, which includes twenty-three separate projects. There is no increase in program funds required to complete these projects as scheduled. However, a one-time appropriation of $400,000 is requested to cover the non-recurring expenses of essential, temporary personnel and supplies solely to meet the anticipated added demands for buildings maintenance, protection, and public health and safety during the peak spring and summer months of 1976.

Research and Exhibition - We are seeking an additional 11 positions and $676,000 to strengthen various research and exhibit programs. The effects of inflation and the importance of the program activities, both in developing a better understanding of contemporary problems, such as environmental and energy-related issues, as well as in fulfilling the Institution's responsiblities to basic research and public education, strongly recommend their selective strengthening. An amount of 6 positions and $423,000 will be used to support on-going and important new research programs in the areas of tropical biology, high energy astrophysics, optical and infrared astronomy, regulatory and environmental biology, ecosystem and land use research, and anthropology. The balance of 5 positions and $253,000 will permit refurbishment and redesign of exhibit halls in the Natural History Building as well as animal habitats at the Zoo, aimed at increasing their educational usefulness, and will expand production capabi lity of our smaller exhibit programs. Funds are also included which will allow some of our museums to maintain a minimum acquisition program necessary to the establishment of more fully representative collections and a more comprehensive exhibits program.

Care and Accessibility of the Collection s - Twenty new positions and $262,000 are needed to support our efforts in conservation and preservation of the National Collections. Effective conservation requires constant attention to environmental conditions in the buildings, specialized treatment to forestall deterioration and decay, a deep understanding of materials' properties and styles, and proper handling and maintenance of the artifacts. In addition, special attention is required to ensure the well-being and health of the living collections of the National Zoological Park.

Automated retrieval and indexing of data pertaining to the collections has greatly facilitated their management. Continued development of ADP facilities will enhance use of the collections by providing catalogues, cross-referencing indices by categories, correlation of data, and better inventory control.

Documentary and Educational Services - An additional 13 positions and $366,000 are requested to increase our capabilities to provide adequate, well organized, and easily accessible archival, library, and photographic materials. The accessibility of these reference and documentary materials together with an adequate level of technician and ADP support will greatly increase the efficiency and capability of our research staff and better serve our scholarly visitors.

A primary objective of the Institution is to make the exhibits and research of the Institution meaningful and available to our large and varied audience. The ever increasing complexity and volume of crowds present unique and challenging demands for our education programs. Additional funds are sought to allow us to enrich and expand our offerings to the public through improved tour, orientation, and other information services. Special emphasis will be given to developing programs for our handicapped ind foreign-speaking visitors and to relating performing arts presentations more effectively to the museums and their collections.

Facilities Management, Protection, and Management Services - A further increase of 93 positions and $1,428,000 is required for us to fulfill our responsibility to the public in terms of their safety and enjoyment. We must make every effort to provide well-planned, attractively designed, adequately maintained and carefully protected facilities. These additional resources will also enable us to improve our capability in various administrative areas, including accounting, personnel, auditing, and property administration, and will assist in the funding of increased postage costs.

Uncontrollable Increases - In the final category under Salaries and Expenses we are requesting an increase of $2,.SI0,000 for largely uncontrollable areas:

--the projected higher cost of current employees caused by legislated pay raises, within-grade step increases, extra work day, and Workmen's Compensation payments ($1,873,000)

--large, unanticipated additional costs for steam and electricity ($617,000)

--increased shipping rates for the international exchange of literary, scientific, and cultural publications ($20,000)

Science Information Exchange

The Science Information Exchange serves as a national information service on research in progress. The budget request for FY 1976 for the Exchange is $1,875,000, 1 increase of only $70,000. Within the resources it has had available, the Exchange .as capitalized on new techniques for improving input into its data base,making it as current for searching as possible. Further improvement is needed, however, if we are to respond effectively to programs of high national concern and to serve better the information needs of state and local governments. The requested increase will be used to develop further and implement a machine assisted indexing system thereby improving the comprehensiveness and timeliness of coverage in subject areas of critical concern and to expand efforts to encourage and provide for new state and local input into the system.

Special Foreign Currency Program

An appropriation of $2,000,000 equivalent in excess foreign currencies is requested for the Special Foreign Currency Program in FY 1976. This request, which includes no increase in funding above the FY 1975 appropriation, will be used for two general purposes:

1) To continue a program of grants totaling $1,000,000 to United States institutions for field research in those countries where excess local currencies are available. Areas of research include archeology and related disciplines, systematic and environmental biology, astrophysics and earth sciences, and museum p^-ograms.

2) To make the third of four annual payments, each of $1,000,000 equivalent in excess Egyptian pounds, to the UNESCO campaign to preserve the temples on the Island of Philae. These monuments, which were inundated by waters of the Nile River, will be re-erected on a nearby island in a setting like the original one.

While creating no additional burden for the taxpayer, the foreign currency grant programs make valuable contributions to the furthering of basic knowledge and understanding on both the scientific and cultural levels.

Facilities Planning, Renovation, Restoration, and Constructio n

We are requesting $14,017,000 for facilities planning, renovation, restoration, and construction--a decrease of $3,893,000 from the FY 1975 level of funding This request is distributed among three appropriation accounts:

Planning, construction and repairs at the National

Zoological Park $9,550,000

Restoration and renovation of other buildings and

facilities $1,467,000

Construction of the National Air and Space Museum

(liquidation of contract authority) $3,000,000

Construction and Improvements, National Zoological Park - The request of $9,550,000 for Zoo construction and improvements will sustain progress on implementation of the approved Master Plan. Maintaining momentum is important not only for program reasons; it also minimizes the effect of future year cost escalation and eliminates as quickly as possible the necessary public inconvenience caused by construction detours and activity. During the Bicentennial period, construction will be restricted to the perimeter of the Zoo.

This appropriation will accomplish the following:

An amount of $4,550,000 will permit completion of an initial self-contained portion of the general service and parking facilities. These facilities are pivotal to the entire Master Plan construction program. They will improve accommodation for visitor parking and centrally house and organize all service and support functions of the Zoo. Space vacated elsewhere in the Zoo by these support activities and certain current parking lots will become available for other projects in the Master Plan. Funds sought for FY 1976 will complete the lower level service building with roof-top parking for 298 cars. We will seek a further appropriation of $13,450,000 in FY 1977 to complete the associated parking structure.

Funding of $3,000,000 is sought to begin construction and renovation of exhibits in the lower Rock Creek area. The major new exhibit to be constructed .in FY 1976 is the Polar Bear exhibit which will have three viewing areas with water moats and simulated ice floes. Other projects include construction of new grizzly bear exhibits and complete renovation of existing bear dens for sun, sloth, and spectacle bears, and for Smokey the Bear. These plans will provide increased space for the bears and will improve visibility for the public.

Planning for future phases of the Master Plan must adhere to a carefully predetermined schedule. An amount of $490,000 requested for planning will allow completion of plans and specifications for the several projects in Beaver Valley.

An increase of $100,000 will be used to upgrade and standardize graphics and street furniture and to identify and coordinate graphic needs for the new facilities. And, an amount of $650,000 is required to continue the program of renovation, repairs, and preventive maintenance of existing facilities, in order to keep the heavily-used facilities in safe condition for the well-being of the public and the animals.

As a final item in the area of Zoo construction, an amount of $760,000 is sought to make necessary repairs, modifications, and improvements to the Zoo's Animal Conservation Center. This Center will be used not only as a conservation and breeding; facility, but will also benefit the Master Plan effort by serving as a temporary home for displaced animals. Furthermore, it will provide farming land for the production of selenium-rich hay.

R estoration and Renovation of Other Buildings - We are seeking an appropriation of $1,467,000 for the restoration, repair, and improvement of other Smithsonian buildings and facilities. Of this total, an amount of $200,000 will be used to continue a phased plan of road and facility improvements at the Mt. Hopkins Observatory near Tucson, Arizona; $150,000 is required to continue the phased installation

of fire control systems in the History and Technology and the Natural History Buildings; $75,000 is requested to complete conversion of the Tivoli Hotel site to offices and laboratories for the Tropical Research Institute in Panama; and an additional 5250,000 is sought to fund further improvements in the restoration of the Arts and Industries Building.

Initial planning for the development of the South Yard area was begun in FY 1975. The funding of $200,000 requested in FY 1976 will complete preparations for the Bicentennial, such as landscaping, plantings, and fixtures, and will also continue tlie preparation of plans for the phased development of the site subsequent to the Bicentennial. Another planning effort, the sixth floor library addition to the History and Technology Building destined in part to house the Dibner Collection cited earlier and to provide a major research center in the history of science and technology, will require an additional $125,000 to complete the final design.

Finally, an amount of $467,000 is sought for general building and facility repairs and improvements. These projects result from the heavy public use of the facilities, general deterioration because of age, safety requirements, and the occasional need generated by program requirements.

Construction, National Air and Space Museum - The third item under the general constniction heading is for $3,000,000 to liquidate the remaining balance of contract authority provided for construction of the National Air and Space Museum.

Transition Period

Details of our requirements for the transition period, which coincides with the second half of peak Bicentennial presentation activity, have been included by appropriation account in our printed budget, and I will be pleased to discuss them in greater detail, as desired.

This completes my summary presentation of the Institution's budget request for next year, and I would conclude my remarks by expressing my appreciation for the support of this subcommittee under which the Smithsonian has developed into an unparalleled scientific, educational, and cultural resource for the Nation. With your continued support, we will strive to ensure that this resource is utilized to its fullest potential.

INTRODUCTION OF ASSOCIATES

Senator Stevens. Please introduce your associates, after which you may proceed in any way you wish to summarize your statements.

Mr. Ripley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am happy to be here this morning with my colleagues and I would like to introduce them. Mr. Brooks is on my right and he is the Under Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. Next to him is Mr. Jameson, who is the Assistant Treasurer; and next to him is Mr. Ault, who is the Director of Support Activities. On my left is Mr. Wheeler, the Treasurer. Next to him is Dr. Challinor, who is the Assistant Secretary for Science; and beyond him is Mr. Blitzer, who is the Assistant Secretary for History and Art.

We also have with us today, Mr. Chairman, some of the directors of our organizations such as the Air and Space Museum, and I hope that I will be empowered to call on them from time to time in case you would like to hear testimony from them about their particular activities.

Senator Stevens. How about Mr. Euell ?

Mr. Ripley. Mr. Euell is here also. Mr. Euell is the Assistant Secretary for Public Service. I have not been able to turn around that far yet.

OPENING statement

I am very glad to be here and to summarize very briefly with an opening statement. Our statement has been submitted for the record, sir. I have a second statement here today which is an extract of the annual report of the institution for the year 1974. The year represents the completion by myself of 10 years as head of the Institution. In the report I expressed my particular appreciation for the support from the congressional committees, particularly the appropriations subcommittees over the past decade. This decade has been the dramatic interest expressed by the Federal Government made tangible in the creation of our sister organizations such as the National Endowments for the Arts and for the Humanities and in our own case the Smithsonian's own affiliate, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, the museums and related cultural institutions like them represent the largest visitation activity of our citizens including sporting events of any activity in this country. We are mindful of our own responsibilities at the Smithsonian to this public, as well as our basic charter. We continue to maintain critical, detailed review and evaluation of our ongoing programs and the application of current resources.

notable E^^NTS, fiscal year 1975

This past year has included several notable events such as the opening of the Hirshhorn Museum, the setting up of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Institute for Historical Research which was authorized by Congress in 1961, and the acceptance of the Dibner Library of the History of Science and Technology, an example of the collections which from time to time have been given to the Smithsonian. This is

the outstanding collection in private hands on the history of science.

The Science Information Exchange has been singled out this past year by the National Cancer Institute to conduct for them current analysis for cancer research programs.

We have a national anthropological film center which has been established not essentially as a new activity but as a way of coalescing the interest and concern of anthropologists around the country in the documentation on film of minority peoples in this country and especially native Americans. These films are enoromously important and were begun to be collected in the Smithsonian in the 1870's.

We have special Bicentennial activities which we will delineate to you with our coordinator of the Bicentennial program, Susan Hamilton. This Avork at the Smithsonian, which as you know Congress has encouraged and supported since 1967, is now nearing completion.

I could perhaps best summarize at this point the actual financial needs of the Institution which we are bringing to you and which were demonstrated to and approved by the Office of ^Management and Budget for this year.

Mr. Chairman, the overall dollar increase for the Smithsonian, considering all appropriation accounts, is $4.9 million or about 5 percent over the estimated fiscal year 1975 total. Within the six appropriation accounts affected there are three increases in funds, two decreases and one account held even.

Looking briefly at each one of these appropriation accounts, the major increase in our budget is $8.7 million, or about 12 percent, in Salaries and expenses. Directly or indirectly, these funds serve some 50 museums, galleries, a zoological park, research laboratories, special programs and supporting activities. These funds are related to our very heavy aimual visitation of about 16 million visitors this past year.

Of this increase $3.5 million will allow us to meet our public commitment to opening the National Air and Space Museum on July 4, 1976, which we believe will be the single most important event during the summer of the Bicentennial year in Washington. We will also present a wide array of national and local programs for the Bicentennial, including our outreach programs to communities across the country.

About $2.7 million of the increase will be applied to carefully selected research and exhibit projects, the care and accessibility of museum collections, and to the maintenance and protection of our buildings and facilities. And $2.5 million is required simply to meet the higher costs resulting from legislated pay raises, rate increases on various utilities and shipping rate hikes.

No increase in budfret is proposed this year for the special foreign currency program. The proposed $2 million budget consists of $1 million to support the ongoing preservation of the temples on the Island of Philae in Egypt, and $1 million for grants.

CONSTRUCTION INCREASES

For "Construction and improvements, National Zoological Park," we are rec|uesting the amount of $9.5 million as part of a phased program of improvements to the zoo. We wish to maintain momentum, if it is fiscally possible, because the present progress is excellent. We

are tremendously impressed with the public reception of what has already happened in restoring the zoo. We wish to continue to put it squarely into the latter third of the 20th century.

For restoration and renovation of buildings, we are seeking a bare-bones appropriation of $1.5 million, slightly below the level of this year, which we feel is modest and represents no more than a fraction of 1 percent of the value of our physical plant.

Finally, the request for construction of the National Air and Space Museum calls for the appropriation of $3 million, $4 million less than in the fiscal year 1975, for the completion of the contract authority and the opening of that building.

I think that concludes my opening statement, Mr. Chairman.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES INCREASE

Senator Ste\t:ns. I see as you have noted in your statement that the salaries and expenses account is up $8.7 million, or a 12-percent increase. How much of that increase is directly related to operating new facilities?

Mr. Ripley. The proportion represented by new facilities, namely the Air and Space Museum, I think Mr. Jameson should comment on that.

Mr. Jameson. It is, Mr. Chairman, about $1.8 million.

Senator Stevens. A million-eight?

Mr. Jameson. I underestimated, it is about $3.1 million, Mr. Chairman, including the funds and staff for the Air and Space Museum, itself, protection, and custodial staff to phase into the opening of the new museum, and utilities and communication costs for the new museum.

Senator Stevens. That is about a third of your increased salaries and expenses account. What is the balance of the increase for ? What does it relate to primarily ?

Mr. Ripley. We are requesting a total of 282 positions on our base of 3,050 for a total of 3,332 full-time permanent positions, Mr. Chairman. Now these 282 new positions repreeant a 9-percent increase over fiscal year 1975; 145 are for the needs of the new National Air and Space Museum which will have its public opening on July 4, 1976. Of this, 65 are requested under the National Air and Space Museum program. That is, 57 for custodial staff, 3 for development and preparation of the spacearium shows and other educational programs, 4 for exhibits preparation, installation, et cetera, and one administrative position. Fifty-five of these new jobs are for protection personnel and 25 positions are required to operate mechanical equipment and provide communications and transportation services to the new building.

Additionally, 137 new positions are requested for personnel in a number of other high-priority areas. Included in this total are 36 new jobs for protection personnel, 48 positions for custodial, mechanical, and general maintenance of our buildings and other facilities, 11 new jobs for personnel to strengthen various research and exhibition programs, and 20 new jobs are needed to support our efforts of restoration and preservation of the national collections.

I realize, Mr. Chairman, that it sounds as if we were creating dozens of new positions. But I can assure j^ou that the positions that we are

requesting are part of a phased program. We can only operate by phasing into the kinds of support we need for these big buildings and these major responsibilities. If we were to ask for what we really needed in any 1 year, the Office of Management and Budget would not allow it in any case. So we have to come to you each year with what seems like a continual reiteration of the same kinds of positions that we have been asking for in the preceding year. But this in effect is part of a phased program.

Senator Ste\t:xs. How many of them relate to the Bicentennial ?

Mr. Ripley. The Bicentennial is not requesting any permanent positions. What we are doing in our Bicentennial program, is, as we have already demonstrated to the Congress in the past year budget testimony, building up to a peak next year which will then begin to fall off. We will terminate these positions after fiscal year 1977. In other words, the only premise on which I would have come to the Congress and asked for support for the Bicentennial to begin with was that we realized it was an event rather than a permanent situation and to build up to that event we would have to have volunteers, part-time workers, dozens of various sources to take on enormously increased visitation, and the preparation of outreach programs. And we then de-escalate the following year.

Mr. Euell, is it true that we are not taking on permanent positions in the Bicentennial ?

Mr. Euell. No ; we are not.

XEW POSITIOXS, FY 1976

Senator Stevexs. Will you give a breakdown for the 282 positions, and I understand you have 50 part-time positions here; do you not? Which are related to facilities and which are related to the Bicentennial programs and how much of it is for regular program expansion ?

Mr. Ripley. Yes, sir, we will be happy to supply these for the record if we may.

[The information follows:]

CM r-^ K) to r-i- '^t

CM CM (N! LO

Ot-^totO"— I'^LncM

O (N .-H CM

GROWTH EMPLOYMENT

Senator Stevens. The summary which I have available here indicates that in the period since the beginning of fiscal 1974, including this request here for fiscal 1976, your permanent employment will increase from 2,880 to 3,332 in 2 fiscal years beginning with actual figures for 1974. That would be the terminal portion of 1974. The next one is 1975 and now 1976. You are going to go from 452 positions in 2 years with a base of 2,880. It seems that the cost of running the Smithsonian is going to be basically related to employment if we keep this

Mr. Ripley. I am sure, Mr. Chairman, you will realize that employment has always been the largest factor in our budget, because you cannot maintain these buildings without very heavy demand on employment, guards, custodians, maintenance, and exhibits personnel. We have and we will be glad to supply for the record if we may our revised fiscal 1975 employment ceiling which totals 3,050 and which we can demonstrate results in an adjustment downwards of 132 positions.

Senator Stevens. Well, this figure shows 3,050 for 1975.

Mr. Ripley. The actual number of people on board is always different from the ceiling that is established because of turnovers and at any one moment we never can come to our authorized ceiling. Is that right, Mr. Jameson? May I ask him to supplement what I am saying?

Mr. Jameson. Our authorized positions for fiscal year 1975 are 3,050. At any given moment during the year we have somewhat less than that due to turnover. And I might add something to the Secretary's statement on employment. I am not sure whether the Smithsonian is unique among the agencies that appear before you, but something on the order of 1.000 of our positions are for people like protection, custodian, and mechanical personnel. AVe serve our own buildings. We do not rely on the General Services Administration. Many of these employees are around-the-clock employees. In other words, we maintain more than one shift for these positions, like protection and mechanical services. As an example, to man one protection post which is a 24-hour post requires five positions on an average basis. So even though it may appear that our employment is somewhat overstated, we do have a healthy demand for manning posts 24 hours a day.

REASONS FOR GROWTH IN EMPLOYMENT

Senator Stevens. We can understand the increased necessity for personnel when you have a new building. That is why we have asked for the breakdown. But the Smithsonian has been there an awful long time and it seems that each year now we are having a substantial increase in terms of the Smithsonian. When other budgets are being cut, yours have been increased each year. As a matter of fact, this is a 10-percent increase, and next to one other one that we heard—I do not remember which one it was—there was only one other that came before this committee that had an increase of this size. We wonder how—obviously you did a good job iustifving for the 0MB or you would not have gotten it throusrh. But I think we would like to know what rationale you used with 0MB to p-et this amount of increase in a year like this when everything else is being cut.

Mr. Ripley. I am entirely in agreement with you, Mr. Chairman. As 1 believe it will become apparent when we supply a list of these numbers and the rationale as to why we are asking for them. It is part merely of a phased program. That is we are never allowed in any one year, or never would have been, let us say, 4 or 5 years ago in the anticipation of the kinds of building support we need, to ask for the full number. ISo that we are constantly in a relatively understaffed j^osition, and what we are doing here is a phased program, year by year, to try and build up to the kind of strength that we think these buildings deserve. In other words, we never could ask for them all at once. Neither the Office of Management and Budget nor the Congress would listen to us. We have opened as you know another museum in this past year. It has already been visited by over a million people and it's needs in terms of custodian maintenance and guard demands are far greater than we anticipated. We have had to take people off of other guards posts to help to fill in the gap. As Mr. Jameson explained, live people are involved in every 24-hour guard post. If you open a new museum and you get fantastic visitation, you have got to maximize the number of guard posts for those purposes. For example, the objects of art in the Hirshhorn are very close to the visitors and they constantly, maybe because of enthusiasm or surprise, handle these objects, which is very dangerous. Therefore, we had to increase the number of guards while at the same time getting our exhibits personnel to build closed cases for these objects merely to try and protect them from the rather enthusiastic public.

UNCONTROLLABLE INCREASES

Senator Stevens. You listed in your analysis of increased positions both uncontrollable and program. What do you consider to be uncontrollable ?

Mr. Ripley. The uncontrollable increases section of our fiscal year 1976 salaries and expenses budget speaks to $2.5 million of additional costs which result primarily from the effects of legislative actions on important base resources of the Institution. Of this total, $1.9 million is for necessary pay and related benefits for the currently authorized level of staffing. This amount is allocated as follows: $827,000 is to annualize funding for the cost of the October 1974 General Schedule and October 1974 wage pay raises; $801,000 to meet the cost of step increases, both annualizing the cost of such increases granted in 1975 and the part-year cost of the additional raises granted in 1976; and $160,000 for additional salaries and benefit costs resulting from an extra workday in 1976. And finally, in this category, $85,000 is to meet increased costs associated with workmen's compensation.

The second item in the total is $617,000 to meet the cost of utility rate increases which are continually going up. The cost of new requirements for utilities at the new National Air and Space Museum are separately justified elsewhere however.

Finally, $20,000 is to meet shipping rate increases, particularly in the areas of ocean freight and shipping to the docks. This is essentially our international exchange service which was set up and authorized by the Congress in the last century.

REORGANIZATIONS

Senator Stevens. Is it true that you had some reorganization in the Smithsonian this last year ?

Mr. Ripley. Yes, sir. We are continually trying to review our organization and are strengthening our efficiency plans for the Institution. During the past year we have initiated or continued certain internal reorganizations. These are designed to improve operational efficiency by aligning related or complementary functions or by strengthening the ability of certain major museums and gallerys to administer directly particular aspects of their programs.

Senator Ste\-ens. Did these result in the transfer of any funds or personnel from one appropriation activity to another in these reorganizations ?

Mr. Ripley. Not between appropriations; all are in salaries and expenses. I think that Mr. Jameson can answer that.

Mr. Jameson. Yes, Mr. Chairman. We maintain the integrity of the appropriations for those particular functions such as custodial operations, exhibit activities, shipping, or printing. These resources were simply placed under the administration of bureau directors. And I might point out that for many, many years, I suspect going back to the first time the Smithsonian got an appropriation, many of these resources have been at the demand of our program activities. We are basically talking about supportive kinds of work and it seemed to us that those funds and personnel resources could be managed more effectively if they were under a single management or user organization unit where the director could make iudgment as to priorities. For instance, if there is a limited amount of printing money, does he choose to print a research publication or an exhibit catalog. But the funds as appropriated to us by the Conj?ress continue to be used in those amounts for exactly the purposes for which they were appropriated.

Senator STE^T.NS. Will you give us in more detail on these transfers, the amount of the funds involved and the numbers of positions that were shifted from function to function so that we can see the impact of it, please?

Mr. Jameson. Yes sir. Would you like to have that now ?

Senator Stevens. No, for the record.

[The information follows:]

00 CTi Csl

Oj| [--

O -H

^1

to CNl •^ (Nl to

LO CN 1—I to

51-957 O - 75 - pi. 4-25

PERSONNEL ADJUSTMENTS

Mr. Stevens. Last year the Smithsonian Institution requested 352 new positions for fiscal 1975. What did you end up with after adjusting to the reductions in your appropriation request ?

Mr. Brooks. As a result of the new appropriated funds in fiscal year 1975, we established 170 new positions.

Mr. Stevens. Although your permanent and part-time employment dropped in 1975 from your original request, your average employment climbed, indicating less lapse. Why is this?

Mr. Brooks. Our original estimate of average employment for fiscal year 1975 was 3,072. In presenting the fiscal year 1975 estimate in the 1976 estimate we are including an average employment figure of 3,110. As I have just indicated we cut full-time permanent employment for two reasons last year, congressional reduction and a voluntary reduction. We also tried to assess the impact of the current employment situation. It was our assessment that even with fewer full-time permanent positions we would have an increase in average employment.

Our reasoning in this was that the employees already on board would continue in greater numbers, not leaving for new positions. And two, that it would be considerably easier to employ the new people we were seeking. We have found that we were too optimistic and our current estimate on average employment is 2,998.

I might point out that we did hire 140 employees in March. Many of these new hires were part-time employees hired to help keep our several museums open during the evening. But we also hired 56 permanent employees. We are hopeful that this level of new employment will continue through June 30.

EISENHOWER INSTITUTE

Senator Stevens. Eisenhower Institute, Doctor: How much of the funding that you are requesting here is for new personnel related to that institute?

Mr. Ripley. Could I ask Mr. Blitzer to answer that?

Mr. Blitzer. There is no new funding, and no new positions are requested for it. This is an administrative transfer of the kind Mr. Jameson was describing from the National Armed Forces Museum Advisory Board which had been a line item in our budget to the National Museum of History and Technology to carry out the purpose of the 1961 act.

Senator Stevens. Was there any provision for that in 1975 ? I take it from what you say there was no line item in 1975 ?

Mr. Blitzer. There was a line item in fiscal year 1975 for the National Armed Forces Museum Advisory Board.

Senator Stevens. Not for the Eisenhower Institute ?

Mr. Blitzer. The Eisenhower Institute, as was explained in our 1975 justification, is having its cost met this year in the budget of the Museum of History and Technology. Our attempt for years has been to bring the two activities far more closely together. The Museum of History and Technology has always had a division of Armed Forces history. It seemed to us to be much more efficient and much more productive to relate these two, which is now what we have done.

Senator Stevens. Thank you.

ANTHROPOLOGICAL FILM CENTER

With regard to the film center, the anthropological film center, Doctor, what was the total Federal cost in that and where did you obtain the moneys?

Mr. Ripley. We have for a number of years been conducting an item which is developed in our annual budget known as the center for the study of man, which is an outgrowth or part of our general concerns in anthropology. The anthropological film center comes under this. I think Dr. Challinor can answer that.

Mr. Chx\llinor. This film center, Mr. Chairman, is funded actually during fiscal 1975 with $259,000 which we got in the form of grants from the National Institutes of Health and the National Endowment for the Humanities. So the operations of this film center are being maintained by grants. The one position we are looking for in fiscal 1976 is a position of a director of this film center. We have requested $20,000 Federal funds for his salary. All of the other expenses we have will be maintained by grants and contracts.

' OTHER federal SUPPORT

Senator Stevens. These are all Federal funds, aren't they? The sources you mentioned are both Federal ?

Mr. Challinor. These are Federal sources paid to the Smithsonian, which accepts them under our grant and contract section, which then is outside of our Federal appropriation funds. Certainly the National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Institutes of Health contracts were with Federal dollars appropriated to those two organizations.

Mr. Ripley. As you know, Mr. Chairman, we continually seek outside sources of funds for grants, contracts or research programs for the Institution. Some of these institutions from whom we seek these funds are private and some are publicly supported. I am sure that you already know about our general authorization to accept and receive such funds and administer them for the purposes of the Institution.

Senator Stevens. What are you going to do if you don't get those two Federal grants? Both of those supporting agencies are funded through this committee. What is going to happen if those funds are not sufficient to maintain this center ?

Mr. Ripley. We will bow to the judgment of the committee, Mr. Chairman, as we always do, and we will continue to go to the private foundations who continually ask us to seek support from the Federal Government for these activities.

Senator Stevens. In this instance the film center is being maintained by two Federal organizations that are highly sensitive right now in terms of whether or not they too are going to get the increases they have requested. What is the total cost for the film center in 1976 ?

Mr, Challinor. We are estimating, Mr. Chairman, between $260,000 and $300,000.

Senator Stevens. And do you have a commitment from NIH or NEH

Mr. Challinor. Excuse me. In fiscal 1976 we have a proposal into the Ford Foundation for almost all of that amount. Whether we get it or not, that is another question. A proposal is being prepared.

Senator Stevens. Do you have any proposals before the Humanities or before NIH ?

Mr. Challinor. For fiscal 1976 ?

Senator Stevens. Yes.

Mr. Challinor. The current NEH grant runs through October 1, 1975. The request for an additional year of funding at the same level has already been submitted. A proposal to NIMH for $78,00 J has also been submitted.

Senator Stevens. This is much like the problems we have trying to figure out how much money is going to public broadcasting. We suddenly find out the money we are giving to humanities and the arts is going into public broadcasting, and we are trying to find out how much real support there is for public broadcasting. It is just about impossible to do because there is so much contracting and mutual support.

Well, we will be happy to learn whether you get the Ford Foundation support. We hope you do.

increase for protection and maintenance

The biggest increase here is for protection and maintenance and that was about the largest one last year. It was a $2 million increase last year, and it is a $3 million increase this year. Now we understand the necessity for the new positions for the new facilities, but what is your justification for the increase in this item for existing facilites?

Mr. Ripley. Well, as I think it would appear to this committee and to the Office of Management and Budget, if we were to ask for the kinds of necessary staff that our own analysis tells us we should have in 1 fiscal year, we would probably be turned down because they are so major. So we have adopted a phased program of trying to ask each year for increments which will then help to meet over a period of time our real needs.

Senator Stevens. Well, are these positions assigned? We are talking about the protection, maintenance. Are they assigned particular facilities or buildings within the Smithsonian ?

Mr. Ripley. Essentially they are.

Senator Stevens. Would you give us a breakdown for this request in terms of the positions, old and new in those buildings and the facilities that they are assigned to ?

Mr. Ripley. We would be very glad to, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Ault has some explanation in case you would like it now of why we come back to you each year with what seems to be a kind of nagging increment to these sorts of positions.

[The information follows:]

DISTRIBUTION OF PROTECTION SERVICES POSITIONS FY 76 (534 Positions)

1. Office of Protection Services (9 positions)

Director, OPS - GS-15 Assistant Director. OPS - GS-14 Administrative Assistant - GS-12 Supply Technician /!_ - GS-7 Supply Clerk /j_ - GS-5 Secretary - GS-7 Administrative Clerk /J_ - GS-6 Identification Clerk /]_ - GS-5 Clerk Typist /2 - GS-5

2. Safety and Health Division (11 positions)

Chief, Safety and Health - GS-13

Safety Management Officer - GS-13

Fire Safety Engineer - GS-13

Safety Specialist - GS-9

Safety Specialist Trainee - GS-7

Secretary - GS-6

Fire Inspector (2) - GS-7

RN (Natural History) - GS-7

RN (History § Technology) - GS-9

RN (Hirshhom) - GS-7

3. Systems Division [Z_ (7 positions)

Chief, Systems Division - GS-12 Protection Systems Assistant - GS-7 Locksmith (3) - WG-11 Systems Technician - WG-11 Secretary - GS-5

4. Protection Division (507 positions)

a. Headquarters (8 positions) Chief, Protection Division - GS-13 Assistant Chief - GS-12 Inspector (2) - GS-11

Training Instructor - GS-9 Training Instructor - GS-8 Secretary - GS-6 Clerk Typist - GS-5

b. Alarm Control Center (7 positions) Control Room Supervisor (3) - GS-7 Control Room Operator (4)/^ - GS-6

c. Investigations Branch (7 positions) Chief Investigator - GS-11 Detective (2) - GS-6

Clerk Typist (2) - GS-4 Investigator (2)/2 - GS-7

d. Canine Corps (6 positions) /4 Canine Supervisor - GS-6 Canine Officer (5) - GS-5

e. National Museum of Natural History (72 positions) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-9 (1) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (4) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (8)

Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (30) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (23) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (6)/2^

f. National Museum of History 5 Technology (79 positions) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-9 (1)

Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (4) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (8) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (35) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (25) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (6) /2^

g. Fine Arts § Portrait Galleries Building (55 positions^ Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-9 (1)

Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (2) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (4) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (26) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (20)

h. Hirshhom Museum § Sculpture Garden (66 positions) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (2) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (4) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (34) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (26)

i. National Air and Space Museum, (85 positionsj Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-9 (1) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (1) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (4)/2 Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (4) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (5)/2 Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (5) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (18)/^ Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (19) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (29)/2 Elec. Equip. Repairer - WG-10 (1)

j. Arts and Industries Building (53 positions) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-9 (1) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (4) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (8) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (15) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (3) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 {2)/2^

k. Freer Gallery of Art (17 positions) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (1) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (10) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (6)

1. Smithsonian Building (8 positions) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (8)

m. Old Air and Space Building (2 positions) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (2)

n. Anacostia Museum (4 positions) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (4)

o. Renwick Gallery (15 positions)

Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (1) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (9) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (5)

p. Facilities away from Mall (31 positions) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-7 (2) Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (4) Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (18) Police Officer/Guard - GS-4 (7)

q. Cooper-Hewitt Museum (14 positions^

Police/Guard Supervisor - GS-6 (1) /2 Police Officer/Guard - GS-5 (13) /2

Notes

/I Transferred from Protection Division during Fiscal Year 1975.

/2 New position requested for Fiscal Year 1976.

/3 Transferred from Protection Division during Fiscal Year 1975, elevated to Division Status.

/4 These positions are used to supplement the regular protection forces in the Mall area facilities.

PROTECTION INCREASES

Mr. AuLT. Mr. Chairman, we are asking for 91 additional spaces for protection this year. The majority, 55, are for the National Air and Space Museum and the remainder are to bring us incrementally more toward the manning that we feel we should achieve to continue to bring down the rate of criminal incidents within the Institution. I am happy to report that due to the 43 additional positions granted us last year, our rate of incidents has diminished. We still have unfortunately too many of these incidents.

Senator Stevens. It sort of looks like Parkinson's Law. Each year there is increment and each year it is increasing. And again, I am not being critical. I just wonder when we see everybody else beijicr sliced as hard as they are how you people manage to convince 0MB that your increases are justified in view of the other cuts that are being made. They are sizable in other areas.

MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY

What about the Natural History Museum? There are 19 new positions in the Natural History Museum. Is there anything new involved in that museum ?

Mr. Ripley. Yes, sir. We are, of course, developing a number of exhibitions in connection with replacing older exhibits as they wear out with new ones that have to be redesigned. We are requesting a total increase of 19 positions and $260,000. For collections management we need 11 technicians to provide additional assistance for the care of collections which grow at a substantial rate and are being utilized increasingly each year. The request also includes tliree exhibits technicians and additional funding to provide for the phased modernization of exhibit halls to enhance their educational value.

Senator Ste\-ens. May I interrupt. When you talk about phased modernization of exhibit halls, is this just the first phase? Are we going to face an increment next vear for that one too ?

Mr. Ripley. We will be coming back to you each year, depending on the will of the Congress, to ask for a phased redesign of our exhibit halls in the Museum of Natural History, but not requestinsr any substantial new dollars for this work. That building, Mr. Chairman, was built in 1918 pnd the exhibits first set up then were modernized at the conclusion of World War II. Already many of those are now substantially worn out or overused, as you know. The visitation of this museum is something in the neighborhood of 3.2 million a year, and the demand for use of the materials and specimens is increasing all the time. Whether it is totem poles or bones of dinosaurs or potsherds from the Southwest or Indian artifacts, we have incredibly increased concern bv citizens of this country who want to ask questions and who have developed programs either on their own or have scientific training in various areas of research dealing with these materials. Thev get tremendous uses because in effect we are the Nation's center for documentation in the answering of questions, all kinds of questions about natural history.

Senator Stevens. I think I have sr>ent as much time in those halls, especially in this one, the Natural History Museum, as any Member of the Senate. What I am trying to find out is in this phased modern-

ization concept, do you have a total project and this is the first phase ?

Mr. EiPLEY. We completed this first phase last year with the Ice Age Hall. Is that right, Mr. Challinor?

Mr. Challinor. Yes, Emergence of Man.

Mr. Ripley. The Emergence of Man was the first phase of the third cycle since the completion of the museum in bringing up to date the exhibits.

Senator Stevens. But the museum itself, is there a total project for the Museum of Natural History for the third phase ?

Mr. Ripley. Yes.

Senator Stevens. What does the total project cost ?

Mr. Challinor. Mr. Chairman, our long-term goal is to try and renovate or redesign a new hall every year. We anticipate that each of these new halls will cost in the vicinity of $350,000 to $450,000 to completely redo. We have opened this hall of the Ice Age and the Emergence of Man. We are now working on a Bicentennial Hall which is partly supported by Bicentennial funds. We expect to open at the end of this year a hall on South America. We will have another on lunar geology. This in turn is the request for a phased renovation of the exhibit halls of the Museum of Natural History that Ave anticipate will each cost between $300,000 and $500,000 over as long a period as the Congress will continue the funds to do this. There are about 30 halls in total. So maybe for the next decade we will come in each year to ask for funds to renovate these exhibits, but not necessarily increased funds. These funds will be in our base if you grant this increase this year.

Senator Stevens. When you get to the end of 10 years, you will start all over again ? Is that what you are saying ? It is sort of a constant cycle ?

Mr. Challinor. That is possible.

SMITHSONIAN ASTROPHYSICAL OBSERVATORY

Senator Stevens. You have a $125,000 request for high energy and optical and infrared laboratories. Do these laboratories in any way duplicate other space related research ?

Mr. Challinor. NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala., high energy facility is scheduled to be operational in fiscal year 1977. This multimillion-dollar facility is, of course, much larger and more sophisticated than the one proposed by SAO, and is intended to be used to perform functional tests of entire systems and as such will be tied up for long periods at a time. The proposed SAO facility, on the other hand, is needed to provide short turnaround capability in support of research dedicated to detector development, granting studies, rocket calibration and adjustments, and optical studies. This research work is needed in support of our ongoing scientific commitment to the NASA HEAO, that is High Energy Astronomical Observatory, program and the future NASA Space Shuttle program.

In addition to the difference in basic purpose of the NASA and SAO laboratories, the proposed SAO laboratory will have the unique capability of attaining extremely high vacuum conditions which are necessary for the development of negative electron device detectors as well as other detection systems.

The proposed optical and infrared laboratory will be particularly tailored to support the SAO program of development, fabrication and calibration of instrumentation to be used with the multiple mirror telescope, or MMT, other SAO ground telescopes measuring 60 and 24 inches, and the SAO balloon-borne infrared telescope. As with all observatories, it is essential that laboratory facilities be provided for the development of equipment and instrumentation which are to be used on ground based optical telescopes and balloon-borne infrared telescopes. If observatories are to maintain viable and effective observational research programs, the duplication of laboratory facilities becomes unavoidable.

VISITING SCIEXTIST AND POSTDOCTORAL PROGRAMS

Senator Stevens. $44,000 is requested to support visiting scientist and postdoctoral programs at the Observatory. ^Vhy is the Smithsonian getting into this type of program ?

Mr. Challinor. The visiting scientist and postdoctoral programs, we believe, are within the fundamental mandate of the Institution, that is, increase and dissemination of knowledge among men. In addition, these programs increase the effectiveness of SAO's research facilities. The visiting scientist program provides an opportunity for members of SAO's scientific staff to work closely with leading scientists in their particular area of research whereas the postdoctoral fellows provide new and stimulating ideas.

Senator Ste\t:ns. Please supply for the record how the $44,000 will be spent and what future program obligations are estimated in this request.

Mr. Challinor. I will be pleased to submit that for the record.

[The information follows:]

Stipend and benefits for 2 additional postdoctoral fellows $30, 000

Salary for 1 additional visiting scientist 6, 000

Computing time 8, 000

Total 44,000

It is expected that Harvard will spend an equal amount for the support of an equal number of postdoctoral fellows and visiting scientists.

It is planned to request in FY 1977 an increase of $40,000 to support two additional postdoctoral fellows and for one additional visiting scientist and related costs.

With this addition, SAO will have reached the objective of this program which is planned to continue at the same level, that is, six postdoctoral fellows and three visiting scientists. Of course, it is expected that Harvard will increase its program accordingly.

MULTIMIRROR TELESCOPE

Senator Stevens. What is the funding in this budget for the multi-mirror telescope which you hope to install atop Mount Hopkins in fiscal year 1976?

Mr. Challinor. Included in the fiscal year 1975 base of $3,402,000 is an amount of $750,000 for the multimirror telescope program for fiscal year 1976.

Senator Stevens. What will be the total cost of this project ?

Mr. Challinor. The SAO salaries and expenses cost for the telescope is $5,468,000 and $1,301,000 from the University of Arizona, with a total estimated cost at completion of $6,769,000.

SMITHSONIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Senator Stevens. What program expansion has occurred at your Tropical Research Institute to require four additional positions ?

Mr. Challinor. I will highlight the requested positions:

Biochemical geneticist: One of the basic biological questions we are examining at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute is how so many kinds of animals can coexist in the tropics. For example, there are more breeding species of birds on 6 square miles of Barro Colorado Island than in the entire State of New York. Obviously such a dense species packing requires fine tuning of organisms' adjustment to their environment. Electrophoretic techniques provide us with a powerful, modern tool in our attempts to understand the genetic differences of many of the related species in the tropics. We can examine fine-scale differences between the hemoglobins, enzymes and other complex molecules of otherwise undistinguishable organisms by using these techniques. We can also detect subtle responses to environmental changes, as well as phenomena such as influx of new species to the island. The theoretical base which we already have at STRI requires the additional input of biochemical data in order to keep our capability comprehensive and to be able to continually update our capability.

Technician: The technician is required to carry out the laboratory analysis for the scientists in the field.

BCI resident naturalist: The BCI resident naturalist is required to provide continuity and coordination of the many scientists who are conducting research on BCI, but whose base is in the Smithsonian in Washington or another university. Someone who is full time in residence will provide the continuity when the other scientists are at other bureaus of the Smithsonian.

Janitor-guard: In fiscal year 1975, the first staff members occupied the partially renovated Tivoli Building. In fiscal year 1976, the building will be completed and the administrative and support functions will move. The additional building will require the services of a janitor-guard.

radiation biology LABORATORY

Senator Stevens. Where is your Radiation Biology Laboratory located ?

Mr. Challinor. The Smithsonian Radiation Biology Laboratory is located at 12441 Parklawn Drive, Rockville, Md. 20852.

Senator Stevens. Does this research duplicate radiation biology efforts of the Atomic Energy Commission, or ERDA as it is called now?

Mr. Challinor. Since its inception in 1926, the research of the Smithsonian Radiation Biology Laboratory has been directed toward understanding cellular and subcellular mechanisms and processes by which organisms utilize solar energy for growth and development. It in no way duplicates the missions of AEC or ERDA which is the study of ionizing or atomic radiation in energy development. The main areas of research at the Smithsonian Radiation Biology Laboratory are the physiology and biochemistry of the developmental responses of organisms to light and the measurement of the spectral quality of natural daylight.

CHESAPEAKE BAY CENTER

Senator Stevens. How about the Chesapeake Bay Center? I remember we had a conversation about that 2 years ago, Doctor. There is an education assistant for tourists and conferences in this request. Do you have funds and personnel devoted at Chesapeake to education ?

Mr. Ripley. Mr. Challinor, would you like to answer that ?

Mr. Challinor. Yes, we do Mr. Chairman. We have a grant of $125,000 to be paid in increments of $25,000 a year over a 5-year period. As I recall, we are finishing the 3d year of that period. The point of this grant was for educational programs at the Chesapeake Bay Center.

Senator Stevens. Where was that grant from ?

Mr. Challinor. That grant was from the Xoble Foundation in Greenwich, Conn. We also have had other grants that helped us toward construction of a building. The education program that we have run there has been extraordinarily successful. And we have been indeed overwhelmed with requests. We will have run about 15 workshops on environmental education covering several hundred adult teachers. From March through November we will have had about 7,000 to 8,000 schoolchildren come through the center and we will have trained some 20 scouts to take elementary schoolchildren through the woods and explain what is happening. We have a summer ecology program there that handles between 300 and 400 children each summer who usually come for 1 to 2 week periods. The demand has been enormous as this particular facility is accessible to Baltimore and Washington, D.C.

Senator Stevens. Did you notify the committee that there would be Federal support required for this facility, that it Avould require Federal funds ?

Mr. Challinor. We have kept the Congress informed to the best of our ability of the development of this center and what our long range plans for it have been each year we come before the committee.

environmental education

Senator Stevens. The HEW Subcommittee also deals with the problems of environmental education for the Xation. It seems that this Chesapeake Bay Center is sort of an Eastern Shore environmental center for this area supported with Federal funds.

Mr. Challinor. It is supported by both Federal funds and private funds.

Senator Ste\'ens. Why should we set up a separate program for one portion of the country with private funds and look for the Federal Government to support it when we have a national program of environmental education which is not the Smithsonian's responsibility ? ^ Mr. Challinor. You are exactly right, Mr. Chairman. I might mention the HEW has supported some of the environmental educational programs we have run at the center.

Senator Stevens. I would like to have one for Anchorage. How am I going to get one ? I can't get Federal funds for it. But vou go out and get private funds and suddenly the Eastern Shore has a federally-supported environmental center. And this goes back to our original

conversation. That whole Chesapeake Center was not Smithsonian's responsibility in the beginning. And it seems that it is just going to expand and you will have a nice community for Baltimore and Washington with a federally supported environmental program, entirely separate from the national environmental education program which we are funding to the best of our ability.

Mr. Rlpley. To our great sorrow, Senator, we just lost Frank Williamson, the director of the Chesapeake Bay Center, to the western shore of Alaska. He has gone up to join the government of Alaska under your Governor as director in the area of the environment and health, I believe.

Senator Stevens. I thought he was from Johns Hopkins.

Mr. ErPLEY. He has been an employee of the Smithsonian at the Chesapeake Bay Center and served as its director for a number of years. And I hope you will ask him the next time you see him about these kinds of environmental education needs because he is particularly interested in this kind of work and I am sure would design a program which would merit appropriate HEW support in Alaska.

Senator Stevens. Let me tell you, we have had one. As a matter of fact we had the first one.

Mr. E-iPLEY. Excuse me, I thought you said you didn't have one.

Senator Stevens. I said I would like to have one like this where you go out and get private funds and you look to the Federal Government to support it for the private community independent of HEW. You are looking to the Smithsonian budget to support an environmental education program for the eastern shore, that is what you are really doing. And it ought to be presented to HEW.

Mr. KiPLEY. Well, we constantly do relate to HEW on these matters. I know that Dr. Williamson has consistently beaten the streets up and down with his shoe leather, as well as myself, in places like New York, trying to make sure that we put together a mosaic of funds which will run an organization of this sort. If we do innovative things we can get money from organizations like HEW.

Senator Stevens. As I recall the Cheaspeake Bay Center, Doctor, it was at the same time they were trying to get NOAA funds to open up a center out there. And really, the Chesapeake Bay Center is somewhat in competition with NOAA to begin with.

Mr. Ripley. I can assure you we are not in competition with NOAA and they know that. I would be glad to supply any information that you would like in that regard.

Senator Stevens. I just would hope you would notify this committee if you are going to acquire facilities that will need Federal support so that we could have some indication of it.

Mr. Ripley. Well, we do this from time to time, Mr. Chairman, although, as you will note, the history of the Smithsonian consists of the acquisition of things. It is difficult at times to draw an exact distinction between the notification that a particular Appropriations Committee would like and not burdening the committee with too much information. We turn down many things, and we would be glad to supply you with a list of the kinds of things that we have turned down.

Senator Stevens. I would like to have that list. The staff would like to see the list of the things that have been turned down.

[The information follows:]

REPRESENTATIVE PROPOSALS, PROJECTS, PROGRAMS DECLINED BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION IN RECENT YEARS (with brief references to implicit responsibilities)

San Francisco Mint, San Francisco, California (rehabilitation,

custody, creation of museum)

Mid-America Center, Hot Springs, Arkansas (comprehensive

development of educational center, including exhibitions)

Mayer House, New York City, New York (custody, suitable use

and display)

Living Historical Farms of the United States (legislative program

to promote development of Living Historical Farms in the United States)

National Oceanographic Bill/later became NOAA, Department of

Commerce (legislative program for oceanography)

American Film Institute, Washington, D. C. (custody, display,

archival function)

Environmental Data Bank (proposed legislation - broad assembly

and dissemination of data)

Folklife Foundation (legislative program, demonstrations nation-wide)

Old St. Louis Post Office Building, St. Louis, Missouri (rehabilitation,

creation of museum)

Jefferson Patterson House, York, Maine (custody, exhibitions)

Pacific Science Center, Seattle, Washington (custody of an

established local museum, educational center, successfully operating)

Collection of Rare Books donor from Arizona (accession, with

conditions)

Franklin Mint, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (custody, exhibitions)

Center for Taxonomic Research, Beltsville, Maryland (broad

custodial and referral responsibilities)

The Textile Museum, Washington, D. C. (custody)

WETA, Washington, D. C. (custody and operation of educational TV

station)

Chicago Regional Air Museum, Chicago, Illinois (custody, exhibition)

Union Station/Visitor Center, Washington, D.C. (study developed on

reconstruction)

Cincinnati Railroad Terminal, Cincinnati, Ohio (rehabilitation,

creation of museum)

S.S. United States, proposal from T. J. D. Management Services Corp. ,

New York, New York, for Smithsonian to take title and assist in developing exhibits

Dodge House, Crosse Pointe, Michigan (custody of collections and

maintain as museum)

Children's Zoo proposed for National Zoological Park, Washington, D. C.

proposal by donor to give $500,000 to establish within the National Zoo.

American Type Culture Collection, Rockville, Maryland (collection of

live colonies of virus, bacteria and fungi - pure strains used in research by various government agencies and private pharmaceutical corapanies)

The above list is by no means complete but is representative of the proposals we have had in recent years.

ACCESSION' POLICY

Mr. Ripley. Is is always assumed, Mr. Chairman, as you know, that a museum is a grabber and we will grab anything off the streets so to speak. But we constantly learn how to say no, and we do this very prudently.

Senator Stevens. I think you are misunderstanding us, and again this goes back to the first conversation I got into as a member of the subcommittee over that Cheaspeake Bay Center. It just seems to me that there are national programs involved in a particular area such as this one, environmental education. I do not know why you should feel compelled to be involved in environmental education and provide education in environment for the Boy Scouts and the children of Washington and Baltimore when there is a Federal program for that. They have it in HEW and they can justify it just like everybody else through the environmental education program. It is there, but you have set up a different program. And it goes beyond what we have done for the rest of the country.

Mr. Challinor. I might point out, Mr. Chairman, that the education program is only one facet of the work that goes on for the Chesapeake Bay Center. Because of its unique location and the facilities available there in our judgment this was a worthwhile activity to undertake. But it was done in no sense in competition with HEW.

NATIONAL AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM

Senator Stevens. I understand. Well let us go to the Air and Space Museum. I believe you have a request of $1.5 million increase for that this year. It is to open on July 4 of next year, is that right ?

Mr. Ripley. That is right, Mr. Chairman. We have Mr. Collins here who can give you some information on that.

Senator Stevens. Do you know what the operating cost of the museum would be when it opens ?

Mr. Collins. We expect to keep the total operating cost at the same level for fiscal year 1977 and fiscal 1978. This will allow us to complete our exhibits program.

Senator Stevens. Is that target date firm ?

Mr. Collins. Yes; it is, Mr. Chairman, July 4, 1976, is our opening date.

Senator Ste\t:ns. That is great. It will be a fine addition to the Smithsonian. Do you have any problems at all with regard to that in terms of aquisition or anything else ?

Mr. Collins, No, sir. We have no major problems provided we get our full level of funding for fiscal year 1976. Fiscal year 1975 has been primarily a year of exhibits design and fiscal year 1976 is primarily a year of exhibits production. So, if we are short in 1976, that means that some of the exhibits which we have designed in the past would not be produced in time for opening.

Senator Stevens. I thank you very much.

Mr. Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARK

Senator Stevens. On the zoo, you have 10 new positions and a $180,-000 program increase for zoo operations. Are any of those new positions tied to new facilities ?

Mr. KiPLEY. Mr. Reed is here, Mr. Chairman. I think it is worthwhile pointing out that the question of new positions overall in regard to the Smithsonian does have a hidden cost that is presently not explained. That is, for example, when we are lacking custodial or other help what we are presently doing at the facilities we have both at the zoo and in other parts of the Smithsonian is having to spend overtime money in order to meet the current needs. Now if we come and, let us say, ask for an increase of $50,000 for custodial needs in a year such as 1976, it means that we are actually spending this year about $30,000 which we really don't have for overtime.

Senator Stevens. With regard to the 10 new positions, are those new positions involved with any new facilities at the zoo ?

Mr. Reed. Sir, they will be. We have renovated the monkey house and we are enlarging and renovating the elephant yards and the bird house plaza and replacing the old 1890 lion house with a new facility. We are requesting four animal keepers, which amounts to 2% posts since we are open every day of the year. We are also seeking an additional air-conditioning and heating mechanic to take care of the new facilities and one exhibit specialist. The other four positions will be used at the Front Royal Research and Conservation Center which was established 2 years ago.

revised ANIMAL COLLECTION

Senator Stevens. What does this mean: "Revised and elaborated animal collection" ?

Mr. Reed. Revised and elaborated animal collection ?

Senator Stevens. That is what you stated, you need four more animal keepers for revised and elaborated animal collection.

Mr. Reed. We are constantly reemphasizing or increasing our emphasis on family exhibits of breeding animals, trying to make our exhibits more meaningful to the public in the terms of ecology and in terms of what is happening to the animals in the wild considering the tremendous destruction of wildlife and natural habitat taking place throughout the world. So there will be new animals that we will be exhibiting in these areas. Particularly in the bird house yards and in the remodeled monkey house. It will be a smaller collection than we had previously. We have reduced the monkey house from 24 exhibits down to 14, but we will have a more select group of animals to show the widespread of the entire monkey kingdom, if you wish to call it that. So there is a constant change in selection of animals and in emphasis of how we exhibit them and what we are trying to exhibit them for. We are trying to make it a more meaningful exhibit to our visitors in terms of what is happening to the animal kingdom and what we humans are doing to our fellow travelers on this planet.

51-957 O - 75 - pt. 4-26

Senator Stevens. In the justification for the four new people, is the revision in your manner of interpreting this ? I don't really know how to put it, but it seems that you are reducing the population, you are reducing the amount of space that is involved, but you are increasing the number of handlers for the population of the zoo now. Is that correct ?

Mr. Keed. No, Mr. Chairman. That is not essentially correct. We are augmenting keepers that we already have and we are increasing the amount of space that we are using. The lion facility, for instance, will increase three times.

Senator Stevens. Has the population increased at all ?

Mr. Reed. The jwpulation of the lions and tigers, the big cats, will be doubled. We will be maintaining 25 animals in family groups of two species. The bird area will be increased and the population of birds increased. We will go up to about two additional acres of physical space. The elephant house yards have been physically increased by about two acres. We have given each of the animals much more space. These four men are not going to just take care of these new spaces. They are going to augment the staff that we already have. This is in addition to our present staff. We have carried during the period of construction several vacancies because of the reduced areas which we will pick up.

zoo CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

Senator Stevens. Are the new facilities now completed ? Is your construction project complete?

Mr. Heed. They are not completed. The monkey house will be reopened in May of this year. The elephant yards will be open in two phases. The first phase in about a month and then later probably June or July the second phase. The bird house plaza will be opened much later, probably November. The lion and tiger facility we are still hoping to open in March of 1976.

Senator Stevens. What about the general service and parking facilities? Are they going to be available for the Bicentennial period?

Mr. Reed. Mr. Chairman, I regret to inform you that 4 years ago when it was suggested that we should get it ready for the Bicentennial, I proposed the new parking and service facility to serve the Bicentennial crowds. It was not approved in the overall Bicentennial program. There is no way that the National Zoo will be able to assist m the parking situation for the Bicentennial. I regret that.

Senator Stevens. Will you have construction underway in the Bicentennial year ?

Mr. Reed. The construction that we are now doing in the center of the zoo will be complete for the Bicentennial. The major exhibits at the zoo will be open to the public. The construction that we will be doing in 1976 will be on the periphery in areas that are not now visited by the public. For example, the service facility will be on the north side of the road in an area that is not used by the public now. The educational building will be built at the Connecticut entrance in a nonpublic area. We will have the center of the zoo open. All facilities will be, I think, in excellent presentation shape to receive our visitors. We will be doing construction out of their area.

Senator Stevens. Out of the areas that the crowds should be in ?

Mr. Reed. That is right.

Senator Stevens. What about the lower Rock Creek Valley project ?

Mr. Reed. This is building and renovation of the bear exhibits. This will be again on the periphery of the visitor area. There is no reason for visitors to go to this area now, and it will not inconvenience them during 1976.

FRONT ROYAL FACILITY

Senator Stevens. I am told that you are requesting $760,000 for renovation for the Front Royal Animal Farm.

Mr. Reed. Renovation and repair.

Senator Stevens. You also have $380,000 budgeted for the 3-month transition period. Is it so unique that you need 50 percent in the 3 months as compared to $760,000 for a full year ?

Mr. Reed. This is because of the nature of the work that we have to do seasonally. We would like to do the work during the good-weather months of the year. There is much more work that we cannot do during the winter months because of keeping the animals in their quarters and just the plain physical difficulty of working outdoors during the winter months.

Senator Stevens. What is the total funding for that at Front Royal ? What is the total project going to cost ?

Mr. Reed. The total project ? It is very difficult to say what it will cost because it is a living, growing, and developing project. We anticipate that about 10 percent of the total budget will be devoted to the Front Royal Conservation Research Center unless we invite the public in. For our purposes of scientific studies and conservation breeding of the animals, we think it will be about 10 percent. If we invite the public in, in 5 or 6 years when we have something to show them, then we will have to take additional steps to take care of the visiting public.

Senator Stevens. But construction now, don't you have a total for construction and renovation ?

Mr. Reed. At the present time, we do not have our plans well developed as to what we will do totally. The renovation and repair figure of $760,000 which we are asking for this year, I think if it carries on for several years we will be able to accomplish most of our development and repair work that we must do. Our problem at the present time is that we have received an excellent facility that has not been maintained for about 30 years since the military left it in 1945 and turned it over to the Department of Agriculture. The USDA used it as a beef cattle experimental station. Some of the buildings were not maintained. We have roof work, gutter work, sewers, utilities distribution systems, and things of this kind to repair and develop. The military kept them up well, but there have been 30 years that they have not been maintained as well as they should.

We will be doing a lot of basic maintenance work in the first few years. The type of work we are doing there is very, very simple construction. We are paying no heed to the public desire to not see fences or not see bars. This is being done strictly on the requirements and the needs of the animals, and the public is not being given the amenities that th^y may like.

Senator Stevens. Does it have public access now ?

Mr. Reed. It does not have public access now. We do not have the staff or the security for our animals to have public attendance. It will be several years before we have anything to show. Incidentally, when you do come there—and I hope you will come up and see it—you look at the 50 acres where there are 15 Pere David Deer. You need field glasses to see them. But the deer are doing well. They are really doing well.

Senator Stevens. I think that would be a great addition to the zoo if you can have that available to the public.

Mr. Reed. I agree with you. Eventually we should have it as a display for the public on conservation. We are cooperating with other zoos on various breeding projects, sharing animals and establishing our responsibility for maintaining viable breeding herds of certain animals.

MUSEUM OF HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY

Senator Stevens. Well, thank you very much.

On the Museum of History and Technology, is there any portion of the $120,000 increase related to the Bicentennial ?

Mr. Rn»LEY. No, sir. I don't believe there is. The $120,000 increase relates to education and public orientation to provide improved tour orientation and other information services to the visitors. As you know, it is the most visited building of its kind in the world. Part of the increase is for buildings and facility management, five custodial positions, $47,0 0 and $3,000 of support funds to maintain the cleanliness of the building. An additional amount of $136,000 is required for necessary pay for the existing staff. In regard to these custodial positions, I think that the point that I was making earlier about the difference between overtime pay and regular daytime pay makes a great, implicit saving in trying to get additional staff.

Senator Steat;ns. Are any of the public orientation positions related to the Bicentennial ?

Mr. Ripley. No, sir, they are not. We have those specified in our Bicentennial program.

Senator Stevens. What I am trying to find out, are these permanent positions not related to the Bicentennial ?

Mr. Ripley. These are permanent positions not related to the Bicentennial.

BICENTENNIAL POSITIONS

Senator Stevens. Do you have any Bicentennial positions that are terminated after the Bicentennial year ?

Mr. Ripley. Yes; indeed we do, temporary and term positions.

Senator Stevens. Where are they located in this project?

Mr. Ripley. They are in the Bicentennial program. For example, there will be in every museum certain kinds of Bicentennial activities, particularly during the summer which will require staff. These will terminate in fiscal 1977.

Senator Stevens. Is that the 50 additional part-time employees that are in this request ?

Mr. Ripley. Let me see if Mrs. Hamilton can answer that.

Mrs. Hamilton. All of the temporary Bicentennial employees are listed under the Bicentennial program.

HIRSHHORN ART OBJECTS

Senator Stevens. It was reported in the newspaper that there was a $67,000 acquisition of art objects by the Hirshhorn Museum. Were those Federal funds ?

Mr. Ripley. Yes sir, those were.

Senator Stevens. To acquire those new art objects at Hirshhorn ?

Mr. Ripley. These were acquired by Federal funds.

Senator Stevens. Where did that request appear in your 1975 budget ?

Mr. Ripley. The use of these Federal funds for the purchase of art objects for the Hirslihorn Museum is provided for by law and included in the budget request to the Congress. Section 76 (aa) and (ee) of title 20 of the United States Code authorized the Joseph H. Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden. Several of these sections are applicable directly to the matter of purchases for the Museum's collection. Section 76 (bb) subsection (b) states "that the United States shall provide such funds as may be necessary for the upkeep, operation, and administration of the Joseph H. Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden." Section 76 (cc) subsection (a) states that the museum's board of trustees has authority to purchase or otherwise acquire works of art for the museum.

Senator Stevens. Doctor, we are not challenging the authority. We just M-ant to know Avhere you presented the request in 1975. "Where was the indication that you were going to spend $67,000 for art objects for Hirshhorn ?

Mr. Ripley. Appropriation language for the salaries and expenses account states that this appropriation is to be used in part for the development, presentation and documentation of the national collections. Analysis of the language submitted to the House Committee on Appropriations in January of 1974 clearly established that the word "development" includes acquisition by purchase. Our fiscal year 1975 justification states that, "While the Hirshhorn gift will form a strong core of the Museum's holdings, a continuing program of new acquisition by gift and purchase will be pursued." A nearly identical statement appears in the fiscal 1976 budget. Specific proposed expenditures, of course, cannot be identified because it is impossible to know whether any works are available and at what price.

absence of 1975 request FOR HIRSHHORN ACQUISITION

Senator Stevens. Doctor, I agree with everything that you are saying. But you have object class breakdowns of your request. All I want to know is, in 1975, where in that object class breakdown is there any indication that you would use funds that we appropriated in 1975 for acquisition ? Not of these particular objects but the acquisition expenditures.

Mr. Ripley. Purchases for the collections come under object class 31, equipment. At the time that the fiscal 1975 budget was being prepared for submission, we could not forecast the precise overall distribution of funds by object classes, particularly in view of the planned transition of the museum and preparation for operational status in this new building.

Senator Stevens. We apparently are not communicating. That equipment classification in 1975 was $14,000, but $67,000 was spent for acquisition of art objects. You told me that you purchased the acquisitions under the equipment object class. Again, in 1975 that was only $14,000 and you spent $67,000. Wliat was the source of the funds that you used for acquisition ?

Mr. Blitzer. I understand the question. It is a sensible question. The answer to the last part of the question is that the source was "other services," and I think that the best I can say is that this being the first year of the full operation of this museum the staff put more money in "other services" and less in "equipment" without realizing exactly what they would need.

Senator Stevens. You have $230,000 in that object class this year. Is that for equipment or for art objects?

Mr. Ripley. That is for equipment and art objects. It is estimated at $130,000 for fiscal year 1976.

Mr. Blitzer. IVfay I say that as to this request, to get back on the right track, that the funds that we are requesting in the amount of $90,000 for purchases in the Hirshhorn Museum are under "equipment."

Senator Si'evexs. Here is the picture: We ha^e a request for $14,000 in 1975. As you present in the 1976 request, you show that in this object class you had $230,000 in 1975 and noAv you arc requesting an additional $90,000 for 1976.

Mr. Ripley. We had $230,000 in 1975 under "equipment," and $130,000 in fiscal year 1976.

Senator Stea'ens. Where did the additional money come from ? We appropriated $14,000.

Mr. Ripley. Mr. Jameson?

Senator Stevt^ns. You spent $67,000. "What else did you acquire with that and where did it come from ?

Mr. Jameson. jNIight I be allowed to try to answer that, sir?

Senator Stea^ens. Please.

Mr. Jameson. "When we give you a budget for 51 line items in January which is half way through the current fiscal year we make the best effort we can to allocate object class funds as we believe they are going to be spent. At this point we are speculating not only as to the object class distribution for the balance of the year we are in, but also the object class distribution for the year to come. We find it very tough, and I think with the Hirshhorn Museum particularly tough, to submit precise object class distributions anywhere from 6 months to 18 months in advance. The job was particularly difficult for the Hirshhorn, since the Hirshhorn had been preparing to open. They had had very heavy other services expenditures for things like conservation services, exhibits and so forth. We assumed at that point that the expenditures in fiscal years 1974 and 1975 would continue that same pattern. We simplv gave you an overestimated budget i^i obiect class 25, "other services," and we underestimated "equipment," object class 31.

SMITHSONIAN MUSEUMS ACQUISITIONS

Senator Stevens. "Well, the other Smithsonian museums do specify the requests for acquisitions, but in this instance there was no specification that you were going to use any funds for acquisitions. It was under the equipment object class that you used it. You transferred it from other services into equipment and then used it for acquisition, is that correct ?

Mr. Jameson. In our budget for fiscal year 1975 we tried to advise you that in the total program for the Hirshhorn we expected and hoped that some expenditures from Federal money could be made as a part of the Federal program. Maybe there is a misunderstanding as to what our justifications are. We give you for each of the 50 organization units a plan of work under the general heading of "Program." In a reasonable number of words, we try to outline broadly the entire program, our expectations, and plans to convey to the Congress some insights on the total body of effort that will be going on. We don't like to give you a budget request that speaks only to increases, but we are constrained by the number of pages. So under the "Program" heading where we tried to outline broadly and briefly the total program of Hirshhorn, that is where we did put in words that indicated acquisitions were anticipated and hoped for.

Senator Ste^t:ns. Well, could you give us for the record a detailed explanation for the object class changes that were made in 1975?

Mr. Jameson. Yes, sir.

Senator Stevens [continuing]. For Hirshhorn I am talking about.

Mr. Jameson. We hope, and here again we are only partly through 1975, that for our new budget request, fiscal 1976, we will cover more accurately the revised base for the current year before we build any increases on it. We will place in the record a detailed explanation of the translations.

[The information follows:]

Hirshhom Museum and Sculpture Garden Object Class Comparison FY 1975

(Dollars in thousands)

11 Personnel Compensation

12 Personnel Benefits

21 Travel & Transportation

of Persons

22 Transporation of Things

23 Rent, Communications,

5 Utilities

24 Printing 5 Reproduction

25 Other Services

26 Supplies (, Materials 31 Equipment

41 Grants 5 Contracts

Total

$1,275

$1,327

$230

$1,557

Comparing a like program for the Hirshhom Museum for FY 1975 (excluding custodial personnel) results in the first two columns above. The difference in dollars results in a request for a supplemental appropriation to finance pay increases.

At the time that the 1975 estimates were prepared, it was believed that all employees would be moved from New York in 1974. This was not the case so the transportation of things estimate was increased to meet this cost.

Several catalogues and brochures were anticipated. In revising the estimates for presentation in the 1976 estimate, the need for these catalogues was reevaluated and they were eliminated.

In the 1975 estimates, "Other Services" contained $66 for acquisitions, $170 for exhibitions and $154 for other. In the 1976 estimates, the exhibitions monies were further refined and spread among several object classes where the expenditures are expected to take place. The $66 for acquisitions was moved to "Equipment."

Grants to students were also anticipated. The amount was reduced in the 1976 estimates, and, in fact, no grants have been made this fiscal year.

The major change in the two estimates is related to the movement of 31 positions and $230,000 from the Office of Plant Services for certain custodial and maintenance personnel. This information is contained in the Reorganization column.

ACQUISITION BY THE HIRSHHORN

Senator Stevens. All right. Will you, Doctor, start the procedure of specifying the amount of your requests that will be used for acquisitions for the Hirshhorn as you do with the other museums ?

Mr. KiPLEY. Yes, we will Mr. Chairman. I hope that you will understand this was a transition year. We were moving into the building. I am not sure that every art museum actually has purchase acquisitions so specified. Is that true, Mr. Blitzer ?

Mr. Blitzer. Mr. Chairman, the language I think you are referring to in our justification tends to occur in cases of requested increases in our appropriation for the purpose of making purchases. At that point we might look back and tell you what the base for purchases is, then how much more we are asking for, as we do this year for the National Collection of Fine Arts and the National Portrait Gallery.

Senator Stevens. You've got a very large collection that you are getting into place, as you pointed out, during this transition period, and I think we ought to know to what extent we are going to start obligating funds to additional art objects, acquisitions, before we actually get this transition complete. That is the problem.

Mr. Blitzer. I would be delighted to tell you.

Senator Stevens. Thank you.

cooper-hewitt museum

Under Cooper-Hewitt Museum we have a new item in the budget. Is this the Carnegie mansion ? Where is it and what are you going to do with it, and how does it fit in ?

Mr. EiPLEY. Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, Cooper-Hewitt Museum goes back to the gift to the Institution in 1967 by the trustees of the Cooper Union. They wished to transfer the museum out of their control. An authorized commission of the American Association of Museums recommended that it be offered to the Smithsonian. The regents of the Smithsonian recognized this and accepted the transfer. At that time we committed ourselves to use our best efforts to maintain this museum and its collections and library in New York City because of the somewhat specialized nature of the collections that are very much tied in with the industry that centers in New York; namely, the industry of design.

And so, subsequently, in 1972, the Carnegie Corp. gave a home for this museum in the form of Andrew Carnegie's old house which they owned, the adjoining house of his daughter, and the adjacent grounds comprising the entire block from 90th to 91st Street on Fifth Avenue. We determined this would be suitable and effective for the home for the Cooper-Hewitt Museum, as we call it.

These gifts include tangibles and intangibles: some funds, a small endowment, the good will, of course, of the community which has resulted in a fairly successful fund-raising effort for ourselves to renovate the building with private funds. And, in addition, the collections that are of great importance—we have some material from them on a table in this room at the present time.

The United States Code, section 46 of title 20, requires that such gifts be given proper care and safeguarding as a private trust. The board of regents has directed that the renovation of this building be

undertaken by the use of private funds. At the same time I am required as Secretary- of the Institution to take all prudent steps includincr the applications of staff and other resources to protect new items as they appear. In a sense our budget request to you this year is in fact not a new item in terms of the work we have been doing so far in maintaining and taking care of the property. The development and the care of the property and the work started in 1968.

BASE FOR COOPER-HEWITT

Senator Stevens. You used $209,000 and 11 positions from the 1975 appropriation and authorization. Where did that come from? It was not in the 1975 request.

Mr. Ripley. In the 1976 budget, on page 55, the resources of Cooper-Hewitt are discussed. In fiscal 1975 as part of our reorganization for effectiveness which we cited to the Congress, these positions already on the staff and the dollars related to them were transferred directly to Cooper-Hewitt as well as to the other museums and galleries.

Senator Stevens. Was that transfer done without any consultation with the committee ?

Mr. Ripley. Reorganizations have appeared in our budget justification for fiscal years, 1974 and 1975. Is that right, Mr. Blitzer?

Mr. Blitzer. Yes sir. Might I add, Senator, that until this reorganization occurred any unit of the Smithsonian that received only support from central Smithsonian services simply would not appear in our justification as a separate line item.

Senator Stevens. Now this was private property, the Carnegie property. Were there any Federal funds invested in the Cooper-Hewitt collection or in the Carnegie property at the time it was acquired ? Did you use any Federal funds to renovate the Carnegie property ?

Mr. Ripley. No, we have not, not to renovate the property. We did repair the furnace in the Carnegie mansion for protection purposes and we did prepare the top floor of the Miller house in order that an employee could live there at our convenience to provide an element of after-hours protection for the property.

Senator Stevens. Are there any Federal funds invested in the collection ?

Mr. Ripley. We have maintenance and custodial workers which have been continuing items in other budgets since the late 1960's.

Senator Stevens. Would you give us a detail of that ? The staff informs me that it goes back to 1965 when it was the Cooper Union collection.

Mr. Ripley. Cooper-Union in 1967 transferred collections for the first time to the care of the Smithsonian as a result of

Senator Stevens. Do you have the chronology that I have mentioned already? Could you give us the details of the financing from that time?

Mr. Ripley. Yes, indeed.

Senator Stevens. I am informed that the negotiations were commenced in 1965 and we would like to identify what Federal funds are involved in it and to identify the non-Federal funds.

Mr. Ripley. We would be happy to do that.

[The information follows:]

C$1000's)

Cooper-Hewitt Funds (Excluding Renovation and Endowment Funds)

PRIVATE OPERATING FUND

Income

Investment - Endowment

Current Funds Gifts - Including "Committee to S Other Misc. Income

Total Income

Expenditures

Salaries § Benefits Other

Total Expenditures 230.S 289^.7 368.7 2AIA 200.3 190.3 207.0

Transfer in (out) - Unrestricted SI - 1.03.5 i.o

- Other Cooper-Hewitt Funds - - 8.2 53.6 (1.9) £10-0) (17^0)

Net Gain (loss) for year 69.3 25.6 (83.4) (81.6) (42.1) (63.0) (21.0)

Add: Transfer from unrestricted fund - - - - -,_ 177.2 21.0 Operating Fund Balance (end of year) 69.3 25.6 9.5 (72.1) ( 114.2) -0- -0-

FEDF.RAL OPERATING FUNDS

Expenditures - Salaries § Benefits 20.0 26.0 37.1 79.7 107.8 152.0 174.0

Other ^_ -_ 46.9 17.4 1.0 22.0 35.0

Total Expenditures 20.0 26.0 84.0 97.1 108.8 174.0 209.0

PRIVATE § FEDERAL GIFTS S GRANTS

Income 149.1— 22.1 116.0 176.5 192.6 74.9 238.0

Expenditures 15.6 10.8 20.6 62.3 57.5, 71.6 100.6

Transfers in (out) - (8.2) (53.6) (131.4^-10.0 17.0

Ending Fund Balance 133.5 144.8 232.0 292.6 296.5 309.6 464v0_

TOTAL COOPER-HEWITT OPERATING EXPENSES .266.4 526.5 473.3 402.8 366.6 455.9 516.6

/I First year of operation by Smithsonian.

11 Includes $40.6 Prior Year accumulated endowment income.

/5 Includes $48.4 Transferred from separate Committee to Save fund.

/4 Employee on loan from National Collection of Fine Arts.

/S Includes $134.4 Fund Balances transferred from Cooper Union.

/6 Includes Transfer to Renovation Fund of $132.5

Carnegie Renovation Fund FY 1971 to FY 1976

($1000s)

Income:

A. W. Mellon Foundation $500.0

Enid Haupt 100.0

R. Clark Foundation 25.0

R. Carroon 25.3

C. Merrill Foundation 35.0

C. Hayden Foundation 25.0

Mobil Foundation 100.0

Miscellaneous Gifts 304.9

Auction Proceeds 144.9 Transfer from Other Cooper-Hewitt funds 132.5

Total Income (as of 4/30/75) 1,392.6

Income needed to complete project 1,133.8

Total Renovation Costs $2,526.4

POSITIONS AT COOPER-HEWrrr

Senator Stevens. I understand we go into this year with 11 positions ?

Mr. KiPLEY. That is right.

Senator Stevens. Could we have an identification of those positions by job description and pay rate and where they are located?

Mr. Ripley. Yes, we would be happy to.

[The information follows:]

COOPER-HEWITT MUSEUM—FISCAL YEAR 1975 FULL-TIME PERMANENT POSITIONS

Pay rate (each Location and job title Number position)

New Yorl< City:

Program manager

Maintenance worker

Maintenance worker

Secretary

Exhibits technician

Registrar

Assistant registrar

TOTAL FEDERAL FUNDS FOR COOPER-HEWITT

Senator Stevens. And you are requesting now five more personnel for maintenance and 14 security guards. It is my understanding this makes a total museum budget of $443,000 and 30 positions now for this portion at the Carnegie property, is that right ?

Mr. Ripley. Yes. We will be opening this building in 1976 and that is why the increase is requested. It will be open to the public 6 days a week and expected attendance is hundreds of thousands of people a year.

Senator Stevens. Will there be any Federal funds used in the operation of the Cooper-Hewitt Museum ?

Mr. Ripley. Well, insofar as you see the Federal budget there will be. This is described in our appeal to the Congress.

Senator Stevens. I understood we were going to use Federal funds only for protection and preservation. I am talking in terms of the operating of this. Are you going to use Federal funds to operate it, too?

Mr. Ripley. The renovation of the building is what I am identifying. As we have told the regents, we will renovate and prepare this site without asking for Federal funds. Now it was quite clearly stipulated in our original agreement that we would make our best efforts to maintain these collections for the benefit of the public and for the design industries and others who particularly needed them in New York City.

We have an option which is if all else fails and if I am not able to raise the necessary funds, we will withdraw the collections. But the maintenance, care, security, and use of the collections is a perfectly historically relevant part of the Smithsonian's activities.

Senator Stevens. On page A-55 of your justification this year it says as far as Federal funds are concerned, the Smithsonian adopted the principal that the programs of the Cooper-Hewitt should be oper-

ated with nonappropriated funds and that appropriated funds should be limited to protection and preservation of the property. We want to know whether, as far as the future is concerned, this principal that 3'ou have stated with regard to operation will be limited to nonappropriated funds for operation of the Cooper-Hewitt ?

Mr. Ripley. I think that what I can say in answer to that question, Mr. Chairman, is that if such an emergency comes to pass and we are unable to raise the necessary private funds, we will come back and tell the committees. They would assist us in coming to some decision as to what to do with the collections.

COOPER-HEWITT LIBRARY

Senator Stevexs. What is the routine library assistance that is provided from the Smithsonian to the Cooper-Hewitt ?

Mr. Ripley. Mr. Blitzer?

Mr. Blitzer. Essentially, sir. it consists of library staff to work on the preservation of this great library.

Senator Steat:xs. That statement appears just before the statement that Federal expenditures will be limited to the purposes stated above. Is that the routine assistance limited to one person?

Mr. Ripley. Two positions, a librarian and a technician, Mr. Chairman. When you own a library of this magnitude and this importance— and it is an extremely important library—you obviously don't want to neglect it or damage it. We have centralized the control of the library of the Institution under a central Smithsonian librarian and library facilities, and this includes maintenance, cataloging and all of the hundred-and-one details that go into administering an enormous library.

Senator Steatexs. You understand that I am filling in for the chairman. I sat in with Senator Bible each year I have been on the committee with regard to the Smithsonian. I have great regard for the Smithsonian, but here is an item which is indicative of the problems wo have.

This museum was not in the budget last year, it was not a line item. Xow, this year, it is $0.5 million and we are maintaining private property with Federal money. The decision was made by your regents and to my knowledge the committee was never notified. I had the same relative relationship with a former chairman as I have with this one and he would not have approved it if he had not consulted with me. I do not recall you consulting with Senator Bible on this last year.

Mr. Ripley. I believe we had explained it in our justification to the Congress in 1973.

FUTURE OBLIGATIOXS AT COOPER-HEWITT

Senator Stevexs. What is the extent of your future obligation?

Mr. Ripley. The extent of our future obligation would be a small regular annual maintenance and protection budget for the operation of this museum for the benefit of the people. Again, these are part of private collections of the Institution. As you know under our charter, Mr. Chairman, all of our collections and all of our buildings are owned by the Smithsonian Institution.

Senator Stevens. I understand that, and I think that it is a marvelous addition to the Smithsonian. But somewhere along the line it would seem that Congress ought to be involved in the actions of the Smithsonian which obligate the Federal Government now and forever to maintain that property. Don't you think that is a reasonable request, that we should be consulted ? What would you do if we didn't give you that $0.5 million and if one of my colleagues would like to make a good argument against it? Suppose that happened? What would you do with that property ?

Mr. EiPLEY. We probably would have to decide to return the buildings and the property to the open market, perhaps in agreement with the Carnegie Corp., who gave them to us as a philanthropic gift, and then withdrew the collections and presumably try to take them down and use them here in Washington. It is a perfectly valid and sensible option and it relates in fact to the entire history of the Institution both to those collections which we justify and accept and to those which we constantly turn down.

NOTIFICATION OF CX)MMITTEE

Senator Stevens. Well, I understand the operation and you have done a marvelous job and you will continue to do a marvelous job with it, but it seems that when we get to buildings and when we get to Federal funds for maintenance and renovation and preservation, we should be somehow or other notified before a commitment is made that is a perpetual commitment of Federal funds. I think that that is a reasonable request. Believe me. Doctor, if this were the Department of Defense and they had gone out and acquired private property and decided to make it into a training place for generals, and did not notify this committee, you better believe my colleagues would all be here and would have cause to. It is only because the Smithsonian is an institution which we dearly love that it can do something like this. The difference is more one of love than one of principal. I think we are entitled to know before you obligate Federal funds as you did in this instance.

Mr. EiPLEY. I believe we defended and justified the obligation of the Federal funds at the time, Mr. Chairman. Might I point out 117 years ago my predecessor sitting in the approximation of this room after 4 or 5 years of agonizng with the fact that he did not have enough income from private funds to keep the museums open received in 1858 the first Federal appropriation to the Institution for these kinds of purposes.

Senator Stevens. I appreciate what you are saying, but still what happened in this last year was that there was a transfer of funds from another project to this museum. In any other department that would have taken place by a reprograming from the Government agency to this committee and we would have signed off on it. That was not done.

In any event, at the initiation of the obligation there would have be^n some consultation with the committee with regard to the com-mitrnent of Federal funds in perpetuity for this type of property. Asrain, trying to be as general as I can about it—particularly in view of the comment that came back to me after our last exchange which

I am sensitive about—I think we have a job to do. The Congress appropriates the funds, the Federal funds, and that is our responsibility. You have committed us to the obligation of Federal funds without any consultation with Congress to my knowledge for this museum, unless I am wrong. And that is why, if I am wrong, I would like to see the history of it as to how we got involved, where Congress approved the expenditure of those funds. Federal funds, for this purpose.

Mr. Ripley. AVell, we believe, Mr. Chairman, that we have exposed the existence of this collection and its use to the Institution in previous appeals to the Congress.

T am sorry if the chairman was sensitive about something. I am afraid that I am in the dark about that.

Senator Ste\'exs. After your last appearance in connection with a supplemental appropriation, one of my colleagues approached me on the floor and told me that he heard that I had been very harsh with you and your colleagues in regard to the supplemental request. And T assurpd him that I didn't think that I had been.

Mr. Ripley. This is news to me.

Senator Ste\t;ns. I was sensitive about it, because I don't like to be called harsh by one of my colleagues. He had a legitimate right to inquire.

Mr. Ripley. This is news to me, Mr. Chairman. If in these times of general tension things somehow seem to materialize in the woodwork or in the air, I assure you that it has nothing to do with our relationship.

Senator Ste\t:ns. I appreciate that. I am tiying to do the job, and someone has to do it. As a matter of fact, as Senator Pastore said yesterday. "If I don't do it, I don't know who will." We have to get through somehow.

Mr. Ripley. We are very appreciative of that.

Senator Stevexs. I am familiar with this property by the way. I hope again we can establish some relationship whereby we have control over expenditure of the Federal funds.

DIVISION OF performing ARTS

On the Division of Performing Arts you've got one additional position and a $23,000 program increase for an educational program. Can I ask you two things ? Is this a Bicentennial increase ?

Mr. Euell. No ; it is not a Bicentennial increase.

Senator Stevens. Have you gotten any funding for the Smithsonian through the Endowment for the Arts for this same function ?

Mr. Euell. No ; we haven't. I think once or twice we have gotten some very small funding from the endowment for performances presenting certain artists and presentations. They also asked us to do a job or to help them in a task of an oral history program which we are doing.

Senator Stevens. Is this the Bicentennial Folk Festival ?

Mr. Euell. We are giving the folk festival major importance in the Bicentennial year. We have been doing folk festivals for 8 years, and this is just an augmented version in 1976. This will be an enlarged version. I think I can safely say we have been the forerunners in American folk life expression in terms of applied folk lore and much

of the material that is gathered out of this experience over the past 8 years is very essential to capture this. We need an education person who can call on this material and get it out to the schools and universities and make better use of it. So that is the reason for this education position.

Senator Stevens. What did the 1974 folk festival cost the Smithsonian ?

Mr. EuELL. Offhand, I don't know that. I would have to supply it for the record.

[The information follows:]

The FY 1974 Folklife Festival held from July 3 through July 15 cost approximately $1.5 million. Of this $1.5 million, $0.3 million was from funds appropriated directly to the Smithsonian.

COST COMPARISONS

Senator Stevens. We would like to compare that year with your request for the Bicentennial Folk Festival. What is your total estimate for the Bicentennial Folk Festival from the Smithsonian funds ?

Mr. EuELL. I think for 1976 our total costs will be, keeping in mind that this is not all moneys coming directly to the Smithsonian based on appropriations, the total cost of the festival will be $7 million. That is an approximation and it is also based on whether or not we are successful in getting the participation resulting from the field research we have done over the past 3 years. In other words, certain groups and countries may drop out. That figure will fluctuate somewhat.

Senator Stevens. Is that the total cost to you, or does it include the National Park Service ?

Mr. EuELL. It includes some funds from the Park Service. It also includes private contributions from corporations and participation from the Department of Labor and others.

Senator Stevens. What is the total Smithsonian budget obligation for the Bicentennial Folk Festival ? How much is this budget that is going to go to the folk festival ?

Mr. KiPLET. I believe it is about $1,150,000 for 1976 for the Bicentennial summer.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR MUSEUM PROGRAMS

Senator Stevens. Last year you requested 12 positions for the Assistant Secretary for Museum Programs. This year you show 63 positions in this office. Does that result from your reorganization ?

Mr. KiCHARDs. The 63 positions that are shown this year result from 2 actions; 45 positions were transferred from the Office of Plant Services to establish the building manager for the south group of buildings on the Mall which consist of the Arts and Industries and Smithsonian Institution Buildings; 6 positions that had been filled by temporary and term employees were changed to full-time permanent. Our Office of Personnel Administration had recommended this as an appropriate action.

SMITHSONIAN LIBRARIES

Senator Stevens. The Smithsonian libraries request an increase of four positions and $278,000. What portion of this increase is directly related to new facilities, such as the Air and Space Museum?

51-957 O - 75 - pt.

Mr. Richards. Two positions and $68,000 of the increase are related to the National Air and Space Museum. One position and $34,000 is for the Dibner Library.

Senator Sit^vens. Your justifications note that the Smithsonian libraries serve outlying units. Wliat is the amount of library support for the Cooper-Hewitt Museum ?

Mr. Richards. The Smithsonian libraries provide Cooper-Hewitt 2 man-years of support and some other object spending, mainly for bookbinding. The total dollar support is approximately $35,000 for fiscal year 1975.

BICENTENNIAL OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION

Senator Stevens. In terms of the Bicentennial, you've got $4.2 million total; is that right ?

Mr. Ripley. That is this request for fiscal year 1976.

Senator Stevens. Yes, the total request.

Mr. Ripley. I believe that is right.

Senator Stevens. Are these temporary people involved in that? How many temporary people are involved in the Bicentennial program ?

Mr. Ripley. Let me ask Mrs. Hamilton.

Senator Stevens. How many additional personnel do you expect to hire and how many do you have now ?

Mrs. Hamilton. We have on staff now in this fiscal year 71 temporary personnel. Most of these people are temporary, some of them are term. For 1976 we will have 168 total. This is throughout the Smithsonian Institution and covering some 23 special Bicentennial projects. Most of these people will be gone by the fall of 1976, and all of them will be gone by the end of fiscal year 1977.

Senator Stevens. The end of 1977 you say ?

Mrs. Hamilton. The end of fiscal year 1977, yes.

Senator Stevens. Are any of the contractual services for personnel ? There is $1.6 million for contractor's services. Is that for pereonnel?

Mrs. Hamilton. It is not for personnel working in the Smithsonian Institution. It does involve people, contractors providing services which we are unable to provide for ourselves in this period.

Senator Stevens. It is not contracting out to bring people into work in the Smithsonian?

Mrs. Hamilton. No sir.

Senator Stevens. What type of contractual services are you talking about when you deal with the $1.6 million ?

Mrs. Hamilton. One type is for research, field research where people are engaged to gather particular kinds of information for us outside of the Smithsonian Institution and bring it back in. Another type is for design services. Some is for fabrication involved with major exhibitions for the Bicentennial that are beyond our capability to produce.

Senator Stevens. And that is all related to the Bicentennial ?

Mrs. Hamilton. Yes sir.

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS

Senator Stevens. About half of your $614,000 request for printing under Bicentennial programs is for production of a 20-volume Encyclopedia of North American Indians. Why is this listed under Bicentennial programs ?

Mrs. Hamilton. The 20-volume Encyclopedia of North American Indians is listed under Bicentennial programs because we have long believed that the commemoration of our Nation's 200th birthday should not fail to take into full account the history of the peoples who preceded us on the North American Continent. The encyclopedia is the most comprehensive and enduring project dealing with Indian history and culture that is under preparation for the Bicentennial. An early element of the overall Smithsonian Bicentennial program, the encyclopedia has been the subject of Smithsonian Bicentennial budget requests since 1973. We were pleased that the special White House Bicentennial Task Force, convened last year to review government-wide programs progress, designated the encyclopedia a "Target-76" project.

Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.

OFFICE OF PROTECTION

With regard to protection. Dr. Ripley.

Mr. Ripley. Yes.

Senator Stevens. You have 91 new security positions at a cost of about $800,000. Last year you requested 82 new security positions, but I note that you dropped half of them under the general reduction in your appropriation. Is that right ?

Mr. Ripley. Mr. Ault would like to speak to that. Yes sir, I believe that is true.

Mr. Ault. That is correct, sir. We received 43 positions last year.

Senator Stevens. In security ?

Mr. Ault. That is correct, sir.

Senator Stevens. Am I correct that when there was a general reduction, in the appropriation that reduction was applied to security? There w^as a general decrease and a major portion of that general decrease was applied to security.

Mr. Ripley. I believe it could be described as a pro rata across the board decrease to absorb the reduction which we received. Is that right, Mr. Jameson ?

Mr. Jameson. Yes, Mr. Ripley.

Senator Stevens. I'm not so sure. You requested an increase of 82 positions and you had a general reduction, but you cut your own request in half in effect by applying that reduction so heavily to security. What we would like to know is how you relate that now to having a request for 91 positions this year. If that was your priority, if security was a No. 1 priority, why was so much of that reduction applied to it ?

Mr. Ripley. You could describe it as an annualization basis depending on the opening of the building. For example, the Hirshhorn opened

in October. For example, this next building opens in July 1976. This kind of thing would affect the pro rata treatment of the absorbtion of a cut in the budget awarded to us in our efforts to try to project which buildings would be open and which buildings would be needing so many guard posts.

Mr. Jameson. Mr. Chairman, you are exactly right, protection is an important priority with us. I guess you might accuse us of having lots of important priorities, and I guess that is true. We try not to do things on a straight pro rata basis. We did receive fewer new dollars than we had requested in the 1975 budget in accordance with the judgment of the Congress. We tried then to go back to the 50 line items and make allocations of new positions at the beginning of the new fiscal year. We can certainly supply, if j'ou are interested, the cuts for the requests for the additional positions and what we finally came out with.

Senator Stevexs. I hope you understand that I am not accusing you of anything. What I am saying is that the staff analysis of the cut shows that it was applied to an area that we thought had higher priority in amount, and that was surprising as compared now to another request for an increase. And I take it a sizable portion of that increase now is associated with the new building, is that right?

]Mr. AuLT. That is correct, sir.

Senator Stevens. How much of that 91 is associated with the new space ?

Mr. AuLT. Fifty-five positions and approximately $202,000 is for the Air and Space Building and 14 positions and $136,000 is for Cooper-Hewitt.

Senator Stevens. Maybe I should ask Mr. Collins this question: Mike, do you need all of those people on board for the whole fiscal year if you are not going to open up until July 4th ?

Mr. Collins. Mr. Chairman, I thing we need the ones that are listed for the full amount. We will begin to move in with our people next month. A certain amount of protection has to take place starting in May 1975. This will build up gradually to July 1976.

Mr. Ripley. I think we specify here, Mr. Chairman, that we would like to add 55 by the last quarter of fiscal 1976. The funds involved are for part-year employment.

Senator Stevens. Very good. I do not see any difficulty there.

TRANSITION PERIOD

Senator Stevens. Your large request for the July-September transition period reflects the busy Bicentennial season. Are any new permanent positions involved ?

Mr. Ripley. There are some new positions anticipated but very few. The national Zoological Park will be opening major attractions, such as the lion and tiger exhibit. They will be hiring some additional animal-keepers and probably policemen and some mechanics, but that would be all. I doubt that the total number of new positions required will exceed 10.

foreign currency program

I am told that you have an Egyptian monument-foreign currency program that involves $2 million. Half of that is for saving Nubian

monuments of Egypt. Is that going to be handled through UNESCO ?

Mr. Ripley. The present arrangement, Mr. Chairman, is that the payment must be made under the appropriation language to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization's campaign to save the monuments in Nubia. This goes back to 1961 when the United States joined this campaign. UNESCO serves as a conduit for these funds. They do not take any administrative or overhead or other costs. They simply receive and deposit this check from the U.S. Government. This would be the third, I believe, of a series of four payments which were requested of this committee to be appropriated for this campaign.

Senator Stevens. Are there some restrictions on the UNESCO support now ?

Mr. Ripley. We believe that the general UNESCO restrictions adopted by the Congress do not apply in this case because of the specific nature of the project funds and the use for the funds in which, as I say, UNESCO operates as a conduit. We believe that the payments would not violate either the will or the spirit of the Congress with regard to the UNESCO.

Senator Stevens. Are there any other alternatives ?

Mr. Ripley. The only other alternatives, Mr. Chairman, would be for us to obtain a revision of the language of the appropriations request so as to eliminate the word UNESCO and in the meantime to determine through our American Embassy in Cairo whether the money might be transferred directly rather than through this existing mechanism.

Senator Stevens. Why don't you give us the appropriate language to do that?

Mr. Challinor. We would be happy to prepare some language, Mr. Chairman. We feel that if there was doubt in the minds of Congress whether UNESCO's name should appear in this legislation, it would be simpler perhaps under the circumstances for us to give this $1 million worth of U.S.-owned Egyptian pounds directly to the Egyptian Government. But as the Secretary pointed out, we would have to change slightly the language of that request.

STATUS OF PHILAE

Senator Stevens. What is the status of those monuments ?

Mr. Challinor. In this particular restoration they have built a dam around the existing island to keep the rising water from destroying the temple. They have leveled the top of an adjacent island to stay well above the high-water mark and they are now in the process of preparing to transfer the temple piece by piece to the new site.

Senator Stevens. I think that is really a very good report on that. So you believe it would be better to give them the $1 million direct ?

Mr. Challinor. I think, sir, it would be easier and avoid the various political considerations if we were able to do that. I might add that our Embassy in Carlo puts a great deal of weight on this particular project and feels that it has a high visibility in Egypt and that it would be well worth the efforts of the U.S. Government to continue these donations.

Senator Stevens. Thank you. Give us the language. We will see if we can accomplish that.

BALANCE OF PROGRAM

What is the balance of the foreign currency going to be used for?

Mr. Challtxor. The balance will be used to continue the research grants we have been making to various scientists including, I might add, Dr. George C. West from the University of Alaska, who has benefited this past year. These grants are reviewed by an outside committee and are given mostly to American educational institutions.

Senator Stevens. Wliat benefits does the Smithsonian get out of that?

Mr. Challinor. Scientists from the Smithsonian, Mr. Chairman, are also eligible to apply for research grants in those countries where these funds are still available.

Senator Ste\tns. Does a person like Dr. West have to make a report to you after he finishes his research ?

Mr. Challinor. Annual reports are made to the Smithsonian for every single research project we award. These are available and can be delivered at any time. Dr. West in this case went to Poland for an international biological program meeting.

FOREIGN CURRENCY

Senator Stevens. Can the Smithsonian come up with some concrete examples of benefits that accrue from this program?

Mr. Challinor. The primary objective of basic research projects is generally not the immediate solution of a known practical problem but an increase of knowledge. The primary standard against which they are criticized is not immediate usefulness but scientific quality. Multitudinous examples could, nevertheless, be cited of their usefulness : Faraday's research on electromagnetism laid the basis for Marconi's invention of the telegraph; Roentgen's research on cathode rays led to the discovery of X-rays; taxonomic studies in the Amazon Basin by Ferreira led to the medical use of ayapana against snake bite and curare as a muscle relaxant; current studies by the Smithsonian's Radiation Biology Laboratory in photoperiodic and cyclical plant responses may lead to the economies of pulsing light in indoor horticulture.

The SFCP believes, however, that it can illustrate both the general proposition and the nature of the SFCP program by focusing on the proven or potential usefulness of a few projects selected from the jirogram itself. This usefulness may consist of an increase in knowledge that benefits other scholars, or that benefits laymen whose interest in archeology, for example, is shown by visits in the hundreds of thousands to museum exhibits. The projects' usefulness may also be more general, such as an increase in knowledge more practically beneficial to mankind.

The examples we will supply, listed alphabetically by principal investigator, have been identified and briefly described with the help of scientists including members of the SFCP's review councils.

[The information follows:]

BURCH, J, B. : UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

SYSTEMATIC STUDIES OF THE MOLLUSCAN GENUS BULINUS IN AFRICA AND ADJACENT REGIONS

This is a study of the biology of one major group of snails distributed throughout Africa and common in Egypt. It is important to understand the biology of snails because some of them are carriers of serious parasitic diseases in man such as schistosomiasis (known in Egypt as bilharzia). Such studies are prerequisite to control of these diseases because they lead to knowledge showing which snails are carriers and how the carriers can be controlled. In this study, collections of snails are being made in many parts of Africa and the specimens are being studied at Ain Shams University in Cairo and at the University of Michigan. A dollar grant from the Rockefeller Foundation supplements the foreign currency grant made by the Smithsonian.

FOSBERG, F. RAYMOND : NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY

REVISION OF TRIMEN'S HANDBOOK OF THE FLORA OF CEYLON (SRI LANKA)

Trimen's classic handbook was based on classifications of tropical flora made by Linneaus and other pioneer botanists whose research specimens were the plants of Ceylon. These classifications were employed in naming most tropical plants of the world. This project is rewriting the descriptions of these plants using modern-day taxonomic techniques, and is thus putting the classification of most tropical plants on a modern footing. This revision of Trimen's basic work will greatly enhance its usefulness in economic and medical literature. Moreover, some 25,000 specimens have been added to the national collections of Sri Lanka and the United States where they will serve as a basis for future study.

MANNING, R. B. : NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY

MARINE DECAPOD CRUSTACEANS OF NORTH AFRICA

This project has produced the first comprehensive study of these crustaceans which include shrimps, crabs, and lobsters and comprise more than 8,000 species. Many, such as a newly discovered species of shrimp, are commercially important. Moreover, comprehensive information on all marine life along the coast of North Africa is being produced including verification of damage being done by pollution.

MCNALLY, SHEILA : UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA

EXCAVATION IN DIOCLETIAN'S PALACE, SPLIT

The modern city of Split developed from a medieval city which grew up within the walls of the palace of the Roman Emperor Diocletian, which was abandoned when the barbarian invasions overran the Roman Empire.

In a unique collaboration University of Minnesota archeologists have worked together with the Town Planning Institute of Dalmatia to integrate the archeological remains representing the continuous cultural history of the city with plans for urban renewal.

PERROT, PAUL : ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR MUSEUM PROGRAMS SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

PUBLICATION OF THE CULTURAL PROPERTY HANDBOOK OF THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MUSEUMS

Publication of the International Council of Museums' handbook. The Protection of Cultural Property , is expected to lead to practical controls limiting illegal trade in antiquities because it brings together for the first time, abstracts of existing national laws and international conventions governing traffic in cultural properties. It will thus serve as a guide to nations preparing legislation governing management and trade in cultural properties and objects. It will also make it possible for museums and similar institutions to know when objects they want to purchase have been legally exported from their countries of origin.

REDFORD, DONALD B. : AMERICAN RESEARCH CENTER IN EGYPT (ARCE) AKHENATEN TEMPLE PROJECT

The great temple at Karnak, built by the Pharaoh Akhenaten, was razed and cannibalized as a source of stone by the Pharaoh's successors in an attempt to eliminate him from Egyptian history, Photographs of the relief-carved and painted surfaces of 35,000 blocks, recovered over the past century, have been matched with the aid of a computer and a pictorial reconstruction of Akhenaten's temple has been made. This has greatly increased the knowledge of the reign of Akhenaten, commonly regarded as the earliest monotheist, and his beautiful consort, Nefertiti. The project has thus restored to mankind a fascinating piece of history.

WAGNER, F. H. : UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY

PRE-SAHARAN SYSTEMS ANALYSIS IN SOUTHERN TWJISIA

This project seeks on the edge of the Sahara Desert what the US-IBP studies are seeking in our own western deserts, namely, information as to whether the desert is advancing or contracting, whether its ecology is dynamic or stable, and similar questions. In answering these questions, the most sophisticated of modern tools are employed, including computer analyses of statistical models of desert ecosystems. The Tunisian Department of Agriculture is cooperating with this study as a part of its program for management and reclamation of desert lands. This project is coordinated with the U. S. Desert Biome Program of the United States National Committee for the International Biological Program.

Favorable comment was voiced on the scientific content of this program at a recent conference sponsored in Tunisia by the Man and the Biosphere Program (MAB) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and supported by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Conferees commented favorably on the project's integrated emphasis on the whole-ecosystem approach, range-management, computer modeling, and socio-economic studies.

WEEKS, KENT : UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO (granted through the American Research Center for Egypt (ARCE)

THE EPIGRAPHIC AND ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY OF THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO AT LUXOR, EGYPT

Using a sophisticated combination of facsimile drawings, photography and egyptology, the University of Chicago has been working since 1924 at Chicago House in Ltixor to record the paintings and inscriptions on the monuments of Karnak. In one of its most important contributions to scholarship, the SFCP has provided partial support to the survey since 1968, thereby making possible the preservation of irreplaceable knowledge of Egyptian civilization before the monuments are eroded by time or by the changing water level at Luxor. The University of Chicago contributes support in dollars.

WEIFFENBACH, GEORGE : SMITHSONIAN ASTROPHYSICAL OBSERVATORY

CONTINUATION OF OPERATION OF THE UTTAR PRADESH STATE OBSERVATORY/SMITHSONIAN ASTROPHYSICAL OBSERVING STATION AT NAINI TAL, INDIA

The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) has operated since 1958 a world-wide network of obsein/ing stations which today employ satellite-tracking cameras and lasers to collect information about the Earth's magnetic field, the density of the Earth's upper atmosphere and shifts of the Earth's crust. This network contributes to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Satellite-Tracking Program (Grant NCR 09-015-002).

The tracking station at Naini Tal in India is supported with a foreign currency grant. It is the only station in the network on the Asian land mass and the only one that links stations in Japan and Ethiopia. One of the most significant results of the SAO tracking effort was the publication of the 1973 Smithsonian Standard Earth (III) . This work provides a mathematical description of this planet's deviations from a perfect sphere. Like its predecessors, Geodetic Parameters for a 1966 Smithsonian Institution Standard Earth and 1969 Smithsonian Standard Earth (II) , it provides a reference gravity field and geodetic network and will serve as a basic tool to scientists working to explain the phenomena of earth dynamics, such as the spreading of sea beds, the magnitude of earth tides, large-scale crustal shifts, and earthquake bands.

WENDORF, FRED : SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY

PREHISTORY OF THE EGYPTIAN DESERT

This study of the geological past may have produced findings of present practical use. It studies past fluctuations in the water table in the Egyptian Sahara and the human response to these changes. Its research at Bir Tarfawi and Bir Sahara has disclosed a large area where, unknown to modern man, a unique geological situation made a great quantity of water available at shallow depth, During the Late Pleistocene, when there was greater rainfall, several large lakes and numerous springs occurred and the region supported a large human population. Investigation suggests that the area could again be developed.

The project is supported by the Geological Survey of Egypt, the Polish Academy of Sciences, and Southern Methodist University. A principal participant on the project in the field is Dr. Rushdi Said, Vice Minister and President of the Egyptian General Organization for Mining and Mineral Resources. Several younger Egyptian geologists are members of the staff, and the Geological Survey of Egypt provides the bulk of the vehicles employed on the project.

FOREIGN TRAVEL

Senator Stevens. How much foreign travel does this program generate for the Smithsonian ?

Mr. Challinor. Out of 378 round trips, 66 were made by Smithsonian staff.

OBSERVATORY ROAD

Senator Stevens. We have another familiar subject: Mount Hopkins Observatory Road. I recall the discussion with Senator Bible on that. It that a new route for the old road or a new road ?

Mr. Ripley. It is essentially an improvement to the very narrowest part of the sort of hog's back you have to go up.

Mr. Challinor. Mr. Chairman, this is primarily for improvements to an existing road that we have been working on for the last several years. The Mount Hopkins' facility has been improved considerably and we now, for example, have a direct powerline from the base of the mountain to the top of the mountain. This powerline rims along the road so that we were able to put the entire powerline underground and, therefore, not have any scar on the mountain by a big powerline running up it. This is part of a long term planned improvement of that facility.

Senator Stevens. This says it is the next phase of the project for safety and economic reasons. What is the total project involved here ? Do you have any cost for this project ?

Mr, Brooks. Yes, we do Mr. Chairman. The total cost for the project is approximately $1,600,000. That includes all sums appropriated to date which through 1975 are $271,000 with this increment, we will be up close to $400,000. We anticipate approximately $1,200,000 left to complete the road construction. We plan to phase the work out again over approximately 5 years.

Senator Stevens. And that is the future cost of the road ?

Mr. Brooks. Yes, sir.

Senator Stevens. What is the safety reason involved in this relocation?

Mr. Brooks. This is an extremely narow and precipitous section of the road, Mr. Chairman. We are moving heavy equipment up the road in order to help in the construction of the multiple mirror telescope at the summit. We felt that because of this use of the road, that this particular relocation and improvement was a high priority this year.

Senator Stevens. Do you suggest a relocation because the old road is too close to the edge or what is the safety reason ? I remember this one in conference once before. Didn't you lose some money on this before ? We had a little tremor in conference with it with my colleagues in the House over this road once before. What is the safety reason ? What are the specifics so we can defend this if we can ?

Mr. Brooks. It is a road that hugs the sides of the mountain. The road climbs approximately 5,500 feet.

Senator Stevens. And how long is the road ?

Mr. Brooks. The road is approximately 14 miles long.

Senator Stevens. And how long is this section you are going to reroute ?

Mr. Brooks. I believe, Mr. Chairman, it is approximately 2 miles. The grade of the road will change from 17 percent to 6.8 percent.

Senator Ste\t:ns. And it is currently considered to be unsafe?

Mr. Brooks. Yes, sir, for the use it is now getting it is unsafe.

Senator Stevens. That is what I am getting at. For what reason is it now considered to be unsafe ?

Mr. Brooks. Because the combination, Mr. Chairman, of essentially a narrow dirt roadway and heavy equipment hauling heavy materials up that road.

Senator Stevens. It is also an access road as I recall for the people working there ?

Mr. Brooks. You can get up to the road satisfactorily, although it is a somewhat hair-raising experience, in a jeep, for example, or in a pickup truck or something of that kind. But when you are moving heavy equipment we feel we need to reroute the road.

library addition

Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.

What about in the construction item? You have the History and Technology Building Library addition. Does that involve more than the facilities for the Dibner collection ?

Mr. Ripley. Mr. Blitzer, would you like to speak to that?

Mr. Blitzer. Indeed it does. Senator. It is something we knew we would need. It is a particularly happy occasion to come back to ask for the final planning money for it. It will be used for the staff of the museum and for visiting scholars.

Senator Stevens, Is this $125,000 to complete the design on it?

Mr. Blitzer. Right.

Senator Stevens. What is your estimate now for the cost of the a ddition ?

Mr. Blitzer. I think the last figure I heard was close to $6 million. When we started we were talking about $3 million.

Senator Stev-ens. How much have you spent so far on this design ?

Mr. Brooks. In fiscal 1973 the appropriation was $150,000 for planning and in fiscal 1974 $25,000 for a total of $175,000.

Senator Ste\t:ns. "When do you think you are going to be asking for the $6 million ? What year is this being projected for ?

Mr. Blitzer. We know we do not want to tear the building up during the Bicentennial. The earliest would be fiscal 1977 for construction funding.

Mr. Ripley. We will be asking for it in fiscal 1977.

Senator Stevens. The beginning of fiscal 1977.

visitor attendance

On page E-2, it reports an interesting decline in the utilization in terms of visitor attendance. Why is that? Do you have any reason? It went up, it was steadily marching up in terms of attendance in 1972, 1973—and in 1974 it comes down.

Mr. Ripley. Mr. Brooks, would you like to explain that?

Mr. Brooks. Yes, Mr. Chairman. There was a decline of approximately 12 percent in our attendance for fiscal year 1974. As you may

recall, this was the year in which the fuel crisis was upon us and specifically in the months from December 1973, through June 1974. That w^as when the major decline in attendance took place. That affected our museums in general, and the National Zoological Park which does not show here.

During this year, fiscal year 1975, we have had a continual rise in attendance relative to last year. As of the end of March, we have had about 11 million visitors to our museums, excluding the Zoo, compared with a little over 9 million last year. We are therefore about 20 percent ahead of last year. And we expect with our continuing crowds on the Mall that attendance will continue to rise and we will have a visitation similar to fiscal 1973, which was the largest year in our history. I should point out that part of that increased attendance is caused by the opening of the Hirshhorn Museum in October of last year. That alone has accounted for about 1.2 million through March of the total attendance. However, the other museums are also up and we do anticipate a very substantial attendance at those museums this year.

Senator Stevens. It seems the smaller buildings are on the increase and the Mall buildings are on the decrease.

Mr. Brooks. In 1974, that was correct, Mr. Chairman. Our art museums generally enjoyed a very good year—the Freer Gallery, the National Collection of Fine Arts, the Portrait Gallery, and the Ren-wick Gallery. This year they are maintaining those figures and the other museums are having a substantial increase over last year.

Senator Stevens. ThanK you.

secretary's travel

Dr. Ripley, last year we had a discussion about the criticism that I recall you received for travel in 1973. I have not seen any renewal of that. Has that quieted down now ?

Mr. Ripley. These things ebb and flow like autumn leaves and spring buds, Mr. Chairman. I am happy to say that we continue to try to get our work done as best we can as we believe and interpret our mandate for research, increase and diffusion of knowledge requires.

Senator Stevens. What was the extent of your travel last year— calendar 1974? Please give us the information for the record.

[The information follows:]

Travel of the Secretaby During Calendar Year 1974

Insofar as travel outside of the District of Columbia is concerned, the Institution has maintained for over 100 years a variety of laboratories and other facilities outside of Washington.

As a convenience to New York, Connecticut, and Cambridge, Mass., where bureaus, donors, and private sources of support are located, the Secretary spent a total of 45 working days in the vicinity of his home and research station in Connecticut. During this time he continued to perform duties for the Institution visiting nearby investment advisors, foundations, and other contacts as well as Smithsonian installations.

Additional visits were made during the year for business purposes, appearances at cities in behalf of the Smithsonian Associates and representation at scientific functions as head of the Smithsonian in the states of Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, North Carolina, New York, and Pennsylvania. Some 24 days can be counted in these necessary activities.

Four trips were made out of the country on the invitation of the host country or on Smithsonian business totalling 20 days; to Mexico (at the invitation of the National Anthropological Museum in Mexico City), to Iran for discussions on conservation and natural environment and museum projects, to London and Cambridge University for Bicentennial matters and the receipt of an Honorary Degree in Science, and to Switzerland and London for wildlife meetings and visits to potential donors.

The total during the year for travel and associated expenses paid for out of private funds amounted to $8,256.23.

TOTAL SMITHSONIAN TRAVEL

Senator Stevens. Please supply for the record the total cost in all funds available to the Smithsonian of your 1973 and 1974 travel. Please include the same figures for travel during those years by all Smithsonian personnel.

[The information follows:]

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION—TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION OF PERSONS IDollars in thousands; fiscal years]

1973 1974

Salaries and expenses... $553.9 $619.4

Construction 1.0 2.4

Museum programs (foreign currency) 199.2 244.3

Private' 723.0 891.7

Total 1,477.1 1,757.8

1 Private includes restricted, unrestricted, and grants and contracts

BOORSTIN USE OF SMITHSONIAN FACILITIES

Senator Ste\t5ns. The committee is also aware of charges aired in the press last year that historian Daniel Boorstin used federally supported facilities and personnel to help in the writing of this book. ^\^lat is the situation ?

Mr. Blitzer. I will submit for the record an explanation of this situation.

[The information follows:]

Preparation of The Americans : The Democratic Experience , by Daniel J. Boorstin

Daniel Boorstin served as director of the National Museum of History and Technology from October 1, 1969 to October 1, 1973; he is now a Senior Historian at that museum. He is not and has not been a government employee, and his salary has not been paid from appropriated funds.

IVlien Dr. Boorstin came to the Museum of History and Technology, it was his wish and the Institution's that he should continue his career as an historian, to the degree that this would be consistent with the fulfillment of his administrative duties. To this end, it was agreed that the Institution would undertake to provide him the kind of research assistance afforded scholars of his eminence in other institutions such as universities, research libraries and other centers for advanced study. In addition to office space, the Museum of History and Technology did provide Dr. Boorstin a research assistant and a secretary in connection with his continuing scholarly endeavors. The research assistant (actually three individuals who served in succession) and the secretary have been civil servants and were paid with appropriated funds. All of them have participated in a variety of programs in the Museum of History and Technology, including work on exhibitions and exhibition catalogues, in addition to their involvement in Dr. Boorstin's scholarly activities. It might be pointed out that the contribution of Smithsonian funds for the salary of the Director of the Museum of History and Technology during these years considerably exceeded the expenditure of appropriated funds for his research assistant and secretary.

IVhile Director of the Museum of History and Technology, Dr. Boorstin completed,^ and published the third volume of his trilogy The Americans : The Democratic Experience , for which he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in History for. 1974.

It has been suggested that some impropriety or illegality was involved in the fact that Dr. Boorstin, as the author of this work, copyrighted it and has earned royalties from it. Although the unique situation of the Smithsonian makes it impossible to find any exact parallel to the facts in this case, a study of the relevant laws and the closest precedents indicates that no illegality and no impropriety is involved here.

Since the Smithsonian is an institution devoted to the increase and diffusion of knowledge, and since Dr. Boorstin is not a civil servant and is not paid from appropriated funds, the usual rules and practices of the academic world offer the most relevant standard. The study of "Copyrights At Colleges and Universities, published in 1972 by the Committee on Governmental Relations of the National Association of College and University Business Officers, begins with the following statement:

Colleges and universities recognize and encourage the publication of scholarly works as an inherent part of the educa_tional mission. They also acknowledge the privilege of university personnel [faculty, staff, and students) to prepare, through individual initiative, articles, pamphlets, and books that may be copyrighted by and generate royalty income for the author.

The same study continues more specifically:

Rights to copyrightable material generated as a result of individual initiative, not as a specific university assignment and only incidental use of university facilities or resources, should normally reside with the author... Where the university provides partial support of an individual effort resulting in copyrightable material by contributing significant faculty time, facilities, or university resources it is reasonable to consider joint rights to ownership and disposition of these materials

and a sharing of royalty income. Some universities may find it desirable in the interest of simplification to merye this category with category 1 above... ./I

Our own inquiries in the academic community have confirmed that in practice the provision of office space, modest research assistance, and secretarial assistance is seldom if ever interpreted as justifying the institution in asserting any claim to either the copyright or the royalties arising from scholarly works produced by its staff. This is true of state and municipal institutions, in which both scholars and assistants are publicly supported, no less than of privately supported institutions.

It has been suggested that the provision of support in the form of federally-funded research assistants and secretary makes it improper or illegal for Dr. Boorstin to have copyrighted The Democratic Experience , or to earn royalties from it. Unless one is prepared to assert that this prize-winning volume was not written by Dr. Boorstin but by his research assistants and secretary, there can be no legal question about his right to copyright it and to receive royalties from it.!-?- Even in cases where federal funds go directly to the support of scholars and scientists, rather than simply to the provision of research and secretarial assistance, this principle has been clearly recognized. For example, the guidelines for National Science Foundation research grants state:

NSF encourages and in some cases requires publication and distribution of the results of research conducted under grants...Unless otherwise provided in the grant instrument, the author or grantee institution is free to copyright any books, publications, films, or other copyrightable materials developed in the course of or under an NSF grant. A3

Similarly, recipients of fellowships from the National Endowment for the Humanities are free to copyright publications resulting from federally-funded fellowships, and to earn royalties from these publications. j_A_

In summary, the general standards and practices of the scholarly community fully support the right of authors to copyright and earn royalties from their published writings, even in cases where research and secretarial assistance have been provided by their institutions. The use of appropriated funds for this assistance in no way compromises this right.

Finally, it should be said that the Smithsonian Institution i s proud of Dr. Boorstin's achievements, as it is of the achievements of others on the Smithsonian staff who contribute at the highest level to the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men.

/I In the case of Smithsonian exhibit catalogues to which Dr. Boorstin has contributed, it should be noted that he has either earned no royalties from this work or has assigned all of his royalties to the Institution.

/2 The provision of 17 U.S.C. §8 restricting copyright in publications of the United States Government apply only to publications written by government employees.

/5 This is subject to a license in the U.S. Government to use such materials

for Government purposes. But, in turn, these rights "may be relinquished by the Grants Officer upon request of the grantee."

/4 The National Endowment for the Humanities has reserved the same license for U.S. Government use, but we are informed that it intends to drop this reservation.

OTHER CRITICISM

Senator Stevens. Are there any clippings or allegations this year about any portions of the Smithsonian that we ought to be familiar with?

Mr. Ripley. There were a couple of clippings during the summer. Perhaps they flew out with the autumn leaves.

Senator Stevens. There is no current controversy that we ought to be familiar with before we walk out and try to defend this budget on the Senate floor ? All we need to do is to run into something that we do not know about and the thing would be up in the air.

Mr. Challinor. In the House hearing, an article by Paul Harvey published on March 9, came up listing a series of projects some of which had some connection with the Smithsonian. If this would be useful to you, we would be happy to prepare a response to show you in what degree we were involved, just in case, for instance, these might be introduced on the floor.

Senator Stevens. I think that would be wise. We would appreciate it if you will, and also if there are any others that blow back in. We did not run into a problem last time as I recall. We were prepared for it, and it did not occur.

Mr. RiPLET. We would be very glad to, Mr. Chairman.

[The information follows:]

Speciax Foreign Currency Program

congressional interest in agency responsibility for projects listed by paul harvey (the herald, provo, utah, march 9, 1975)

The list includes twenty-five projects for vphich Mr. Harvey states that Congress has appropriated funds. The list does not specify the responsible agencies, distinguish between projects that may or may not have been funded, or distinguish between funding in dollars as compared with funding in "excess" foreign currency. The "excess" foreign currencies available to the Smithsonian can by international agreement be used only for research and other specified purposes in the countries where these funds have accumulated. If not spent, they lose their value, in some countries very rapidly, through inflation.

Of the twenty-five projects, the Smithsonian Special Foreign Currency Program received proposals on five. Listed below (as cited by Mr. Harvey), with brief summaries of their disposition are these five projects.

None of these projects received a research project award.

One, "to stud.v Polish bisexual frogs," received two research field trips (which support comparatively limited and brief research) for $8,548 (in dollar equivalent of Polish zlotys). This research later received dollar funding from another agency.

One. "to tabulate the difference between native American and Indian whistling ducks," received a research development trip (which is intended to enable the researcher to explore and arrange necessary participation by scientists and approval of governments in host countries) for $5,796 (in dollar equivalent of Indian rupees). It later failed to qualify for a grant.

Three received no funds: "to learn about the 'cultural, economic, and social impact of rural road construction in Poland' " ; "to learn about Yugoslavian inter-tidal hermit crabs": and "to find out how fishing boat crewmen cause conflicts in Yugoslavian peasant town."

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator Stevens. Well, this completes our hearings. We will recess subject to call of the Chair. We have no further hearings scheduled at this time.

Mr. Ripley. Thank you, sir.

rWhereuDon, at 12:40 p.m.. Wednesday, April 23, the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]

/

51-957 O - 75 - pt. 4-28

We ask your support for and encouragement of Forest Service research initiatives in this area.

The president of one of the Nation's largest lumber and wood products corporations has stated that the United States has the capability of achieving the same strong position in the world's wood market that the Persian Gulf countries now hold on oil. He postulates that the United States and Canada have the joint capability of meeting the soaring worldwide demand for wood in ways that can improve world stability. If this tremendous potential for the Nation's timber resources, 52 percent of which are owned by the Federal Government, is to be realized, forest products utilization research conducted by the Forest Service must be adequately funded.

Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Stevens. We appreciate your time in supporting the effort.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT HILTON SIMMONS, FREELANCE WRITER, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Mr. Simmons. Mr. Chairman, I'm Eobert Simmons, a freelance writer from Washington, D.C. My testimony concerns irregularities in the administration and application of appropriated funds by the Smithsonian Institution. The intention of this testimony, to be frank, is to bring matters out in the public and to endeavor to force this committee and other subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee to initiate General Accounting Office investigations in the matters that have repeatedly been brought out into the public in the past few years; and also, if I may, tp initiate to the Department of Justice investigations into certain aspects of these. My testimony, I think, mi^ht, if you were interested, go over the 5-minute level and I'm quite willing, if you wish, to yield now to the other witnesses who have been waiting here for a long time and pick it up at the end of their testimony if you could, perhaps, give me just a little bit longer than 5 minutes.

Senator Stevens. I'm sorry. We have to finish these witnesses tonight. We have a full day tomorrow and then we start on a whole new area on Thursday.

Mr. Simmons. Than I'll simply submit this for the record and try to get through it as fast as I can.

Senator Stevens. Thank you.

Mr. Simmons. The Smithsonian Institution has asked this year for a total of $94,300,000 in new budget authority, which means funds from the U.S. Treasury for its support in fiscal year 1976. Millions more from the same source will be given to the Smithsonian in grants and contracts from other Federal agencies, such as Department of Defense, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, et al.

The United States Constitution, article I, section 9, states: "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time."

In the Smithsonian budget you will find, over and again, that among these 21 subdivisions of the Smithsonian, that there are bureaus that have no authorizing legislation passed, whatsoever. These include the

51-957 O - 75 - pt. 4-53

Cooper-Hewitt Museum, the Chesapeake Bay Center for Environmental Studies, the Center for the Study of Man, and several others which I would be glad to submit a list of for the record.

The second point is, the law, under title XXXI, section 628, states that funds that are appropriated for a purpose, must be spent for that purpose. Normally that means that these funds, if they are to be spent for another purpose, that a reprograming has to be made before these subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee before the House and Senate.

These reprograming recommendations and requirements have simply not been taken by the Smithsonian Institution time after time. Money that's appropriated for one purpose is not spent for that purpose, over and over again. This subcommittee took up one factor of that a couple of weeks ago in regard to money that was spent by the Hirshorn Museum for one purpose, which was appropriated for another purpose, and there are many other instances.

At hearings on the Smithsonian Institution budget justifications for fiscal 1976, conducted by this subcommittee on April 23,1975, Senator Stevens, acting chairman, asked the following questions of the Smithsonian Secretary S. Dillon Ripley regarding possible criticisms of the Institution in the press:

"Are there any clippings this year about any portions of the Smithsonian we ought to be familiar with ?"

Secretary Ripley replied: "There were a couple of clippings during the summer. Perhaps they flew out with the autumn leaves."

Senator Stevens then asked: "There is no current controversy that we ought to be familiar with before we walk out and try to defend this budget on the Senate floor ?"

Senator Stevens. Mr. Simmons, I have to cut you off now. We have a lot of people that have come a long way out of town, and some of my own constituents are back there, too. They've been waiting for a long time.

I am familiar with some of the background that you are reciting. The legislative committees have jurisdiction over the matter, Senator Moss' subcommittee, and he's one of the ones that served on the Smithsonian Board of Regents. So, I think it would be most proper that you seek to appear before the legislative committee, because this committee deals with the amount of Federal funds that goes to the Smithsonian, which is a very unique institution. I think it's one of the most unique in our system of government.

I am not hesitating to be critical of some of their practices, but they are a fine institution and I think if there are going to be any changes made in their procedures, they would have to be made through an ac. of Congress, that this committee would have no jurisdiction over. So, while I appreciate your statement, and it will be printed in full in the record, I really don't think it's relevant to this committee's consideration of the budget request that's presented to us, which we examine in very minute detail, particularly in view of some of the comments that you have noted, and that have appeared in the press. We'll continue to do that, but meanwhile, if you seek a change in the law, I think you should address your testimony to the legislative committee, which could affect that. We could not.

I believe you understand that situation and our position on the matter. We must move ahead and hear these people who are here to petition the Congress for money which is within the jurisdiction of this committee.

Mr. Simmons. Surely, Senator, I appreciate that. These matters will be taken up in other hearings.

You'll find in the second part of my statement, some interesting information that does pertain to the immediate concerns of this subcommittee.

PREPARED STATEMENT

Senator Stevens. I have looked at that. If we had the time, I'd be happy to have a discussion with you, but I think we have to be courteous to the people that have been waiting this long. We do have to proceed.

I do thank you for your statement and your interest in the administration of the Smithsonian. Your prepared statement will be inserted in the record at this point.

Mr. Simmons. Thank you, very much.

[The statement follows:]

The Smithsonian Inotitution hao asked that it be given a total of w94,300,000 in "new budget authority" — funds from the U.L. Treasury — for itb support in Fiscal Year 1976. Iviillions more from the same source v/ill be ^iven to the ^mithaonian in grants and contracts from other Federal agencies, such as Department of Defense, IJAoM, et al.

The United Lttite^ Constitution, Article I, :;'ection 9, states: "Ho Money shall be drav.'n from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made tj law; and a regular i^tutement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."

This testimony will demonst,rate that these basic Constitutional guarantees, ao v/ell as other Federal laws, are being violated by the Jmith-sonia)i Institution in the administrution of its Federal budget and the activities financed by this money from the U.S. Treasury,

At hearings on limithoonian Institution Budget Justifications for Fiscal Year 1976 co.iducted by this subcoimaittee oii April 23, 1975, Uenator Jteven^, Acting Chairman, asked the follov/ing queotions of imithaonian oecretury o. uillon Rij^jley regarding possible criticisms of the Institution in the press:

"Are there any clippings this year about any portions of the .,mithsonian that we ought to be familiar with?"

oecretary Ripley replied: "There were a couple of clippings during the summer. Perhaps they flew out v/ith the autumn leaves."

Lenator ..tevens then asked: "There is no current controversy that we ought to be familiar with before vie walk out and try to defend this budget on the iienate floor?"

Secretary liipley rcoponded with the silent negative. iJarlier, in reply to a question about criticism of the Secretary's travel expenses for 1973 (a total of tens of thousands of dollars) and his absenteeism (a total of seven monthd away from Waohington), Secretary Kipley replied:

"These things ebb and flow like autTomn leaves and spring buds, Mr. Chairman,"

These rejoojises clearly indicate the attitude the current Smithsonian administration haj toward thj Congress. The fact ij that n\imbers of articles have appeared in the pai^t year seriously critical of Gmith-lionian irregularities — all relevant to the Federal support that made them possible.

One "current controversy" was reported on V.edneoday, May 7, 1975, on the front page of The .>eH York Times in an article by llrnejt Holsen-dolph entitled "Job Favoritism Is Fo\ind in L'tudy of U.S. Agencies: Rep. Lioss Liakes Public Data Kept Secret by Civil Service Unit."

The article began as follov/s: "Cronyism, political favoritism and other irregularities are being used by a niimber of Federal agencies to fill their employment needs, according to reports by the United States Civil Service Commission."

Prominent among the agencies involved wao the Smithsonian Institution. A suppressed report dated September, 1973, found the Institution seriously negligeiit in its responsibilities to the Federal laws regarding equal-employmeut-opport\mity practices. Blame for this negligence was placed squarely on "top management" — tha.t is. Secretary Ripley and his associates, the Under Secretary, Asoistant Secretaries, and Regents.

At one point the long report stated: "The Smithsonian Institution ... is so unique that many Smithsonian managers and supervisors have no great awareness of being part of the Federal civil service and, therefore, no great .iense of urgency in fulfilling the public policy responsibilities which are theirs aj Federal employees. Contributing to the problem is

the fact that top management is not holding managers and supervisors, accountable for carrying out the EEO reaponsibilities nor evaluating' their effectiveness in furthering EEO objectives.

"In interviews with employees, dissatisfaction with supervisors was the major complaint received. Employees cited the failures to discipline problem employees, the failure to av;ard recognition, to o\;!lBtanding employees, the lack of effective performance evaluation, the absence of career coiAnseling, and favoritism in promoting and providing training as significant concerns. Many minorities and women tended to view all of the above aa discriminatory practices."

Perhaps when Secretary Ripley ma,de his remark to the Acting Chairman that "theae things ebb and flow like autumn leaves and spring buds" he was atill confident that this suppressed report would remain suppressed. He may have been satisfied that the lav/s circumvented and ignored — Public Law 92-261 and Executive Order 11478 — could remain circumvented and ignored, protected as he was by the members of the Smithsonian Board of Regents, which includes the Chief Justice and influential Senators and Congressmen, who share his responsibilities toward the Federal law.

In any event, he must have known that hbtot other critical articles had appeared and that their content was serious. Among these were the following:

1) "Smuggled Antiquities," by Jack Anderson, V/ashington Post, March 16, 1974.

2) "A 'Shoo' Stopper," by Judith Martin, Washington Post, June 20, 1974.

3) "Bird Chaser," by Jack Anderson, V/ashington Post, Aug. 2, 1974.

4) "History Lesson," by Jack Anderson, Washington Post, Aug. 19, 1974.

5) "The Hirshhorn: Getting the Bugs Out," by Benjamin Forgey, Washington Star^News, Oct. 1, 1974.

6) "Hirshhorn Museum Unveiled in Capital," by Grace Glueck, New York Times, Oct. 2, 1974.

7) "Hirshhorn Price: A Piece of the Nation's Soul," comment by Eric Sevareid, CBS Radio Network, Oct. 2, 1974.

8) "The Avid Eclectic," Time magazine, Sept. 30, 1974. -

9) "Critism of Hirshhorn Museum," by Ada Louise Huxtable, Kefr.York ■ ■ ' Times, Oct. 6, 1974.

10 11

12 13 14 'l5 16 17 18

"A Critique of the Hirshhorn Museum: Big Deals and Bitter Endings," by Suzaiine Stephens, Artforum magazine, February, 1975.

"Questionable Disposition and Use of Gifts by Smithsonian Institution," Chapter 4 of General Accounting Office Report #ID-75-51, "Proposals to strengthen the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act of 1966, March 26, 1975.

"Nixon Aided on Keeping Foreign Gifts," by Maxine Cheshire, Washington Post, March 28, 1975.

"Job Favoritism Is Pound in Study of U.S. Agencies," by Ernest Holsendolph, New York Times, May 7, 1975.

"•Unique* Problems at Smithsonian," Federal Times (weekly). May 14,

1975.

"Boorstin To Be Congress' Librarian," by William Gildea, Washington

Post, May 9, 1975.

"Boorstin to Get Librarian Job," Associated Press, V/ashington Star, May 9, 1975.

"Library of Congress Gets Nonlibrarian," This Week in Review , New York Times, May 11, 1975.

"Government's Record Is Bad on Job Equality," This Week in Review , New York Times, May 11, 1975.

The essential fact of the irregularities detailed in these articles is the repeated aiiu unrelenting disrespect for Federal lav. manifested by bmithsonian administrators. The suppressed Civil i ,rvice report of September, 1973i cited the bmithsoniai. administration for having "no great sense of urgency in f\ilfilling the public policy responsibilities which are theirs as Federal employees." That statement is much too delicate. The plain and demonstrable fact io that secretary Ripley and his associates seem willfully to choose, over and over again, to violate United LtLites Federal lav/s. They indeed seem to consider themselves to be "above the lav<."

In the one matter of equal-emplojanent-opportuj-iities lav/s, for example, the Civil Service Commission investigated CraithL,oniari practices back in 1969 and 1970, publishing a report late in 1970. That report, according to those who saw it, was severely critical of secretary Ripley and his associates. It was suppressed. And it w. j disregarded. In July of 1970, the House Subcommittee on Library and l.Ienorials conducted legislative oversight hearings on the ^mithsonian, taking extensive testimony about employment practices. In its Report to the Congress (House Report 91-1801) the subcommittee concluded: "Discrimination is most likely to be practiced v/here it is least likely to be discovered. The subcommittee strongly feels that the Smith^^onian Merit l-romotion Program could be an ideal discriminatory device... The Subcommittee suggests that the -^mithoonian carefully reviev/ itj pro aoti on procedures7 and

should it concur witii the opinion of tnis^^uocommitxee, not hesitate to establish a new system ."

This report and this Congresoional advice was also apparently disregarded. And so, in 1973» the Civil ^jervice Commission was caused to conduct another investigation of the L-mithaonian, again finding the '^mithsonian administri.tors seriously in violation of United btates laws relevant to equal-employment-opportunities practices. This report was also suppressed, as The IJev. York Times has noted. And, again, the recommendations were apparently disregarded. The fact is th.;t ijmith-sonian employees today iire still diocriminated against and can obtain a fair hearing for their grievances only after hiring attorneys to represent them in their appeals for justice. Meanwhile, the favorites and th- cronies, even when incompetent, enjoy their special privileges, their ever-increaoing super-salaries, their Georgetown mansions, and their luxurious travel allowaiices.

The House ^subcommittee on Library and Memorials, in its Report to the Congress in 1970 regarding omithsonian financial management, concluded: " Tne .subcommittee indeed wishe^ to make tht3 following recommendation ; that the v^mithwoaian reveal, in as much detail p,s is prosently th e practice v.ith respect to expenditures of public funds, both tna sources of private fuiids and the maimer in which they are expended .""

The Smithsonian administration did not comply with this recommendation. Indeed, the Secretary has flatly refused to maJce public any proper accounting for "private funds" and the Regents have firmly supported this position. The General Accounting Office is excluded from any investigation. The Department of Justice is satisfied to accept the legal opinions of the Smithsonian Office of General Counsel (appointed b;, :.ecretary Ripley) in all the^e matters, perhaps noting, after all, that the Chief Justice of the United states is also the Chancellor of the Smith^-onian Institution, and is equally responsible, together with the otcretary, for the irregularities in question. V.'hy "rock the boat"?

The "oecretary's Reserve Fund" is provided with skim-off funds in the followiiig manner:

1) The omithsonian iHotitution receives "grants and contracts" annually from such Federal agencies as Atomic Energy Commission, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Health, Education and V.elfare, Department of Interior, D^,partment of Labor, iJationa^ Aeronautics 6; space Administration, national .cience Foundation, and Na-

tional Endovvmentd for the Arts and Humanities. Theae are fir^t of all, of covLTse, ajjpropriations from the Treasury to these Federal agencies. At the moment the omithsonian receives these grants and contracts, however, they become so-called "private funds."

From these nev/ly designated "private funds," 28^o is deducted and this sum goes into the "secretary's Reserve Fund," to be distributed according to the discretion of the Secretary. These Federal grants and contracts average a total of some ^12,000,000 each year. Thus, the "Secretary's Reserve Fund" receives some $t3>360»000 per year from this slcim- off ■ sour ee l

2) The "Excess Foreign Currency" Program of the .Jmithsonian provides Federal appropriations of some §4,500,000 each year in money derived from the United states Treasury but impounded in certain foreign countries. It is understood that a skim-off of some 28?^ is also taken from this fund and transferred into the "Secretary's Reserve Fund." Thus, the skim-off amounts to an estimated i;l,260,000 each year from this Federal source ^ ' ''

3) MOot flagrant violation of all, skim-off is taken each year from ( the direct operations appropriations given from the United otates Treasury to the support of the ^-■mithsonian Institution. A skim-off of some 7^ is taken from the budget of nearly all the Federal bureaus that comprise the- Smithsonian Institution. This T/o skim-off goes into the "Secretary's Reserve Fund." Thib represents Federal funds converted directly into private funds — in "apparent violation of Federal

laws. In Fiscal Year .1975> for example, this T}i skim-off was deducted from an estimated"^50,000,000 of the Federal a^jpropriation and placed in the "Secretary's Reserve Fund." Thus, a skim-off sum in the amount of an estimated $3,500,000 v/as produced from this Federal sourceT

4) The Freer Gallery of Art possesses an endowment of some $^20,000,000, The Federal Government is responsible for the administration of this fund, through the administration of the Smithsonian Board of Regents. Annual skim-off is taken from this source and placed in the "Secretary's Reserve Fund" also. A skim-off of 155° is deducted from the annual interest of the Freer Fund, and this skim-off is given to the "Secretary's Reserve Fund." Since the interest is some i!;800,000 per year, this soiirce provides a revenue of some $120,000 per year. Although this is not from Federal ajjpropriations it represents an excessive skim-off

and for a purpose not confirmed by law. The Federal Government is responsible.

5) A fifth source of skim^off for "the "Secretary's Reserve Fund" is

the so-called "private revenue-producing activities" of the Smithsonian. The Smithsonian magazine itself is estimated to gross more than some $5,000,000 per yearo ».hat the skim-off from these sources amounts to each year cannot be estimated. Neither can it be investigated. Nor is it accounted for.

Recapitulation of estimated aixnual skim-off going to "Secretary's Reserve Fund" ;

1) Federal grunts and contracts 53,360,000

2) "Excess Foreign Ciorrency" 1,260,000

3) l)irect^L- Federal appropriations 3»500,000

4) Freer Fund interest 120,000

5) Private revenue-producing activities ?

GRAllJJ TOTAL ESTIMATED oKBI-OFF ' ^8, 240,000

STATEMENT OF EDWARD WESTON, ACTOR'S EQUITY ASSOCIATION, WESTERN REGIONAL DIRECTOR

Senator Stevens. Mr. Weston,

Mr. Weston. I have a prepared statement, ISIr. Chairman, and if it will be included in the committee's record, I will not read it. If I may, I would like to add a few comments to it.

I'm the assistant executive secretary and western regional representative of Actor's Equity, Association. We represent all of the performers in the legitimate theater throughout the United States. At a time when the unemployment rate in the United States is approximately 8.7 percent, our membership is unemployed to the extent of 75 to 80 percent. It's quite a distastrous figure for us.

I'm here to echo the appeal of a colleague on the National Endowment of the Arts to ask that the authorization for funds be set at the maximum level of $126 million, rather than the $82 million requested.

It's vital to us, not only to the artists who are unemployed, but I think to the welfare and economy of the country.

The Congress has appropriate approximately $2.5 billion for a comprehensive employment and train act, which does not really affect the artists or the arts of this country. The additional moneys that can be allocated to the Endowment, can be used expressly for this purpose without the introduction of additional bureaucracy.

So, we are urging that this appropriate be at the highest level. It's not just for the artists involved and the culure of the country, but quite obviously, for the many people who are dependent on the theatrical industry for their professions.

To cite an example, in Los Angeles, which is my home, the introduction of a music center there 10 years ago, the Three Theaters, in a dilapidated, broken-down section called Bunker Hill. Since that time, the entire downtown area of Los Angeles has been revitalized. It has brought back business, industry, to a city which was literally falling apart. I think the same could be demonstrated in other areas.

So, what we're asking is not purely selfishly for the arts and the artists, although I think that is a good selfish reason that affects all of us, but it also has to do with the economy of the rest of the country, and I think it's succeedingly valuable; and we urge your support of it.

Senator Stevens. I appreciate your statement and we will print it in full. The Endowment for the Arts has almost a 10-percent increase in the budget, that was submitted. We don't know yet what our colleagues in the House will approve this year. "WTien the Endowment was here, I pointed out that it was my memory that almost 50 percent of the Endowment Arts grants was spent in New York. Massachusetts, and California. That may have something to do with some of the lack of support for increased appropriations. I think it's something that they are addressing and they are now working on having greater diversity this year than they had last year.

We are doing our best to increase this amount and I'm sure the committee, as I've told the other witnesses, will give serious consideration to the full amount of funding level. It is still a factor, I think, in terms of congressional support in terms of the concentration of their expenditures in those three States.

Mr. Weston. The State of Alaska, if I might say, is in my administrative jurisdiction, and of course, we always bemoan the fact that