EMPLOYMENT OF EXPERTS AND CONSULTANTS

BY FEDERAL AGENCIES

MONDAY, APRIL 16, 1956

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE

REORGANIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a. m., in room 1501, New House Office Building, Hon. William L. Dawson (chairman of the full committee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Dawson, McCormack, Jones, Fascell, Hoffman, and Jonas.

Also present: Orville S. Poland, general counsel; William Pincus, associate general counsel; Elmer Henderson, associate counsel of the subcommittee; Orville J. Montgomery, John B. O'Brien, Jr., David Glick, of the subcommittee staff; and Ann McLachlan, subcommittee clerk.

Chairman DAWSON. The subcommittee will come to order.

The subcommittee today is opening hearings on the general subject of the employment and utilization of experts and consultants in carrying on the business of the Government. It is important because it is generally recognized that through such employment the Government oftentimes makes use of specially needed talent to assist in solving the many technical and scientific problems involved in the day-to-day operations of our Government.

At the same time, we must be aware of the special problems inherent in this type of employment and their particular effect on the operation of the Government and the private economy.

Practically all departments and agencies utilize experts and consultants. There are now employed many thousands of these people who serve both with and without compensation and who are recruited from practically every field of science and industry.

The widespread use of this type of employment stems from the expanded needs and manpower shortages arising out of World War II and has since continued on an extensive scale.

While there are many special and separate provisions or laws authorizing procurement of experts and consultants, the only general authorization available to all agencies is that provided in section 15 of Public Law 600, 79th Cong. approved August 2, 1946.

That law is a product of the House Committee on Government Operations, and now that it has been in effect almost 10 years it is appropriate that this subcommittee review in detail what is being done in this field as a means of evaluating the effectiveness of the

1

law as well as determining the necessity for new or amendatory legislation.

The subcommittee is interested in experts and consultants serving the Government both with and without compensation. From the viewpoint of the Government administrator, existing authority to employ experts and consultants is a broad authority to employ outside of existing civil service procedures.

Unless discriminatingly used there may be a drift toward use of the authority primarily to avoid restrictions rather than to obtain specialized personal services. From the viewpoint of the individual expert or consultant there are a variety of problems raised because of the fact that in the main Government service is not his primary way of earning a livelihood or achieving recognition. Even in those cases where the Government service is very important and significant, the fact remains that it frequently represents only one of a number of professional attachments.

Therefore, the subcommittee proposed to:

1. Review other statutory and regulatory authorities being used for the same purpose as that provided in section 15 of Public Law 600 and, in the light of facts and data gathered during the course of this study, determine whether all these authorities should be combined into one law not only for the purpose of providing one uniform authority for all agencies, but to provide uniformity in such controls and limitations as may be deemed proper to prescribe.

2. Determine the extent and manner in which the services of experts and consultants are being used by the departments and agencies under the various authorities now in existence, including:

Relationship to civil service career employment procedures.

Kinds of services performed by experts and consultants and qualifications of such experts and consultants.

Special problems raised by specialized, temporary, or ad hoc employment as contrasted with regular, full-time employment.

3. Determine what controls have been established over uses of existing authorities to employ and utilize consultants and experts and the effectiveness of such controls.

This subcommittee is interested in obtaining facts which will lead to objective consideration of the problems, and, if needed, to constructive legislation.

Existing legislation, including section 15 of the Public Law 600, also authorizes the procurement of expert or consultant services from organizations of such experts or consultants. The subcommittee has been making a study of Government practices in this regard as part of the area of temporary or intermittent services being utilized by the Government. The subcommittee hopes to carry this part of its study forward in conjunction with the study of individual experts and consultants of which the hearing this morning is one phase.

Finally, and most important, there has grown up a form of quasigovernmental organization which can be characterized broadly as the advisory committee device. Advisory committees are, generally speaking, groups of individual experts and consultants who are brought together under public auspices for advice of various kinds regarding Government activities.

The subcommittee has been collecting data on these advisory committees. The nature and extent of these advisory committees indicate they are an important part of the governmental structure.

Because these committees play an important part in the Government's decision making process in many agencies, specific attention has to be devoted to them to see how widespread is their use and exactly how they are being used.

It is essential that the people be advised concerning advisory groups, including those largely drawn from or representative of industry and allied fields. These groups are organized under public auspices for providing advice to their Government. The responsibility for official action remains that of the recognized public officials.

But wholly apart from the internal deliberations of advisory groups there remains the need for public knowledge of the membership of these groups, their nongovernmental affiliations, the subject matter assigned to them, and the role perform in the final determination of governmental policy.

In regard to the matter of determination of governmental policy, it is important to ascertain the extent to which the advice furnished by such groups ultimately becomes the official policy of the Government agency.

The hearing this morning is concerned with individual experts and consultants as distinguished from organizations of such persons or advisory committees.

We have with us this morning Chairman Young and other representatives from the Civil Service Commission. The Civil Service Commission perhaps has had more contact with the overall problems of individual experts and consultants in Government than any other agency. We are certain that Commissioner Young's testimony will be of great value to this subcommittee in its consideration of the use of experts and consultants.

Chairman Young's staff has already been of great assistance to our subcommittee staff in the preliminary work done in this area and we wish to express our thanks for the cooperation and courtesy extended to them.

May we have at this time Mr. Young?

We are happy to have you with us again.

STATEMENT OF HON. PHILIP YOUNG, CHAIRMAN, UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION; ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN W. MACY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR; LAWRENCE V. MELOY, ACTING GENERAL COUNSEL; FRANK BARLEY, CHIEF, BUREAU OF INSPECTIONS AND CLASSIFICATION AUDITS; AND JOHN W. STEELE, CHIEF, REGULATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS DIVISION, UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

Mr. YOUNG. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I have a prepared statement, Mr. Chairman. Shall I proceed. Chairman DAWSON. Thank you. You may.

Mr. YOUNG. I am glad to respond to Chairman Dawson's invitation to meet with you today in connection with your study of the use of experts and consultants by departments and agencies of the Government.

I have been asked to comment in particular on the following mat

ters:

1. The existing authorities for the employment of experts and consultants, including Schedule A of the Civil Service Rules and Public Law 600;

2. The authority and role of the Civil Service Commission and other Federal agencies;

3. The procedures for administering existing laws; including the system of inspection by the Commission;

4. The extent and nature of employment of such experts and consultants in the last three years; and

5. Suggestions regarding the need for modifying existing legislation if, in my opinion, any such need exists.

The proper use of experts and consultants is a normal, legitimate and economical method of improving the product, service, or operations of any enterprise. Certainly, in many activities of the Federal Government which are most vital to the safety and well-being of our Nation, the contributions of specialists from science, business, and industry have always been recognized to be of great value. For these reasons I believe that proper use of authority in the Federal Government to secure consultant or expert assistance on a temporary or periodic basis should be encouraged.

This does not mean, of course, that it is appropriate to use such means to do a task that could be as well done with agency personnel, that calls for full-time continuous employment, or that is organized to "get around" competitive employment procedures or Classification Act pay limitations. Such devices are not only unwarranted, they are wasteful, and they tend to destroy the morale of regular career employees. One of the first efforts of the present Civil Service Commission was directed toward giving all agencies a better understanding of the legal authorities and broad policies which govern employment of experts and consultants. At the same time, we undertook to improve the procedures so that both the agencies and the Commission could carry out their responsibilities more effectively.

We have recently furnished for the members of this subcommittee copies of pamphlet No. 3 in our personnel management series, issued in 1954. This pamphlet pulls together, for the guidance of Federal executives, the existing laws and policy, our regulations, and suggested practices as to the employment of experts and consultants. That is this little green pamphlet that you have available and I might add, useful in the complicated area of our discussion.

Before proceeding further, let me say what we mean by the words "expert" and "consultant."

An expert is a specialist who has outstanding, clearly superior qualifications in a professional, scientific, or technical field. He is generally recognized as an expert by other people in his own field. He usually serves in an advisory or consulting capacity but may serve temporarily in an operating position.

In contrast, a consultant serves only in an advisory capacity. He does not himself perform or supervise the performance of, the operating functions of the agency. A consultant is likely to be an expert in his field. However, he need not be a specialist. His advice may be sought because of his broad administrative or technical experience.