Mr. VURSELL. I would like to say that I have enjoyed the splendid examination of the Secretary this morning, and his very capable replies. I do believe that the Secretary has operated under the laws of the Congress. I do believe that he has a responsibility with regard to costs, and I would like to go into some of those things, but at the present time I know we want to get through.

I just want to say that it appears to me we do have yet a very great problem after all the years we have been in this farmwork-the Congress and the Secretary of Agriculture. I am hopeful, as all of us are, we are making some progress at the present time. I do believe that we have reached the point where the road is more upward than downward. I think that the Secretary and his assistants have rendered a very good service to the farmers and to the economy of the country.

Mr. WHITTEN. With regard to the questions submitted by Mr. Taber, I would like to have shown any change that has been made in the price-support level for those years that he requested.

(NOTE. Information supplied by the Department may be found in the appendix.)

MILK MARKETING ORDERS

I would like for Mr. Roberts to put a statement in the record showing what developments have occurred with regard to the committee's request for an improvement in handling, administratively, of milkmarketing orders. Mr. Roberts has submitted that to me, and I want to say for the record that the committee's desire was not to push you into speedy action, but it was a problem we felt surely you would have some concern about. Again, the whole purpose was to bring about some improvement in the general handling of it through the regulations. A reading of Mr. Roberts' suggestions would indicate they are in the right direction. Again, we would not want to tie you tightly to any proposal, or to any immediate action thereon, but I thought the record might show your tentative suggestions to date. (The information requested follows:)

Following is a tentative draft of proposed amendments to rules applicable to hearings on marketing agreements and orders. This draft has been prepared as a result of discussions with the House Subcommittee on Agriculture Appropriations. The amendments proposed are intended to strengthen our present rules in keeping with suggestions made by the chairman of the committee during the hearing mentioned above.

The amendments include:

1. A requirement that the Deputy Administrator shall give or cause to be given notice of the hearing.

2. Clarification of the requirement for publication to specifically provide that one method of publication be through local newspapers.

3. A requirement that the Deputy Administrator certify that notice of hearing has been given as required by the regulations, or in the alternative, that he determine that such notice is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.

4. A requirement that the hearing examiner conducting the hearing ascertain that the record contains the certification or determination referred to in 3 above before proceeding to receive evidence.

TENTATIVE DRAFT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULES APPLICABLE TO HEARINGS ON MARKETING AGREEMENTS AND ORDERS

[Old language deleted, in brackets; new language in italic]

Amend section 900.4 (b) as follows:

“(b) Giving notice of hearing. (1) [Upon the filing of the notice of the hearing, the hearing clerk shall give or cause to be given notice of the hearing in the following manner.] The Deputy Administrator shall give or cause to be given notice of hearing in the following manner:

"(i) By publication of the notice of hearing in the Federal Register;

"(ii) By mailing a true copy of the notice of hearing to each of the persons known to the Deputy Administrator, to be interested therein;

"(iii) By issuing a press release containing the complete text or a summary of the contents of the notice of hearing and making the same available to such newspapers in the area proposed to be subjected to regulation as reasonably will tend to bring the notice to the attention of the persons interested therein;

"(iv) By forwarding copies of the notice of hearing addressed to the governors of such of the several States of the United States and to executive heads of such of the Territories and possessions of the United States as the Deputy Administrator, having due regard for the subject matter of the proposal and the public interest, shall determine should be notified.

"(2) Legal notice of the hearing shall be deemed to be given if notice is given in the manner provided by subparagraph (1) (i) of this paragraph; and failure to give notice in the manner provided in subparagraph (1) (ii), (iii), and (iv) of this paragraph shall not affect the legality of the notice.

"(c) Proof of the giving of notice. [Proof of the giving of notice (other than by publication in the Federal Register) shall be by the affidavit or certificate of the person giving the same. Such affidavit or certificate shall be filed with

the hearing clerk and the filing thereof shall be noted on the docket of the proceeding.] There shall be filed with the hearing clerk or submitted to the examiner at the hearing proof of the giving of notice (other than by publication in the Federal Register) in the form of an affidavit or certificate of the person giving the same. In the alternative, if notice is not given in the manner provided in subparagraph (1) (ii), (iii), and (iv) there shall be filed with the hearing clerk or submitted to the examiner at the hearing a determination by the Deputy Administrator that such notice is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest with a brief statement of the reasons for such determination. In the event of a determination by the Deputy Administrator such determination shall be final."

Amend section 900.8 (c) as follows:

"(c) Order of procedure. [The presiding officer shall have noted on the record his designation as presiding officer and the notice of the hearing as filed with the Division of the Federal Register. This shall be done by filing as an exhibit for the record a copy of the Federal Register containing such designation and such notice, or a duly certified copy of such designation and notice.] The presiding officer shall, at the opening of the hearing prior to the taking of testimony, have noted as part of the record his designation as presiding officer, the notice of hearing as filed with the Division of the Federal Register, and the affidavit or certificate of the giving of notice or the determination provided for in subsection 900.4 (c).

"Evidence shall then be received with respect to the matters specified in the notice of the hearing in such order as the presiding officer shall announce."

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Secretary, we are pleased to have had you before the committee. As I pointed out earlier, there have been some differences of viewpoint existing through the years. I think after 5 years you show that you still stick to your original beliefs, so we can expect from you the same beliefs and activities that you have shown during the past 5 years.

You and I have had many arguments. They certainly were not intended to be personal on my part, and I know they have not been on yours. We have had some arguments with regard to figures, not as to the accuracy of them of your Department, but over the question which of those figures are the most important.

Though we have enjoyed a friendly personal relationship that will continue, there is one place where our differences will be resolved. The farmer knows his situation and we do not have to put the figures in here for each one of them to know whether he is prosperous. He knows. We will leave the record at that.

Thank you.

Secretary BENSON. Thank you.

LANGUAGE CHANGES AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

WITNESS

CHARLES L. GRANT, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND BUDGET OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Mr. GRANT. Mr. Chairman, there are a number of language changes in the bill which have not been discussed. In the interest of conserving your time, I would be glad to discuss the most significant ones, leaving out those which involve editorial changes or citations to new legislation, etc.

Mr. WHITTEN. That will be all right. You may include those in the record, if you will, and hit the highlights with us.

Mr. GRANT. All right.

(The statement requested is as follows:)

LANGUAGE CHANGES PROPOSED IN 1959 BUDGET CONTENTS

Page in subcommittee print

1-3

34, 35

43, 44 58

64

Extension Service: Cooperative extension work, payments and expenses-

Reimbursement to CCC for advances for animal disease eradication activities.

Reimbursement to CCC for grading and classing activities__

Special commodity disposal programs--.

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE

132

79, 86

91

103

134

136

137

Salaries and expenses

Page 1, line 12: This change would provide for the purchase of two airplanes, of which one would be for replacement. Both planes would be used for plant pest control activities, and would be four-place observation planes designed

specifically for agricultural work and equipped for spraying and dusting operations. They would cost approximately $17,000 each. The additional plane is needed because of the increased workload due to the screwworm, fire ant, and other control programs. The other plane would replace a small two-place plane purchased in 1952. The new plane would be safer to operate and much more efficient for the pest control work.

Page 2, line 10: This change would insert language which would provide authority for the acquisition of land for experimental purposes for the soil and water conservation research laboratory being constructed at Morris, Minn., with funds provided in fiscal year 1958. The site for the laboratory consists of only 15 acres. The additional land is needed to provide several small experimental areas nearby, covering varying special problem soil types included in the original objectives of the laboratory.

Page 2, line 13: This change would delete the provision in the 1958 Appropriation Act which applied specifically to the construction, alteration, and repair of laboratories and other buildings and the acquisition of land therefor. This provision applies to nonrecurring appropriation items and will not be needed in 1959.

Page 2, line 16: This change would add language to provide for emergency replacement of buildings used in connection with research on foot-and-mouth and other contagious diseases at Plum Island, N. Y. Prompt replacement of buildings which might be destroyed by fire, storm, or other cause would be essential. Because of the isolated location of the research station and the highly contagious nature of foot-and-mouth or other contagious diseases which may be studied there, it is essential that it be possible to make replacements promptly. Experience already acquired because of storm and fire damage emphasizes the need for such authority. This is in effect standby authority to enable the Department to replace damaged or destroyed buildings which may cost more than the limitation prescribed in the Appropriation Act. The amount cannot be determined in advance.

The laboratory at Plum Island, for which $10 million was appropriated in 1952, is now in use. With the construction of a few remaining supporting facilities in fiscal year 1958, the installation will be completed and there will be no balance remaining available from the 1952 appropriation for the emergency replacement of buildings should that become necessary.

Page 2, line 25: This change proposes to delete references to the act of May 9, 1938, and the act of August 13, 1954, which amended that act. It is not necessary to include these references in the appropriation language and deletion of them will shorten and simplify the language. Appropriate references will be included hereafter in the language citations in the printed budget. The deletion of these references will not affect in any way the nature or scope of the work conducted under this item.

Page 3, line 3: This change would:

(a) Delete language prohibiting the use of this appropriation for payment of indemnities because of injury or destruction of property as a result of plant insect and disease control activities, except potatoes and tomatoes as authorized under the Golden Nematode Act. Inclusion of the language is unnecessary because indemnity payments are specifically prohibited by section 102 (c) of the Department of Agriculture Organic Act of 1944 (7 U. S. C. 147c), and authority to pay indemnities for potatoes and tomatoes is specifically set forth in the Golden Nematode Act (act of June 15, 1948). (b) Delete the proviso which would permit the Secretary, in his discretion, to require cooperation from States or others in carrying out the sweetpotato weevil control, barberry eradication, and golden nematode control programs. This proviso is a repetition of the authority which the Secretary already has in section 102 (a) of the Department of Agriculture Organic Act of 1944 (7 U. S. C. 147a), and in the Golden Nematode Act (7 U. S. C. 150c), to require cooperation at his discretion.

The deletion would in no way affect the authority of the Secretary and is pro posed with the sole intent of shortening and simplifying the wording of the language.

State experiment stations:

Page 9, line 3: This change deletes citations to the United States Code which have been transferred to 7 U. S. C. 361a-361i.

Page 9, line 6: This change substitutes the appropriate citation to the United States Code for the old citation to the Statutes at Large applicable to the act of August 11, 1955, which amended the Hatch Act, approved March 2, 1887,