A. Additions.-Effective December 31, 1948, the following commodities are added to the positive list of commodities requiring a validated license for export to all group O and R destinations.

A. Additions.-Effective February 4, 1949, the following commodity is added to the positive list of commodities requiring a validated license for exportation to all group O and R destinations:

A. Additions.-The following commodities are added to the positive list of commodities requiring a validated license for exportation to all group O and R destinations, effective as of the dates shown:

1 Tin-plate scrap, schedule B No. 601100, was licensed by the State Department prior to Feb. 28, 1949. By agreement with the State Department, licenses validated prior to Feb. 28, 1949, authorizing the expor tation of tin-plate scrap will remain valid for the period indicated on the face of the licenses unless modified or revoked by the Department of Commerce. With this action, tin cans, old, crushed, classified under schedule B No. 601100, are placed on general license for exportation to all destinations in country group 0.

VI. ERRATA-CURRENT EXPORT BULLETIN NO. 503

Current Export Bulletin No. 503, the positive list of commodities, revised to incorporate revisions in Department of Commerce Schedule B classifications, has been found upon further review to contain certain errors. The corrections are listed below with page numbers. It is suggested that persons having copies of Current Export Bulletin No. 503 make the indicated changes in their copies.

Mr. MCINTYRE. In addition, all commodities of major industrial or military or security significance require licenses for Europe and while it is not possible to supply a complete list of those, since that list is not prepared as such, the requirement that licenses be had for shipments to Europe accounts for two-thirds of the volume of license applications which we now process.

I must emphasize that when it comes to licenses on security goods, the task of processing each individual application is very different from the short-supply situation and in many ways much more difficult. It is necessary to check with the security agencies, such as the National Security Resources Board, the National Military Establishment, the Atomic Energy Commission and others, to determine the extent of their interest, their knowledge of the individual shipment, and whether it is on security grounds an appropriate one to forward.

NEED FOR AMOUNT OF ESTIMATE IN VIEW OF REDUCTION IN ITEMS CONTROLLED

Mr. ROONEY. Last June, Mr. Keegan testified before the Deficiency Subcommittee that there were 400 items then under control. You say the number is now down to 300.

Mr. MCINTYRE. Yes.

NEED FOR AMOUNT

Mr. ROONEY. Why does not your request for appropriations reflect this decrease in the number of items under control?

Mr. MCINTYRE. I think it does, sir. The security burden which we have had to assume because

Mr. ROONEY. If the items under control have been reduced from 400, as of June last, to 300 as of the present time, I do not see where it is reflected since there is an increase of $185,000 in the requested appropriation.

Mr. MCINTYRE. Export control is exercised on two counts: one, to protect from excessive export commodities in short supply in the United States. The list of those short-supply commodities has dropped from 400 to about 300. But the other activity of export control is the security one which I have just started to describe and for that purpose all major items are screened in their shipments to Europe. These commodities constitute two-thirds

Mr. ROONEY. Screened by whom?

Mr. MCINTYRE. First by the licensing officer and then in consultation with the representatives of these security agencies I was just enumerating; National Security Resources Board, the National Military Establishment, the Atomic Energy Commission, and others. That security burden has increased very markedly and if it were not for the relief we are getting from the decline in work load on account of short-supply items, we would have had to request a substantial increase in appropriations.

Mr. BELL. I think, frankly, that we underestimated the volume of work in connection with security. We over-estimated the number of licenses coming in. It was really fortunate that we did, because it is taking much more manpower than we had anticipated for the screening and the enforcement and compliance work.

EXPORT LICENSES FOR SHIPMENTS BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN

Mr. ROONEY. What is the situation with regard to export licenses for shipments of goods to countries behind the iron curtain?

Mr. MCINTYRE. They are issued very sparingly on any commodities of significant industrial or military potential. They are issued not at all on items of the highest classification.

Mr. Bell has just suggested that if you wish a real answer to this, we would request that we go off the record, as this is primarily a security question.

Mr. ROONEY. Let us hear about it off the record.

(Statement off the record.)

TRAVEL EXPENSE

Mr. ROONEY. How do you break down this item of $35,400 for travel?

Mr. Bell. That covers not only the Office of International Trade

Mr. ROONEY. This is the over-all figure?

Mr. BELL. Yes, sir; that is right.

Mr. ROONEY. How do you break it down?

Mr. BELL. $25,000 is for the Office of International Trade.

Mr. MCINTYRE. I can describe, if you wish, the OIT part of the travel.

Mr. CAWLEY. Mr. Chairman, the total for travel in this appropriation is $35,400.

Mr. ROONEY. Give us a break-down of it, Mr. Cawley.

Mr. CAWLEY. By offices?

Mr. ROONEY. Yes; of the $35,400 by offices.

Mr. CAWLEY. I shall have to supply that for the record, I do not have it here.

Mr. MCINTYRE. We can work it out piece by piece, if you wish. Mr. CAWLEY. We can do this out of the justifications starting with each office. The Secretary has a total of $2,000.

Mr. ROONEY. How is that arrived at?

Mr. CAWLEY. That is based on the requirement for travel for that particular outfit. It is about the same as in the current year, as I recall.

The Office of Business Economics has no travel. The Office of Domestic Commerce has an estimate of $8,000 for travel as compared with $10,000 in the current year.

Mr. ROONEY. Yes; but we are giving this the first brushover; we want to know the details. I am not so much concerned with the comparison between now and a year ago, because we did not have this item before us then.

Mr. CAWLEY. Yes, sir. For example, that $8,000 item for Domestic Commerce is necessary because a number of personnel have to continue private contacts with businessmen; the analysis that is necessary under the law makes it imperative that considerable time be spent outside of Washington in consultation.

Mr. ROONEY. Consultation on what?

Mr. CAWLEY. With private businessmen.

Mr. ROONEY. To see whether they want export licenses or not?

Mr. CAWLEY. No, sir; on the requirements of the export program. Mr. ROONEY. Why are they not required to come to Washington? Mr. CAWLEY. Mr. McCoy I believe would better answer that question.

Mr. McCoy. May I answer that question, Mr. Chairman?

Mr. ROONEY. Yes.

Mr. McCoy. This travel is for personnel engaged in analyzing the domestic demand-supply situation to visit principal producers, trade associations and others and get information at first hand. We cannot always expect these people to travel to Washington, because this is not in their interest, it is in the interest of the Government to get this information.

Mr. ROONEY. Why could it not be done by mail?

Mr. McCoy. It requires too much elaborate consultation of statistics in the hands of private companies to get it by mail.

Mr. ROONEY. What is the next item?

Mr. CAWLEY. The next item is an estimated $25,000 for the Office of International Trade.

Mr. ROONEY. What is the break-down of that?

Mr. BELL. I might say that it is an estimate based on our experience during the current year. We have had to have three men go abroad. Our general counsel went to the western European countries working with the ECA authorities and with the various missions of the Foreign Service on methods of checking transshipments behind the iron curtain, to see that they were controlled.

We have a man stationed in Switzerland now, which has proven to be a point where we have to watch transshipments very closely; also we have a man in Italy. Another man visited the more important countries in Central and South America to check on the danger points, you might call them, for transshipment there.

In addition it is necessary in our enforcement and compliance work that our people make quick trips to many of the ports of shipment in this country to check export declarations against licenses issued or to check evasion of our regulations or failure to comply with them in any respect.

Mr. ROONEY. On page 48 of the justifications there is an error in connection with travel. It should be $25,000, not $5,000.

Mr. BELL. That is a typographical error, yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. MCINTYRE. The greatest burden of travel falls in this enforcement field, Mr. Chairman; the problem is one of getting enforcement and compliance officers on the spot for examination into possible violations, whether in New Orleans or Los Angeles or San Francisco. It is much less expensive to send a man there than it is to set up a whole office and maintain it on the spot in those cities; this applies as well to the foreign travel problem to which Mr. Bell has referred. A roving compliance officer in European and Mediterranean countries can run down a number of cases and help prevent shipments behind the iron curtain which might otherwise go undetected.

INCREASE IN COMMUNICATION SERVICES

Mr. ROONEY. This increase, Mr. Cawley, under communication services, $50,400 requested for the coming fiscal year, is based entirely on the granting of the additional positions which we have discussed?