Mr. LUND. I am afraid you'd have to ask General Services that question. Under our law

The CHAIRMAN. Sir?

Mr. LUND. Under our provisions of the Property Act for which we have responsibility, we can only assign that property which is allocated to us for assignment for health and educational purposes. We are not authorized as the Government's agency to do leasing. The other aspect of this we studied was

The CHAIRMAN. I'm trying to get at this point. This is park property, national park property.

Mr. LUND. That's correct.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Now, suppose this hospital is declared surplus, which the Army is going to do. Then it would be reported to the Park Service. The Park Service has no need for the facility, as such. We try to get it to use it, but it has no use for it.

Then it is declared surplus and reported to the General Services Administration. Is that correct? Then the GSA comes along and says, "Why don't you take it?" which you could do.

Mr. LUND. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Once you took it over, you'd have no authority to lease it.

Mr. LUND. No.

The CHAIRMAN. You would need special legislation to do that.
Mr. LUND. That is correct, sir.

And we have one other provision of law and we could not then surrender it because there is another basic law making the provision that any Park Service property must come before the Congress for its disposal; so it actually has a condition on it and could not be declared surplus where we could get legal title to transfer to the State.

The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions? Can you think of anything further?

Mr. LUND. No, we had one or two other recommendations, minor recommendations, but they are already in the record so I don't think I should take the time of the committee to repeat them. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, gentlemen, very much. (The letter previously referred to follows:)

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE,
OFFICE OF VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION,

Hon. JOHN L. MCCELLAN,

Washington D.C., May 14, 1959.

Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MCCLELLAN: As I told you in our telephone conversation on Wednesday of this week I regret exceedingly that I will not be able to appear personally before your committee to discuss the proposed use of the Army and Navy General Hospital facility at Hot Springs, Ark., as a State-operated rehabilitation center, in the event the Federal Government should effect transfer of this property to the State of Arkansas. I am leaving this week for the First Mediterranean Conference on Rehabilitation, sponsored by the International Society for the Welfare of Cripples. Mr. E. Emory Ferebee, Deputy Director of the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation, who conducted the negotiations with the Department of Defense and your staff, and who is thoroughly familiar with my views, will represent this Office at your hearings on Thursday, May 21, at 10:30 a.m.

As you requested, I am conveying to you some of the views I expressed when I appeared before the House Committee on Appropriations. From my knowledge of the vocational rehabilitation program in Arkansas and surrounding States, and from the widespread interest expressed by citizens of Arkansas when I visited there last year, it seems apparent to me that the use of this facility to establish a rehabilitation center would be of great assistance in meeting the needs of the disabled people of that area. The State rehabilitation program in Arkansas is one of our more advanced programs and is devoted to improving the services provided for the disabled citizens of Arkansas. As the Secretary made clear in our official report on the bill, what this legislation seeks to accomplish is very desirable.

You have requested my views on the probable Federal requirement in connection with this project. At this stage of the Arkansas plans, it is next to impossible to accurately advise you as to what the requirements might be. We are, however, dedicated to the concept that these types of rehabilitation facilities should be established on a financially sound basis, designed over a long-term period to operate on a fee-for-service basis that will adequately cover all or most of their costs. We recognize that, through the Federal-State program of support for vocational rehabilitation, we are providing partial assistance for the rehabilitation of disabled persons through our basic grant program, and do not believe that this subsidy should be duplicated on a permanent basis by an additional subsidy to a rehabilitation facility providing such services. We do, however, recognize that in order to establish a large-scale effective rehabilitation facility, it may be necessary to provide transitional subsidy assistance until it is in full operation. We have not yet received, nor is it timely for us to have received, a complete and detailed operating plan for this facility, and therefore are not in a position to determine what the precise transitional subsidy requirements might be. However, the order of magnitude of such subsidy would appear to range between $300,000 and $500,000 in the partial year of operation which would be possible in 1960.

I appreciate your interest in the vocational rehabilitation program.

Sincerely yours,

MARY E. SWITZER, Director.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, the next witness is Mr. E. B. Whitten, executive director of the National Rehabilitation Association. State your name and present position, please.

STATEMENT OF E. B. WHITTEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL REHABILITATION ASSOCIATION

Mr. WHITTEN. My name is E. B. Whitten. I am executive director of the National Rehabilitation Association, which is a nonprofit, private voluntary organization concerned with the rehabilitation of the handicapped, with a history of about 30 years of service in that direction.

We do not offer testimony before the Congress upon things that we do not think of national import. In other words, we won't testify on a strictly local matter. We do think, however, that the transfer of this property and the possibilities that it holds for the advancement of rehabilitation in this whole section of the country, and even nationally, is of such importance that we wanted to take interest in it and to show our approval of this bill to provide for the transfer of the property. We support the bill.

There are several things that seem to us very promising about this proposal, things that in fact have impressed us a good deal.

In the first place, the interest of the community, which is always very important in a proposal of this kind, seems to me very real and deep, and we are confident that the creation of this facility will have the support of the people of Hot Springs.

Second, the fact that the State of Arkansas itself has been willing, in advance even of the transfer of this property, to make an appropriation for the creation of this facility certainly indicates that people in highest authority in the State are deeply devoted to the principles of rehabilitation as well as to this which is a specific method of accomplishing a good result.

We also have be very much impressed by the thoroughness with which the rehabilitation service in the State has investigated the possibilities for the use of this proposal. They are getting, for instance, an impartial committee to come in from outside of the State to make a survey of the property and to make recommendations to them as well as for the very sound financial plan which we think has been developed to carry it out.

We are also impressed by the competency of the Arkansas rehabilitation staff, the leaders of rehabilitation in the State, that they can do this thing. It is very important that the people who are in charge do have the right philosophy and know-how to do the kind of thing that they are proposing to do here.

I would like to say in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, sentimentally, that I have some interest in this proposal. I didn't know, for instance, until 1957 that this property would be available. Someone here on the Hill told me about this, and I am the individual who went to Arkansas and brought it to the attention of the rehabilitation authorities in the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation because I thought, immediately, that this provided a tremendous opportunity, that we certainly ought not to pass by in developing facilities for handicapped people in this area of the country.

Therefore, it has been a great personal satisfaction to me to see this thing develop as it has and to see us, we think, about to realize this great service to the people in Arkansas and throughout the Nation.

The CHAIRMAN. În other words, Mr. Whitten, if the Federal Government is going to promote, sponsor, and finance a rehabilitation program on the national scale, to make grants-in-aid and contribute matching funds to States and other localities for the encouragement and advancement of a rehabilitation program, then it would be overlooking a very fine opportunity if it passed up securing of this facility to establish a regional center for that purpose.

Mr. WHITTEN. I agree with that viewpoint exactly. I think it would be tragic for the interest of handicapped people for this opportunity to be passed up.

The CHAIRMAN. Particularly for those facilities just being closed down, put in mothballs and performing no service.

Mr. WHITTEN. That is exactly true. Arkansas and the region has a great opportunity here. In fact, we are carrying on rehabilitation programs in this country now in buildings that we are almost ashamed of. People, of course, are doing the best they can with the meager facilities they have, and to have this opportunity is just tremendous. The CHAIRMAN. So it has more far-reaching significance and impact than just something that the Government is doing for the State. It is doing it for the people.

Mr. WHITTEN. That's right.

The CHAIRMAN. Primarily in an area-and, of course, some can benefit from it, possibly from all over the country.

Mr. WHITTEN. Well, to illustrate, there are people sent from as far as Wyoming to Woodrow Wilson Rehabilitation Center in Virginia. The CHAIRMAN. Down to Fishersville, Va.?

Mr. WHITTEN. Yes, that's right, and I think this facility would draw not only from the States who have indicated to you by letter that they are interested in it, but from the whole Rocky Mountain area where there is no facility even comparable to this. I am sure there will be people coming from Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, down to this center, not in large numbers, but in some numbers. The CHAIRMAN. All right, anything further?

Senator CURTIS. No questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. WHITTEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Donald E. Lee and Mr. Frank E. Harrison, will you come around, please?

Have a seat, gentlemen.

All right, Mr. Lee, you are Chief of the Lands Division, National Park Service?

Mr. LEE. That's right, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And Mr. Frank E. Harrison, you are a special assistant of the National Park Service?

Mr. HARRISON. That's right.

The CHAIRMAN. How long have you held your position, Mr. Lee? Mr. LEE. I have been with the Park Service since 1935, excluding approximately 4 years I served with the Navy during World War II. The CHAIRMAN. And you, Mr. Harrison.

Mr. HARRISON. Since 1950 I have been with the National Park Service and in my present position for about two and a half years.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, now, you gentlemen proceed in your own way to give us the benefit of your opinion.

STATEMENTS OF DONALD E. LEE, CHIEF OF THE LANDS DIVISION, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE; AND FRANK E. HARRISON, SPECIAL ASSISTANT

Mr. LEE. Senator, I want to say that Director Wirth of the National Park Service regrets that he could not be here. He had a prior commitment and he has asked Mr. Harrison and myself to represent the National Park Service on this matter.

For the information of Senator Curtis-and I am sure you are familiar with it-I have here from our official land records-the only one that I have, incidentally-a map showing the location of the hospital area with relation to the national park as a whole.

The blue area in here is the hospital area; green is the park area, sir. Senator CURTIS. In other words, the removal of that by reason of being located in the corner is not going to cause any lessening of the value and the access of the park.

Mr. LEE. No, I would say not, Senator, because, as a matter of fact, strangely enough, the hospital was actually in existence prior to the creation of the national park.

Senator CURTIS. You are favoring this legislation?

Mr. LEE. Yes, we are. We have suggested two amendments, however, to the legislation that we believe are unobjectionable and it would be to the satisfaction of everyone concerned.

The CHAIRMAN. What are those two amendments, Mr. Lee?
Mr. LEE. One of the amendments, Senator, removes-

The CHAIRMAN. Excludes the superintendent's house.

Mr. LEE. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Three and a half acres.

Mr. LEE. Yes, that's right. There are about three and a half acres in here; and the other provision is one that we believe follows the pattern established by the Congress in connection with the original establishment of this area as the Hot Springs Reservation, and that is this hot water that emanates on there is to be reserved in perpetuity to the Federal Government.

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, that's right, and you control the allocation of it to different users.

Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir.

Mr. LEE. Yes, sir.

Mr. HARRISON. May I mention, there is a third one which should be brought out. That is an amendment to section 6, which would give the Secretary of the Interior authority, along with the Secretary of the Army, to prescribe the conditions that should go into the deed, conditions which affect the preservation of the park and the values that are there. That is the third amendment which has been recommended by the Department of the Interior.

The CHAIRMAN. Are those all of the objectives you asked for? Mr. HARRISON. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. We will look into that but we are trying to legislate here as to what we want to do. We wouldn't want the Department of the Army to have a veto power over what we are going to do with the property.

Mr. HARRISON. No, that is not the intention.

I just wanted to mention that there were three instead of two. The CHAIRMAN. All right; that will go into our consideration. Mr. LEE. I think the one that is here explained is more or less in conformity with the general idea.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you give us a photostatic copy of that map? Mr. LEE. I will endeavor to do so. I don't know how well it will show up on a photostat but we'll endeavor to do it.

The CHAIRMAN. If you can, we'd appreciate it, for insertion in the record.

Permit me to ask you gentlemen about this-maybe you are the ones to comment on it since the vast majority of this area is under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service-what do you say about leasing the property rather than conveying it by deed subject to these conditions?

Mr. LEE. Well, it wouldn't be, as I see it, too material to us one way or the other.

Our department is perfectly agreeable to a conveyance of the property and if the agencies that would have to administer this property have difficulty in connection with the leasing authority, as against conveyance authority, it would be perfectly satisfactory to us to have it conveved.

The CHAIRMAN. The point I'm getting at, the State, so far as I know, the State authorities, haven't suggested that it be leased but some local interests, for some reason or other, that is not quite clear to