Evening star., 1954-01-03
e. O. P Trying Hard to Justify ,456 Security Figure

and other persons not fred after
having been proven security
risks. Proof Of this fact was
contained explicitly In the re-
lease In which the Navy an
nounced It's own contribution
to the October total. This is
what the Navy said:
Separations In some instances
were affected after preferment
of charges and hearings. Others
were separated through resigna-,
tion or observation-disclosures prior
to final processing OF derogatory
information, or by other admin
istrative action during the en-
ploye's trial period" I"
Procedure in Doubt.
The logical question. Of course,
is whether the procedures fol-
lowed In the Navy case were
followed In producing the purge
figures for other agencies. No
one in the administration will say
that handling of the Navy figures
was typical of the way the whole
list was produced. But, on the
other hand. nobody will say 1t
wasn't.
James Hatcher, head of the
Civil Service Commissions secu-
rity appraisal unit. was asked
whether the figures for other
agencies also included voluntary
designations. observation-disclosures
and other administrative separa-
tions found on the Navy list. He
said he was not at liberty to
discuss the matter and suggested
that Mr.. Young was the only
one who could. PerhapSAM Mr..
Young could. But he wouldn't.
The same kind Of thing is en-
countered in trying to estimate
the percentage of the 1.456 fig-
ure which actually has to do with
loyalty cases.
Navy Rate Low.
The bulk of the Navy's security
separations were blue collar
workers - laborers and helpers
and the like. Navy offieials know
of only II cases involving sub
yersive associations or question
able loyalty. They spot checked
Civil Service records on the IT'S
others - every fifth one - and
found no additional loyalty cases.
According to an Air Force Off
cial. instances of questionable
loyalty were no higher in his de-
partment. percentage wise, than
they were in the Navy. The Air
Force employs 289, 900 and the
Navy 435.000 civilian workers
a total roughly one-third of all
Government employees.
The Star has been told by
sources it believes to be reliable
that the Army and Veterans
Administration also have low
rates of loyalty cases. No infor-
nation on other agencies is
available.
One of the reasons for a low
percentage Of loyalty cases in
the military is that for three
years the Army. Navy and Air
Force have had the authority
under Public Law 1888, to fire
summarily any employe believed
to have subversive connections.
The State Department, Central
Intelligence Agency and several
other also have had this author
ity. -
New Report Form Used.
OF late. the administration
apparently has recognized that
the reporting system which it
has been using has produced
confusion and numbers with no
clear meaning. The Civil Serv-
ice Commission. with the advice
of the Justice Department and
agency security officers. has
developed a new monthly report
form. This makes clear what |
statistics are required.
The commission. however,
will not tell the press what in
formation the new report form |
seeks. Nor will 1t say whether
the form is now in use.
Two weeks ago. Mr.. Young |
and Mr.. Brownell met with |
Government security officers at |
the Justice Department to take |
critical stock of the program and
to discuss, among other things, |
the new reporting system.
And the Justice Departments |
Mr.. Minor. who perhaps had as |
much to do with the actual |
writing Of the employe security |
program as any other, told The |
Star the administration is not |
forgetting that disnniSals under |
the executive order are to be |
made only in the interests of |
national security"
If the order is being used for |