He explained yesterday that his office "does not dictate [University] policy, but initiate ideas and plans." "I try persuasion and some cajoling," Leonard said, but he added that he does not have final say in the formulation of policy.

He suggested that each of the large faculties ought to have at least one person with central and designated authority to insure equal opportunity and the implementation of the plan itself, with final coordination and overseeing responsibility resting in his office.

Leonard said that he returned a five page memorandum to HEW's regional office explaining "how I spend my time," since there was some question in HEW's rejection notification letter concerning his status.

In response to the HEW call for expansion of job description. Leonard said that the assignment of certain descriptions of jobs such as those of faculty members would be "nothing more than an exercise in futility."

The University's nepotism policy, which the HEW reviewer described as "obscure" and apparently operating "in a discriminatory fashion against women." will be rewritten to conform with the policy of the American Association of University Professors.

"All we want is a system where candidates are judged fairly on their merits," Leonard said. "No one's application should be weighted by family connections to the exclusion of other applicants with similar or superior qualifications."

Leonard said that although the present policy could be "construed" to be discriminatory against women, he does not know exactly what HEW "wants" with regard to a nepotism policy. But he speculated that "what they want is no policy at all." which he said would "open up possibilities for abuse."

Some of HEW's objections to Harvard's most recent affirmative action plan have already been ironed out in verbal discussions with agency representatives, Leonard said yesterday.

These questions included:

* whether goals in various job categories were fair and how the projections were arrived at;

* how many special interest groups--minority and women--were consulted during the formulation of the plan;

* whether documentation existed showing that all union agreements with the University contain no discriminatory clauses; and.

* whether the maternity leave policy violates Federal rulings by setting time limits for paid leaves of absence