페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

agree, I am sure. Commissioner Tierney is shaking his head. The reporter can't pick up head shakes.

Commissioner TIERNEY. I would like to point out first of all that the Doyle report, of course, was a report on all transportation.

Senator HARTKE. That is right.

Commissioner TIERNEY. Including nonsurface transportation, which is out of our jurisdiction.

Senator HARTKE. There wasn't any Department of Transportation then, remember.

Commissioner TIERNEY. That is correct. Some of the recommendations in there, of course, and I think of the Department as one of them really, have been adopted. This is one of them. The establishment of the Department of Transportation, that is.

Senator HARTKE. Well, has it really? Is the Department as now constituted identical to the recommendation they made or not?

Commissioner TIERNEY. It is my recollection it was. But all I wanted to say, my reaction to your question as to whether or not in effect we were paying, the Commission for example, was paying too much attention to the welfare of the industries we regulate as contrasted to the public interest, I think that is not quite an accurate statement of what the Commission has been doing. I guess the perfect example is the present rate of return of the railroads today, around 2 or 3 percent. I think that furnishes a pretty good example. Maybe we haven't paid enough attention to them. But generally speaking, I think it should be emphasized of course, and I think everybody recognizes, that part of the public interest involves the financially sound condition of our carriers. So that is the difficulty of regulation, taking care of that aspect of it and of course more importantly those who use the carriers.

Senator HARTKE. This report in effect says that Congress itself is no better equipped to deal with the major issues in transportation policy than it was prior to the enactment of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946. Then they come back and say that the CAB, ICC, and the Federal Maritime Commission-I think at that time it was Federal Maritime Board-should be consolidated into a single Federal Transportation Commission, which would have jurisdiction over operating rights of all regulated carriers, all aspects of intramodal and intermodal rates and service, including shipping contracts and agreements, approval of safety regulations for air, highway, and rail carriers, which is now in the Department of Transportation.

Then the report says top staffs of the Commission should be organized for purposes, such as operating rights, rates, services, and so forth, for all modes, to avoid top-level organization by clientele, that is rail, highway, waterway, and pipeline. Organization by clientele may be necessary at lower levels of the heirarchy. I am quoting in each of these cases from the Doyle report, page 11. What is your comment about that? Would such a commission in that form improve transportation coordination in the country, or do you have a contrary comment? Do you have an opinion? Or do you think you are allowed to have one?

Commissioner WALRATH. Senator, I have one. I don't want to seem to volunteer every time, but

Commissioner Bush. Why do you, then. [Laughter.]

Commissioner WALRATH. Well, my only excuse at the moment, sir, is that I happen to have taken the Doyle report very seriously and I have a high regard for Gen. Jack Doyle, who authored that study.

I would like to comment on a question you asked some time ago. I think General Doyle was talking there about removing inequities, which we all recognize exist, because of statutory exemptions that are not applicable to all forms of transportation. To illustrate, where railroads are fully regulated economically, and where motor carriers have the agricultural exemption and the water carriers have both the bulk and agricultural exemption, I think that is what he had in mind about inequities, plus the differences in the basic transportation policies of FMC and CAB and ICC. Now in that context, I agree with him that simply removing the inequities, that is the exemptions, would not alone create a viable intermodal transportation system. I think we do have to go one step further and I am speaking personally now. I think we have to look toward a single basic transportation policy that would be applicable to water shipping, aircraft and surface. That is the first problem.

We couldn't simply in my judgment put the three Commissions together in one and each operate under different statutory standards. Ratemaking for water purposes, deep water, is quite different, as you know, from that which is traditional under the Interstate Commerce Commission Act. I think it is probably somewhat different in air transportation. I don't speak as an expert in either of those fields. But they do have certain promotional functions we don't have. We don't favor one mode of surface carrier over another.

I think the first step toward that Utopia-complete integration of the three agencies, and I think it is an ideal objective_would be to find a way to make one national transportation policy that is comparable to the policy that precedes every section of our act, but how we do that is a tremendous problem. And it is one that I have always hoped that the Department of Transportation might sort of begin to gather materiał on.

We can only speak for our act. But I don't think the three policies that exist now are compatible and that is why I don't think we can overnight put the three acts together.

Senator HARTKE. Does anyone else want to comment?

Commissioner TIERNEY. I would like to comment on the comment of the Doyle report that everything should be, that the staff or the organization of this body should be on a functional basis rather than for each mode. That is the way the Interstate Commerce Commission is organized. Our organization, our divisions here, are on a functional basis and not as to any particular mode. Rates, for example, cover all of the modes.

Senator HARTKE. Anybody else?

Mrs. Brown. I just want to say one thing in regard to it, Mr. Chairman. As we all know the transportation of this country didn't arise or wasn't drawn on a drawing board all at one time. And the inequities and the differences of course are there. But I think I also have to believe along the lines of the great people that have said in

this country a long time before, many of whom which you have known too, along the lines that even though a statute or even though something isn't drawn perfectly, or set out perfectly, that when you have good people or talented people to administer it they can make something work that doesn't look like it technically can work too. So even if everything was to be wiped out and started anew, I am not sure that we could start, shall we say, equal or stay equal a long time. r

Senator HARTKE. I just have one other general question before we get to the specific divisions and that is this question concerning Ralph Nader's raiders. I think they have begun to study the Interstate Commerce Commission.

Mrs. BROWN. Yes; they have.
Senator HARTKE. Do they have access to the public files ?

Mrs. Brown. Mr. Nader and the project director, Mr. Fellmeth, have been to ICC and met with the Vice Chairman and myself, the General Counsel, and Managing Director. He has submitted in writing things that he would like to see at ICC, and we certainly have tried to, or are trying to, afford them the things that are available and that we can give them if at all possible. We are at that stage. Actually it was, I think, June 10 that we met with them and the letter was some time later.

ORGANIZATION AND CONDITION Senator HARTKE. Let's proceed to the organization and the condition of the ICC. I think that is one of your topics. We have talked about the question of staff, the need for more staff. I think the general conclusion of part 1 of your report seems to be that the Commission believes it needs more staff because the economy is growing, and so are the carriers' revenues. I think that was underlined here this morning in some other questioning. Can you tell me what proportion of the Commission's time and resources, measured in terms of case man-hours, is spent on motor carriers matters today?

Mrs. BROWN. Excuse me a minute.

Senator HARTKE. Mr. Tierney, Mr. Murphy, and Mr. Jackson, are you the responsible people in this field? Where do I go?

Commissioner Murphy? I don't care. Whoever wants to answer it.

Commissioner MURPHY. As I understand your question, it was as to the motor carrier section or division, as to what percentage of manhours

Senator HARTKE. No; that was not the question. I asked the question as to the Commission. I said how much of the Commission's time.

Commissioner MURPHY. I stand corrected. I didn't mean to say it was just the division. If you are speaking of the number of cases, which really doesn't give you much of an answer by using just the figure, but I would say 80 to 85 percent of the number of cases involve motor carriers.

Senator HARTKE. Now, what-measured in terms of manpower, as distinguished from cases—proportion of the Commission's time and resources is spent on motor carrier matters?

Commissioner MURPHY. Not at this time. I think perhaps it might be furnished after an audit or study. For example, in the Bureau of Proceedings, you would have perhaps 50 to 55 percent of the staff in the Bureau of Proceedings involved in motor carrier matters.

In the Bureau of Operations it perhaps would be around 60 or 65 percent. So, you would have to go through the entire organization of the Commission and try to figure out a percentage.

Senator HARTKE. Whose responsibility is it to study the utilization of the Commmission's manpower?

Mrs. Brown. It is delegated to the Chairman as such and then we have a managing director.

Senator HARTKE. Who is the manager-director?
Mrs. BROWN. Mr. Schmid.
Mr. Schmid. Right here, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HARTKE. I really want to tell you quite honestly that before these hearings began I had made a sort of unofficial commitment to myself to listen to no staff members. I wanted to hear from the Commission. There has been too much accusation flowing freely that the staff runs the Commission.

I wanted to either dispel or confirm that by seeing whether or not I can find out from the Commission the answers to the questions I have. So, Mr. Schmid, if we cannot find out from the Commission who is in charge of running its organization and delegation of manpower, then we will come back to the staff members.

But I want the Commission to understand that that does tend to confirm a well-established rumor which I do not confirm or admit to. So, now, is there any member of the Commission who knows how manpower is used in the agency ? Or does the staff run that?

Mrs. BROWN. No. The staff doesn't run the manpower of the Commission.

Senator HARTKE. Somebody ought to know here in this Commission which employs 1,828 people how those 1,828 people are being utilized in regard to budget. There ought to be manpower as well as organization charts and charts on the utilization of dollars and manpower.

We will skip that and come back to it a little later. Let us put that in the file for a moment.

Commissioner MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, before you leave that, may I make a comment ?

Senator HARTKE. Yes, sir.

Commissioner MURPHY. It might be a little embarrassing not to be able to give you an exact percentage here this afternoon. However, I think I can explain why you would

not have that figure at your fingertips,

and I am speaking for myself individually, but in my office on the staff when you begin to take the personnel involved in handling proceedings, I believe as stated this morning they are used interchangeably.

For example, many of the hearing examiners are not now specializing in one particular type case. So, I would be afraid to tell you this afternoon what percentage of the time any person assigned to my staff is spending in handling or preparing of motor carrier cases, what percentage is being put on finance cases, unless I could sit down and figure it out. I didn't know you would ask for that.

But I don't think that I don't want to mislead you with a figure of what I think it would be. I think the information can be furnished, but we would have to look at it and determine it rather than to guess at it.

a

a

Senator HARTKE. Is it true that in a lot of these cases it is a question of whether they are going to haul steel pipe or whether they can haul nuts and bolts and how those little details are handled? You would not consider these major decisions, would you ?

Commissioner MURPHY. No, sir.

Senator HARTKE. And yet, coming back again to what Commissioner Bush said, they certainly do not come into the realm of being matters of national concern at the present time. But if they are taking 80 to 85 percent of the caseload, how can you justify this disproportionate utilization of manpower for just one segment of the surface transportation industry

Commissioner MURPHY. Well, I think one of the answers is in the fact that it is a growing industry, it is a rather new industry, it is expanding, the economy is expanding, the services to the industry and to the public is changing. Whereas I think 10 years ago you were estimating that the number of proceedings or caseloads in the motor carrier division or section would perhaps begin to drop off, I don't think we have had a year that there hasn't ben an increase in the number

of proceedings before the Commission. Senator HARTKE. There are several other modes of transportation under your jurisdiction. What are they?

Commissioner MURPHY. Water, rail, pipeline.
Senator HARTKE. Pipeline; express companies
Commissioner MURPHY. Freight forwarders and express companies.

Commissioner TUGGLE. In talking about the different modes, there are about 15,000 motor carriers engaged in interstate commerce.

Senator HARTKE. I understand.

Commissioner TUGGLE. On the contrary there are only about 70 class one railroads and perhaps 250 short-line railroads, or terminal railroads that are relatively small.

I am not sure, but roughly 100 freight forwarders. And perhaps 200 or so water carriers on the Mississippi River and coastwise in intercoastal shipping. So, the volume falls on the motor carrier side of the procedure docket.

Senator HARTKE. The question of priorities here is one which you hear nationally. What are the priorities inside of the Commission? Is it 80 to 85 percent priority for motor freight ?

Mrs. BROWN. No.

Senator HARTKE. But 80 to 85 percent of the caseload, and you say possibility 60 to 65 percent utilization of manpower?

Commissioner MURPHY. In different bureaus it will vary. I said that 60 to 65 percent—and this is a guess--of the Bureau of Opera. tions is used in motor carrier activities.

Senator HARTKE. What you have in motor cases, operating cases, is rather detailed minutia, right?

Commissioner MURPHY. Not necessarily.

Senator HARTKE. Have you given any consideration to an arrangement of your priorities that would give greater time to some of the other things that are discussed in this report and coming up with solutions to those as compared to the moment's day-by-day problems of motor carrier operating cases?

Commissioner MURPHY. I don't know that I can agree on that, because I think our primary objective is the public interest that we are

« 이전계속 »