increased emphasis and consideration of service to the individual user in that area as well as over the entire national transportation system. Concerning safety, some of the statutes administered by the Department assign particular safety functions to the operating administrations. They in turn carry out special modal safety programs but their primary concern and authority is limited to their own particular mode. The Secretary, as head of the Department, however, has broad interest and ultimate responsibility for transportation safety as a whole. To meet this responsibility, he must be able to evaluate and where necessary coordinate the individual performances and programs of the operating agencies. The new Assistant Secretary will place on his staff at the highest level for the first time an official with the principal function of advising and assisting him to meet his responsibility. Because the Department brought together several separate functions being carried out under a variety of statutes, the Department's safety programs are now administered under differing philosophical and procedural concepts. Some of these differences are caused by the various statutes which created the programs, and some have been a matter of administrative choice. I believe that all of these safety programs, although administered by different elements of the Department, should be administered under uniform policies to the extent possible. The new Assistant Secretary will assist in establishing uniform policies and practices, exercise oversight over safety activities, and evaluate the responsiveness of our safety programs to the public need. Finally, many of the safety programs are interrelated or have intermodal aspects, such as railroad grade crossings, pipeline highway crossings, and the transport of hazardous materials. Thus policy-making functions must be exercised through the Office of the Secretary to assure that these interrelationships and intermodal aspects are fully and properly considered and coordinated. This is especially true in the area of new or evolving programs and in determining legislative needs. It is my intention that the new Assistant Secretary will perform these functions but without interfering with or attempting to manage the specific functions and programs assigned to the operating administrations. It is my understanding that, when the Department was initially organized, the Office of Hazardous Materials was placed under the then Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (now Systems Development and Technology), not because that was the ideal placement, but rather because the other available choices were even less logical. Similarly, when the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act was passed, the new Office of Pipeline Safety was placed under the same Assistant Secretary more because of its relationship to the Office of Hazardous Materials than because it was the type of regulatory function to be supervised by an Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology. While the individuals who have filled the position of Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology since the creation of the Department have provided overall guidance to these two offices, the nature of the research and technology function is inconsistent with the day-to-day supervision of offices that perform essentially regulatory functions. With the creation of an Assistant Secretary who would perforce be devoting a large percentage of his time to transportation safety, it becomes apparent that his office is an appropriate "home" for the Offices of Hazardous Materials and Pipeline Safety. The pipeline safety program is still in a formative stage. It is therefore important that during this period it receive more of the attention of an Assistant Secretary than can be provided by the Assistant Secretary charged primarily with systems development and technology. While it is true that the proposed functional statement for the new Assistant Secretary does not at this time include the oil pipeline safety program, omission is not because of a lack of recognition that both the gas and oil pipeline safety programs should be under one office. On the contrary, it is our intention to centralize these functions in the Office of Pipeline Safety just as soon as we are able to obtain the necessary authority under either an executive reorganization plan or an amendment to the Department of Transportation Act. Under the present requirements of the Department of Transportation Act (Section 6 (f) (3) (A)), the liquid pipeline safety program is delegated to the Federal Railroad Administration and Section 9(e) (3) of the Act prohibits delegation outside of that administration. I am convinced that my action in establishing a new Assistant Secretary for Safety and Consumer Affairs will enhance the ability of the Department to carry out the objectives and policies expressed by Congress in the DOT Act. I hope that the above answers to your questions will also convince you that such will be the result. Sincerely, JOHN VOLPE. decided to abolish the position of Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs and to use the space gained thereby to establish a new Assistant Secretary for Safety and Consumer Affairs. I might point out that the creation of an Assistant Secretary to have overview of safety functions has been under consideration since the early days of the Department. The Office of Civil Rights was never part of the Office of Public Affairs and thus is not involved in this reorganization. The "consumer" upon whom the new Assistant Secretary will focus will be the individual user or purchaser of transportation-the traveler by common carrier or privately owned vehicle, the purchaser of a private vehicle (such as an auto or boat) or the individual purchaser of transportation (as a shipper of household goods). This is differentiated from corporate or industrial users principally engaged in the shipment of quantities of goods in commerce whose interests are adequately represented by well-established industry associations and whose needs and preferences are already carefully considered by other segments of the Department. By establishing an Assistant Secretary to focus on the problems and interests of the largely unorganized and unrepresented individuals who comprise the general consumer public, I propose to have equal consideration given to the heretofore imperfectly known and insufficiently represented needs and preferences of the individual users and purchasers of transportation. The concept of "consumer rights" is more than a catch word; it is an accepted fact. It is being absorbed into our legal system and gradually is effecting significant changes in our processes of government. Thus I view the establishment of this new office also as a response to a present and growing change in our nation's way of doing business. In this regard, the Department of Transportation Act declares as a purpose of my Department "the identification and solution of transportation problems . . . with full and appropriate consideration of the needs of the public. . . ." The new organization will enable us to better carry out that responsibility. ... Much of the consumer input we have received is random and unsolicited and has been treated largely on an ad hoc basis by the individual operating administrations, to whom it is generally directed. I believe that this situation can be greatly improved by establishing an Assistant Secretary to whom the consumers can communicate their requirements and preferences with assurance that they will be considered by those with the responsibility and authority to implement them. To that end, I expect the Assistant Secretary to perform a number of important functions. One will be to assure that the consumer is aware of our transportation programs-what we are doing and why we are doing it. A second will be to evaluate program issues to determine how they pertain to the consumer. A third will be to see that consumer views are sought out with respect to transportation needs in general and DOT programs in particular. Another will be to assure that those views are then translated into terms of consumer transportation needs and preferences. The Assistant Secretary will be the means of introducing such information regularly, systematically, and at the highest level, into the mainstream of Departmental policy and decision making processes. In addition, the DOT Act declares it in the national interest to develop "national transportation policies and programs conducive to the provision of fast, safe, efficient, and convenient transportation. . . ." The Department, in considering the individual traveler, has always emphasized the safety of vehicle and systems. These considerations have been addressed most properly by the operating administrations, and I intend that it remain so. While I expect the new Assistant Secretary (in his safety role) to assist in the development of more comprehensive, coordinated and cohesive vehicle and system safety programs in and among the operating administrations, I expect him to go beyond that in his consumer affairs role. I expect him to bring into focus, equally as sharply as safety concerns, consideration of service to the consumer-the efficiency and convenience of our transportation system to the individual users and travelers. This consideration cuts across modal lines and to a large degree cannot effectively be dealt with by the individual operating administrations. It requires an overview and degree of coordination that can be achieved best at the level of an Assistant Secretary. The Assistant Secretary for Environment and Urban Systems is concerned with the impact of transportation activities on the general population and ecology, both in general and in specific instances. He is also concerned with urban transportation systems. Thus to a degree he shares some of the concern of the new Assistant Secretary, although his interest is focused on definable segments of the public (such as commuters) and on urban transportation as a system rather than on individual users. The new Assistant Secretary will provide valuable increased emphasis and consideration of service to the individual user in that area as well as over the entire national transportation system. Concerning safety, some of the statutes administered by the Department assign particular safety functions to the operating administrations. They in turn carry out special modal safety programs but their primary concern and authority is limited to their own particular mode. The Secretary, as head of the Department, however, has broad interest and ultimate responsibility for transportation safety as a whole. To meet this responsibility, he must be able to evaluate and where necessary coordinate the individual performances and programs of the operating agencies. The new Assistant Secretary will place on his staff at the highest level for the first time an official with the principal function of advising and assisting him to meet his responsibility. Because the Department brought together several separate functions being carried out under a variety of statutes, the Department's safety programs are now administered under differing philosophical and procedural concepts. Some of these differences are caused by the various statutes which created the programs, and some have been a matter of administrative choice. I believe that all of these safety programs, although administered by different elements of the Department, should be administered under uniform policies to the extent possible. The new Assistant Secretary will assist in establishing uniform policies and practices, exercise oversight over safety activities, and evaluate the responsiveness of our safety programs to the public need. Finally, many of the safety programs are interrelated or have intermodal aspects, such as railroad grade crossings, pipeline highway crossings, and the transport of hazardous materials. Thus policy-making functions must be exercised through the Office of the Secretary to assure that these interrelationships and intermodal aspects are fully and properly considered and coordinated. This is especially true in the area of new or evolving programs and in determining legislative needs. It is my intention that the new Assistant Secretary will perform these functions but without interfering with or attempting to manage the specific functions and programs assigned to the operating administrations. It is my understanding that, when the Department was initially organized, the Office of Hazardous Materials was placed under the then Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (now Systems Development and Technology), not because that was the ideal placement, but rather because the other available choices were even less logical. Similarly, when the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act was passed, the new Office of Pipeline Safety was placed under the same Assistant Secretary more because of its relationship to the Office of Hazardous Materials than because it was the type of regulatory function to be supervised by an Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology. While the individuals who have filled the position of Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology since the creation of the Department have provided overall guidance to these two offices, the nature of the research and technology function is inconsistent with the day-to-day supervision of offices that perform essentially regulatory functions. With the creation of an Assistant Secretary who would perforce be devoting a large percentage of his time to transportation safety, it becomes apparent that his office is an appropriate "home" for the Offices of Hazardous Materials and Pipeline Safety. The pipeline safety program is still in a formative stage. It is therefore important that during this period it receive more of the attention of an Assistant Secretary than can be provided by the Assistant Secretary charged primarily with systems development and technology. While it is true that the proposed functional statement for the new Assistant Secretary does not at this time include the oil pipeline safety program, omission is not because of a lack of recognition that both the gas and oil pipeline safety programs should be under one office. On the contrary, it is our intention to centralize these functions in the Office of Pipeline Safety just as soon as we are able to obtain the necessary authority under either an executive reorganization plan or an amendment to the Department of Transportation Act. Under the present requirements of the Department of Transportation Act (Section 6(f) (3) (A)), the liquid pipeline safety program is delegated to the Federal Railroad Administration and Section 9(e)(3) of the Act prohibits delegation outside of that administration. I am convinced that my action in establishing a new Assistant Secretary for Safety and Consumer Affairs will enhance the ability of the Department to carry out the objectives and policies expressed by Congress in the DOT Act. I hope that the above answers to your questions will also convince you that such will be the result. Sincerely, JOHN VOLPE. Senator SPONG. Admiral Smith, in the Airport-Airways bill and in other legislation enacted by the Congress recently, certain responsibilities have been placed upon the Department of Transportation with regard to environmental impact. Do you see that the duties of your job would in any way be focused upon this? Admiral SMITH. No, sir. We now have a point in our Department in the Secretary's office, the Assistant Secretary for Environment and Urban Systems, that is dealing with environmental problems. Senator SPONG. Well, thank you very much. It is nice to have you before this committee in a new capacity. We appreciate your being here. Admiral SMITH. Thank you, sir. Senator SPONG. Senator Griffin, do you have any questions in addition to your remarks? Senator GRIFFIN. No, I was perhaps going to focus again as I did in my introduction upon the fact that while consumers affairs is a part of the responsibility of Admiral Smith in his new job, as I see it, an equally or even more important responsibility has to do with safety and the overseeing and administration of some of the safety laws that have come out of this committee. Admiral SMITH. That is correct, Senator. I think this encompasses perhaps the major part of the office. We will have the responsibility for the regulation of the transportation of hazardous materials and gas pipeline safety as well as coordination and policy matters for the safety programs of the administration. Senator GRIFFIN. I think that is worth noting. You are not going to be spending all of your time tripping over the consumer affairs officers. Admiral SMITH. Thank you. Senator SPONG. Thank you, Admiral. That concludes the hearing on the nomination. (Whereupon, at 9:45 a.m., the committee was adjourned.) DAVID S. DENNISON, JR., TO BE A COMMISSIONER OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1970 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9:30 a.m. in room 5110, New Senate Office Building, Hon. Philip A. Hart, presiding. Present: Senators Hart, Cotton, Pearson, Griffin, Baker, and Saxbe. OPENING STATEMENT BY SENATOR HART Senator HART. The committee will be in order. We meet to consider the nomination of David S. Dennison, Jr., of Ohio, to the Federal Trade Commission. If you have no objection I I will put his nomination reference and report in the record at this point. (The information follows:) NOMINATION REFERENCE AND REPORT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, Ordered, that the following nomination be referred to the Committee on Commerce: David S. Dennison, Jr., of Ohio, to be a Federal Trade Commissioner for the term of 7 years from September 26, 1970, vice Philip Elman. Senator HART. The nomination was received by the Senate on September 22 and referred to this committee. This nomination represents the President's recommendation for a successor to Commissioner Elman. Such successor will have shoes to fill. It is a nomination that comes at a very critical time in the life of the Commission. The degree of commitment that Mr. Dennison brings to his new post may well determine which course of action the Commission pursues. |