LETTERS FROM WYOMING SENATORS AND OTHERS Senator MAGNUSON. We will put in the record at this point, if the Senator from Colorado doesn't object, the letters from Senator Simpson, Wyoming Trucking Association, the State of Wyoming, Senator McGee, and others on this subject. Go ahead. (The letters referred to follow :) THE STATE OF WYOMING, BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, Senator WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Chairman, Independent Offices Subcommittee, Senate Appropriations Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: For many years, it has been the practice of the Wyoming Public Service Commission to work as closely as possible with the Interstate Commerce Commission Office in Denver and we feel that this has been most fruitful and to the advantage of both parties as well as the motor transportation industry in the State of Wyoming. However, at times, we have felt very much the lack of a field office within the State of Wyoming itself. We now find our position, in this matter, almost at the impossible stage when our regional office will now be on the west coast, approximately 1,000 miles away from us. Since we, in Wyoming, are most dependent upon the trucking industry for transportation distribution, it has become imperative to us that we have a field office of the Interstate Commerce Commission located in our State. I am sure that our Senators McGee and Simpson have explained our situation to you and we are hopeful that you will join them in providing the small appropriation necessary to see that this office materializes in our State. Assuring you of our appreciation for assistance and support in this matter, I am, Most sincerely yours, RICHARD J. LUMAN, Chairman, Public Service Commission. FEBRUARY 5, 1964. Hon. GALE MCGEE, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MCGEE: This has reference to your letter of January 23, 1964, with respect to the establishment of an Interstate Commerce Commission field office in the State of Wyoming, and the overall need for additional field staff resulting from the growth of the motor carrier industry. Neither the appropriation for the fiscal year 1964, which we are presently operating under nor the appropriation request for fiscal year 1965 presently under considerations by the Congress provide adequate personnel for the establishment of additional field offices. During recent years, our work in Wyoming has increased to the point that an office in that State can be justified. While the Commission has made efforts to secure adequate resources to open an office in Wyoming, funds have not been made available for such purpose. For the current fiscal year and under the budget estimates for fiscal year 1965 the employment ceiling of the Commission provides two district supervisors, two safety inspectors and two clerical employees to handle the motor carrier work with respect to carriers in Colorado and Wyoming, with the personnel domiciled at Denver. There are presently 1,425 for-hire, private, and exempt carriers of record domiciled in Colorado. There are 524 such carriers domiciled in Wyoming. The two district supervisors jointly have responsibility for 1,949 motor carriers. Thus, it will be seen that carrierwise approximately 27 percent of the above staff's time is devoted to Wyoming carriers. Should one of those supervisors be moved to Wyoming, the remaining Denver supervisor would has responsibility for 1.425 carriers. Since Denver is a heavy transportation center, transfer of personnel from that point would make it impossible to handle the workload there. Under these conditions we are satisfied, that a staff reduction at Denver would not be a proper solution. The 524 carriers now in Wyoming plus anticipated increases in the 1964 fiscal year would result in there being approximately 557 carriers in Wyoming. The workload formula, as set forth in the enclosed report, establishes 600 motor carriers as the maximum carrier workload a staff team composed of one district supervisor, one safety inspector and one clerical employee can effectively handle. Thus, considering also the large land area in Wyoming and its status as a bridge State, there is justification for the assignment of a staff team and the establishment of an office in Wyoming. We believe it is clear that the two staff teams, headquartered in Denver, one of which devotes part of its time to needs of Wyoming carriers, are not adequate to provide the minimum required motor carrier work for both the States of Colorado and Wyoming. In response to your request for data and statistics with respect to the overall need for additional field staff there is enclosed herewith a report which sets forth the additional motor carrier field staff required to effectively administer and enforce part II of the Interstate Commerce Act together with the justification therefor. As you will note from the enclosed analysis, immediate additional motor carrier field staff requirements to do the job effectively total 271. However, because of inability to recruit and train that number of employees in any one year, we believe a more realistic approach to augmenting the motor carrier field staff would be to distribute the additional manpower requirements over a 3-year period. Thus, if additional staff were provided in accordance with the proposed program, about one-third of the total in each of 3 consecutive years, the Commission would be in a position to materially improve its enforcement of the motor carrier provisions of the Interstate Commerce Act. Included in these total requirements, are motor carrier field staff, in the first year increases, to open offices in Delaware, Vermont and Wyoming. There are also enclosed charts showing the proposed distribution of field employees of the Commission under the President's budget estimate for the fiscal year 1965, by program function and by city and State. Sincerely yours, ABE MCGREGOR GOFF, Chairman. U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: I respectfully request the serious consideration of your subcommittee to providing funds for the establishment of an Interstate Commerce Commission field office in the State of Wyoming. I call your attention to the fact that the only States that do not have ICC field offices are Vermont, Delaware, and Wyoming. As you know, the State of Wyoming is quite large in size-about 97,000 square miles. The railroads serve a comparatively small portion of our State. Wyoming depends considerably upon motor carrier transportation and is placed at a distinct disadvantage by not having a field office in the State. In a recent letter ICC Chairman Abe McGregor Goff stated: "I realize there are cogent reasons why the Comimssion should have a field office in Wyoming. The present situation is far from satisfactory. Considering the large land area in Wyoming and its status as a bridge State, there is justification for the assignment of a staff team and the establishment of an office in Wyoming. This can be accomplished from a practical standpoint only by the allotment of funds for additional personnel." Although I heartily approve of efforts to economize, in view of the admitted need for this office and the small amount of money it would take to establish it-approximately $30,000 a year-I shall greatly appreciate the consideration of your committee to providing funds for this purpose. With best personal regards, I am, Sincerely yours, MILWARD L. SIMPSON, U.S. Senator. WYOMING TRUCKING ASSOCIATION, INC., Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: We have been trying for several years, in cooperation with the Wyoming Public Service Commission, to obtain a field office for the Interstate Commerce Commission in Wyoming. Motor truck transportation is very essential to Wyoming, and ours is a rapidly growing economy in which the Interstate Commerce Commission plays an ever-increasing role. The recent reorganization of the Interstate Commerce Commission's offices, which places the principal office under which Wyoming carriers operate, in Portland, Oreg., now makes a field office for Wyoming imperative. You recognize, I am sure, that it will be much more expensive for the Interstate Commerce Commission to maintain fieldmen in Wyoming operating out of the Portland office, than it would be to support an office in Wyoming. We will certainly appreciate anything your committee can do to make funds available to the Interstate Commerce Commission for the establishment of a Wyoming field office. You know that you can count on the support of our Wyoming Senators-Gale W. McGee and Milward L. Simpson. Yours truly, L. E. MEREDITH, Managing Director. Mr. SCHMID. Well, Wyoming is one of the three States where we do not have offices, and the reason we don't have offices in those particular States is because we just haven't had the funds to open them up. COST PER ANNUM OF WYOMING OFFICE Senator ALLOTT. How much money would it take to establish an orfice in Wyoming and operate a year? Mr. SCHMID. In Wyoming? Senator ALLOTT. Yes. Mr. SCHMID. $33,500. Senator ALLOTT. Was this amount requested by you this year? Mr. SCHMID. No; it was not, Senator. It was not included in the budget this year but we have had this request before the Congress in previous years. Senator ALLOTT. I think the question was clear. You did not request it of the Budget Bureau this year. Mr. SCHMID. From the Budget Bureau; oh, yes. We did from the Budget Bureau. It was not in the President's request of Congress. Senator ALLOTT. But you did not get it in the budget? Mr. SCHMID. That is correct. Senator ALLOTT. Now, according to the information which has been given to me by some of my colleagues, there has been a demonstrated need for such an office for a considerable period of time. Is this not true? Mr. SCHMID. That is correct. NEED FOR ANOTHER OFFICE Senator ALLOTT. With the increase in truck transportation throughout the West, and as that area develops, do you consider that a trip to Denver, for example, or Portland, a reasonable burden to place on carriers and their representatives whenever they want to do business with the ICC? Mr. SCHMID. Mr. Meyer? Mr. MEYER. No, sir; we don't, and we think that in Wyoming, as is true with many other areas where there are so many more carriers than we can get around to, an additional staff is justified. TRAVEL FUNDS Senator ALLOTT. Well now, it is the same situation in a way, although it is on a different relationship, but getting back to the car service thing, Mr. Goff, you spoke about the transportation or travel shortage you had in 1964 for field service. Mr. SCHMID. Travel money. Mr. GOFF. Travel money-money for travel, is what you are talking about. Senator ALLOTT. You had field service travel, and I am on page 1, you had $259,730, and in 1965, the 1965 budget which excludes reimbursements of $80,000 for 1964 fiscal year, and $175,000 for the 1965 year from the OEP with relation to emergency preparedness functions, you got the same amount or you requested and got the same amount, $259,730. Did you request more for these from the budget? Mr. SCHMID. You mentioned car service, and the figures you are citing is the travel money for motor carrier work. Senator ALLOTT. All right. Will you give me the field, which one is that? Mr. SCHMID. Drop down to safety and service here. Senator ALLOTT. Safety and service. The total safety and service then. Mr. SCHMID. $115,000 both years, 1964 and 1965. Senator ALLOTT. So you didn't increase it this year? Mr. SCHMID. No; that is correct. But we requested increases from the Bureau of the Budget in travel moneys. Senator ALLOTT. And the Bureau of the Budget did not give you these increases in this item? Mr. SCHMID. No. Do you want the figure we requested, Senator? Senator ALLOTT. Yes. Mr. RYAN. We requested for 1964 $148,600. Senator ALLOTT. Difference between $115,000 and $148,000. And this is an item that you feel is necessary in order to increase the car service? Mr. SCHMID. This has definitely handicapped our work particularly in the last 6 months, Senator. We are very tight on travel money. PRESENT STATUS OF WORK Senator ALLOTT. Well, in other words, here we have this problem going into all the things that the chairman has mentioned and that we have discussed last year, discussed this year again, and the only thing which we seem to be able to do immediately is to increase the efficiency of the car service department, but your suggestion here, I understand you are not able to ask for $148,000 but you did ask for $148.000, and you are short $33,000 to bring this up to the point where you feel it should be. Mr. SCHMID. That is correct. Mr. GOFF. That is certainly correct. Senator ALLOTT. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. AMOUNT OF UNLAWFUL MOTOR TRANSPORTATION Senator MAGNUSON. On page 10 you talk about a road check that you made in three additional States, and you estimate that the unlawful motor transportation might represent $500 to $600 million annually in lost revenues to regulated carriers. Have you any reason to revise that statement? Does it still hold good, I mean the amount? Mr. GoFF. Mr. Myer, can you say anything further on that? He has charge of this field service. Mr. MEYER. Well, actually this figure is nothing more than our best guess, of course. Senator MAGNUSON. I understand that. Mr. MEYER. We have no reason to think it is changed any or that it is likely to change. Mr. GoFF. But it may increase? Mr. MEYER. Correct. Senator MAGNUSON. And as you attempt to enforce the regulations, the more you attempt to enforce it the more devious the schemes become to evade it, and the harder it is to find out these schemes; isn't that correct? GROWTH IN MOTOR CARRIER POPULATION Mr. MEYER. That is correct, and, of course, the additional motor carrier population known to us continues to grow. Senator MAGNUSON. Yes. Mr. MEYER. We are adding in the neighborhood of 9,000 private and exempt carriers every year that we had never heard of before, and, of course, those keep building up, and we just don't get around to them. Senator MAGNUSON. All right. EXAMPLE OF TRUCKING PROBLEMS Senator ALLOTT. Would this be a fair example of the operations you are talking about? I don't know of anything recent, but I have known 8 or 10 years ago of people who came into eastern and southeastern Colorado with a truck. You have a long windrow of wheat, a hundred yards long, stacked up 10 or 12 feet high on the ground, maybe 20 or 30 feet across, and a farmer sells out of that pile to a trucker for cash. The truck is loaded-a pretty big truck sometimes-comes in at night and is loaded and by morning has gone somewhere down in Texas, and that is the last anybody ever hears of the truck except sometimes a fellow leaves a check, and then everybody is trying to collect the check. Is this the sort of operation you are talking about? Mr. MEYER. Not insofar as unlawful transportation is concerned, because, of course, wheat doesn't require operating authority, or grain or any of the exempt commodities, but that is possibly one of the kind of carrier that we are adding every year-the ones that we are learning of-but I think that is the small number. The main ones are a shipper has decided to put on his own trucks in private carrier operation, or a trucker has decided to go to hauling exempt commodities one way and whatever he can get the other direction-that is the bulk of the additional carriers. |