Mr. BROWN. I must admit, Admiral, I always wondered why the Coast Guard was not an adjunct of the Department of Defense, rather than Treasury Department.

Admiral SHIELDS. I think one of the prime reasons is because, as I mentioned, it started out as a revenue service under Alexander Hamilton. It always has participated in all of the wars in which the United States has been engaged in, as an entity, as the Coast Guard, and it is just some more equipment that the Navy has available to meet its operational needs in time of war.

And I think some of our functions, as far as the public is concerned, are more acceptable if they are under a civilian department rather than under a military department.

Mr. BROWN. Do you feel that a continuation of this association, which began at the time and birth of our Nation, with the Treasury Department is more one of tradition than practicality?

Admiral SHIELDS. I think it may be a little bit of both, sir. I think there has been considerable talk from time to time about moving the Coast Guard, but it always happens we so far have stayed in the Treasury.

Mr. BROWN. To what other agencies has moving the Coast Guard been suggested?

Admiral SHIELDS. One of the Hoover Commission reports, I think, and some other reports, as I understand it, the first thought about a Department of Transportation goes back to something like 1873, so it isn't completely new, and at all of these various times, there has been talk about the Coast Guard moving.

Mr. BROWN. But in most of these cases thoughts of moving it has been in reference to Department of Transportation or to some aspect. of merchant marine activity?

Admiral SHIELDS. Yes, sir; that is my understanding.

Mr. BROWN. Do you envision under the new Department of Transportation any change of functions under the Coast Guard?

Admiral SHIELDS. No, sir; I do not. I feel myself, from reading the legislation and from the things that are in it and our discussions, that as far as the day-to-day operation of the Coast Guard, the dayto-day contact the Coast Guard has with the public, they will never notice the difference.

Mr. BROWN. And the present associations that you have with the Treasury Department will be less effective by this move?

Admiral SHIELDS. I don't think they will be any less effective, they will probably have to be executed by agreements between the two departments, rather than us now going directly to our Assistant Secretary.

But I think these things can be worked out so that if any of the Treasury agencies need help or cooperation that Coast Guard facilities can offer, we will certainly be there to give them that on very short notice.

Mr. BROWN. This is a relatively small portion of the function which the Coast Guard now performs?

Admiral SHIELDS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROWN. Could you assess the amount of your total activity that is involved in direct association with the Treasury Department?

Admiral SHIELDS. No, sir; I don't think that has ever been broken out. I will look it up; and, if it is, I will submit it for the record. (The information referred to is as follows:)

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD,
Washington, D.C., April 13, 1966.

MEMORANDUM TO STAFF DIRECTOR, HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

From: U.S. Coast Guard congressional liaison officer.

Subject: Hearings held on H.R. 13200, April 7, 1966; submission of material for the record as requested.

1. On page 265, line 5, the submission of material for the record was requested by Congressman C. J. Brown. The Coast Guard was advised, subsequent to the hearings, that in addition to information concerning Coast Guard operational activities in direct association with the Treasury Department, as requested by Congressman Brown, information was also desired as regards Coast Guard activities in direct association with all department and agencies of the Federal Government. The following information is submitted:

A. Operational activities in direct association with the Treasury Department 1. Furnishing water transportation to personnel of the Bureau of Customs in connection with the enforcement of customs laws and regulations.

2. Furnishing air transportation, as available, to personnel of the Alcohol Tax Unit in the location of illicit stills.

3. Cooperation with the agents of the Bureau of Narcotics in connection with the inspecting of vessels for possible smuggling of narcotic drugs.

4. On occasion, cooperation with the Secret Service in providing protection for the President and members of his family, as authorized by law.

Coast Guard records do not indicate the percentage of total Coast Guard activities expended for the above cooperative activities other than the greatest single activity, that is, cooperation with the Bureau of Customs. This activity results in 6,780 boat hours annually, at an approximate cost of $417,915.

B. Operational activities in direct association with other departments and agencies of the Federal Government

1. Assistance to the Immigration and Naturalization Service in its inspection and enforcement function regarding illegal entry of aliens.

2. Cooperation with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in providing water transportation for Public Health Service personnel in carrying out quarantine rules and regulations.

3. Cooperation with Department of the Interior in making annual visits to U.S. possessions in the Pacific Ocean, i.e., Howland, Baker, Enderburg, and Jarvis Islands. Coast Guard vessels make annual visits to these islands and furnish to the Department of the Interior reports and photographs after each visit.

4. Cooperation with the Post Office Department by utilizing Coast Guard facilities and personnel to assist in transportation of mail deliveries during emergency conditions.

5. Cooperation with the Weather Bureau in the collection and dissemination of marine intelligence and exhibiting warning displays along the seacoasts and inland waterways.

6. Participation and cooperation in the national oceanographic program, including membership on Interagency Committee on Oceanography.

7. Cooperation with the Fish and Wildlife Service by carrying out all marine enforcement of the conservation laws, with the exception of the north Pacific

area.

8. Cooperation with the State Department in enforcement of neutrality laws, and enforcement of international fishing treaties.

9. Cooperation with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration by participation in the astronaut recovery programs and water transportation of space vehicles.

10. Cooperation with the Department of the Army by marking for the protection of the navigators sunken vessels or similar obstructions on navigable waters of the United States.

11. Cooperation with the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corp. by supervisions of aids to navigation on those waters.

12. The man-hours spent in the cooperative activities listed above as well as those spent in the general day-to-day cooperation with all Federal departments, stemming from an existent Coast Guard capability, cannot be specifically listed.

Mr. BROWN. I would appreciate it.

I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

W. L. MORRISON, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Thank you very much, Admiral Shields.
Just a minute, Mr. Lanigan has a question.

Mr. LANIGAN. Are you presently an officer in the Department of the Treasury?

Admiral SHIELDS. All Coast Guard officers are customs officers.

Mr. LANIGAN. Then, 6(b) (1) of the bill which transfers the Coast Guard to the new Department also transfers to the Secretary of the new Department, all powers and duties relating to the Coast Guard of the Secretary of the Treasury and of other officers and offices of the Department of the Treasury.

So your functions will be, when the transfer has taken place, will be centered in the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, is that correct, and you will anticipate that your functions will then be redelegated to you as they are now delegated by the Secretary of Treasury?

Admiral SHIELDS. I think we can consider that we would be deputized as customs officers, if you might want to call it that.

Mr. ROBACK. You will remain?

Admiral SHIELDS. We anticipate no change in our functions at all, because we are transferred as a whole and our duties and responsibilities go with us.

Mr. LANIGAN. Further on, it says:

The National Transportation Safety Board shall exercise the functions, powers, and duties transferred to the Secretary by sections 6 and 8 of this act with regard to (1) determining the cause or probable cause of transportation accidents, and shall report the facts, conditions, and circumstances relating to such accidents.

Will you say that the National Transportation Safety Board would not have any function relating to marine accidents in light of this language?

Admiral SHIELDS. We would expect that we would continue the investigative functions which we have now. This Board would probably be the top appeal board, who would sit on final actions on these investigations and probably also on final actions, just as General McKee indicated, on licenses, and permits and things like that, for seamen, for merchant marine officers and in that capacity.

Mr. LANIGAN. You anticipate that the basic investigational work will continue to be done by the Coast Guard.

Admiral SHIELDS. That is correct.

Mr. LANIGAN. And you anticipate that will be done under section 3(a), under which Board will authorize and delegate to other agencies and departments, accident investigation functions.

Admiral WHALEN. Which section?

Mr. LANIGAN. Page 11, line 3.

Admiral WHALEN. Mr. Lanigan, would you repeat your question, please, sir?

Mr. LANIGAN. The point I was making is that section 5 provides that all of the functions relating to the determining of the cause or probable cause of transportation accidents shall be in the National Transportation Safety Board.

sir.

Now I was trying to find out how pieces of that can get to the Coast Guard, how some of that authority can get to the Coast Guard so that you can carry out your current accident investigation functions? Admiral WHALEN. I would like to try to answer that if I may, We feel that we carry over that authority with us. As far as the NTSB is concerned, there wouldn't be any delegation of authority to the Coast Guard to conduct their accident investigation procedures as they are now. As we interpret this, they would determine the causes and would act on appeals, and could, of course, oversee and review the investigations, but actually, we feel in going in as the entity as we are, with all of the authority being transferred-that it is-that we would continue our current setup.

Mr. LANIGAN. I wonder if you could supply for the committee record, an example of one or two concrete examples of how you envision the relationship between the Transportation Safety Board and how the Coast Guard would operate in the new Department, not now, but I mean for the record for insertion at this point.

Admiral WHALEN. Yes, sir; and in addition as far as our existing procedures are concerned also.

(The requested information is included in app. 5 on p. 329.) Mr. LANIGAN. Thank you.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Thank you very much, gentlemen.

Just a minute, we have another question.

Mr. Roback?

Mr. ROBACK. Is there any question in your mind, Admiral that these functions with regard to safety are transferred to the Board and redelegated?

Admiral WHALEN. No, sir; there is no question in our mind on that. Mr. ROBACK. There is no question that these functions are transferred from the Coast Guard to the Safety Board?

Admiral SHIELDS. Well, as we understand the statute, sir, the NTSB, does not have the investigative end of it.

Mr. ROBACK. The bill says the Board shall determine the cause of probable cause of transportation accidents. Do you consider that an appellate function?

Admiral WHALEN. Do I consider that what?

Mr. ROBACK. Do you consider that an appellate function, determining the cause or probable cause?

Admiral WHALEN. As I understand it, the investigative procedure per se would be conducted by us, that the statute as it stands, would not set up the investigative procedure within the Board. And as I mentioned before, sir, the Board would act on appeal, that is written

in the law.

Mr. ROBACK. Point out to me the provision of the law you understand constitutes the Transportation Safety Board as appellate body. I mean, show me where you read the language that makes it an appellate body?

Admiral SHIELDS. The way we understand it is that the investigative functions do not go to the Safety Board. The Board acts on records of the investigation.

Mr. ROBACK. You mean that the Board is going to act on the administrative record of the investigation in the same sense as a court would act on administrative or examiner's hearing, is that your understanding? We don't want to ask you to make off-the-cuff interpretations here. If you don't understand it, just tell the committee that you would like to examine it a little more closely, but

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Submit a memorandum on it. It seems that the section does give you investigative power in one area, and review on appeal of certain things such as the modification, revocation, or denial of any certificate or license, but they are separate functions, and apparently one is an operative function and the other is appellate function.

Mr. ROBACK. Mr. Chairman, if it is not out of order, I would like to request, also, that General McKee review the testimony and submit a similar memorandum, because his testimony on accident functions, as I heard it, doesn't seem to comport fully with provisions of the bill as I understand them.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. I am also informed by my staff that the testimony of the Budget Bureau representative was a little obscure on this, so we will ask the staff to contact these different witnesses, and I am notifying you at this time, Admiral Shields, to prepare a memorandum on this point, and we will see if there is confusion. We may perhaps have amendment to resolve this.

(The requested information is included in app. 5 on p. 329.)

Mr. ROBACK. One more question. Are you affected in any way by

section 7?

Admiral SHIELDS. We don't think we are affected in any way by that section; no, sir.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Thank you for the third time, sir.

Admiral SHIELDS. Thank you, sir.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Charles M. Haar, Assistant Secretary for Metropolitan Development of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

All right, Mr. Haar.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES M. HAAR, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; ACCOMPANIED BY VICTOR FISCHER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT; DAVID SPECK, HEAD OF THE LEGAL STAFF, OFFICE OF TRANSPORTATION; AND RICHARD BRYANT, OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL Mr. HAAR. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am appearing here, on behalf of Secretary Weaver, to present the views of the Department of Housing and Urban Development in support of H.R. 13200, the administration-recommended bill to establish a Department of Transportation.

With me are Victor Fischer, Director of our Office of Metropolitan Development: David Speck, head of the legal staff of our Office of Transportation; and Richard Bryant, from our Office of General Counsel.