Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

In view of all of the foregoing, it has become necessary to amend the United States Customs Court 1968 Budget Requests, previously submitted, to include a request for the following additional positions:

Senior Judge David J. Wilson: 1 JSP-14 law assistant....

Protest Division:

1 JSP-10 calendar clerk

1 JSP-9 classifier----

2 JSP-3 typists for calendaring___

Reappraisement Division: 1 JSP-9 classifier....
Stenographic and Typing Division :

2 JSP-7 stenographers_-_

2 JSP-6 stenographers----

3 JSP-4 typists (to replace 6 part-time typists)

Total salaries on annual basis (13 positions)....
Personnel benefits (retirement, life, and health insurance) 7.8 percent___
Equipment and furniture (nonrecurring) -----

Total

$15, 106

8,421 7.696 10, 662 7,696

12,902

11, 734

14, 328

88,545

6,900

5,750

101, 195

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

PERSONNEL INCREASE

Senator MCCLELLAN. All right, Judge Rao, the committee will be pleased to receive your justification on the needs for the additional funds requested.

Judge RAO. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, this is the first opportunity the U.S. Customs Court has had to speak in behalf of an amendment to its budget for the fiscal year 1968, wherein a request is made for the sum of $101,195 to provide for the appointment of 13 additional employees, as shown in our justification.

NONCONSIDERATION BY HOUSE

Our request for this additional appropriation was not before the House Appropriations Subcommittee because it had not been transmitted to the House Appropriations Subcommittee from the Bureau of the Budget in time for that committee to consider it at our hearing. I did make a statement to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on February 8, 1967, which made reference to our present difficult situation, that shows no sign of abating. I should like to summarize the situation for this committee.

WORKLOAD INCREASE

With the reorganization of the Customs Bureau in 1965, and the activation of the office of the regional commissioner of customs of the port of New York on June 6, 1966, the U.S. Customs Court has been deluged with the heaviest workload in its history.

In the fiscal year 1967, which ended on June 30, 1967, the court received 133,524 cases.

As an example of what we are faced with, the receipts of protests from the New York office during fiscal 1967 was equivalent to the total receipts for a normal 4-year period, and the heavy influx of cases shows no sign of diminishing.

It had, at first, been thought that the unusual receipts were an extraordinary phenomenon occasioned by the reorganization, and that a tapering off would soon occur, but this does not seem to be the case.

LETTERS TO ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE

Periodically I have written to the administrative office of the U.S. Courts about the continuation of this tremendous workload, and the necessity of increasing our personnel in order to cope with it.

With your permission, I should like to read the contents of the last letter, dated June 29, 1967.

Hon. WILLIAM R. SWEENEY,

JUNE 29, 1967.

Assistant Director, Administrative Office of the United States Courts,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR BILL: Upon my return to the Court from my recent trip to Italy, I was apprised by our Clerk that we are continuing to receive the excessive number of cases which have been coming to us in heavy volume since July 1, 1966, as I have advised you in my letters of August 16, 1966, January 27, 1967, March 30, 1967, and April 7, 1967. Receipts for the week of June 19, 1967, totalled 2,247 cases. At my direction the Clerk communicated with the Office of the Regional Commissioner of Customs at New York in an attempt to ascertain how long this

extraordinary situation might be expected to continue. He spoke with Mr. Samuel Balsam and Mr. Max Kliff, both of the Regional Commissioner's office, in charge of the processing of protests and entries. He was advised that there are approximately 42,000 cases still to be forwarded to the Court. This group constitutes a backlog and does not include current protests which are being filed and forwarded to the Court in ever increasing numbers.

From this report it can be concluded that the Court can anticipate a continuation of these abnormal receipts from the Port of New York at least throughout the ensuing year and probably for some time thereafter.

I am keeping you advised of this situation because I appreciate your interest in our affairs. I do hope that you will be able to apprise those concerned of the troubles which confront us, and that the Senate will act favorably on the amendment to our budget for the fiscal year 1968, so that we may be able to utilize the services of additional personnel so urgently required to maintain our work on a current basis.

With kind personal regards,

Sincerely,

PAUL P. RAO, Chief Judge.

STEADY INCREASE IN CASES

The following tabulation, prepared from official court records, is evidence of the steady increase in the number of cases received by

the court.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Let this table be printed in the record. (The table follows:)

[blocks in formation]

The increase in the volume of customs transactions is further reflected in the rising collections of customs duties over the past twenty years, as shown in the annual reports of the Secretary of the Treasury.

[blocks in formation]

Senator MCCLELLAN. At this point, Judge, how do you account for that tremendous increase, doubling the number of cases in the last year? What is the reason for it?

Judge RAO. The tremendous income derived from customs duties and importation of merchandise.

I will now state that, for example, in 1966, the duties collected in the whole country were $2,473,616,824, and 20 years ago, in 1946, there was not even a half a billion dollars collected. There was only $435,474,072, and that source of revenue has increased, Mr. Chairman. continually.

Five years ago, there was only $1.007,755,214 collected in customs duties, and in the last 5-year period it has increased to $2,473,616,824. Senator MCCLELLAN. What is the present cost of operating the Customs Court, total cost? What is the appropriation for you in the House bill?

Mr. BASLER. $1,472,000, before the deduction by the House Appropriation Committee.

Senator MCCLELLAN. $1,472,000?

Judge RICHARDSON. It is $1,430,000.
Senator MCCLELLAN. That is right.

Now, they did not have this information before the House?

Judge RAo. No, sir, they did not have it at all.

Senator MCCLELLAN. At that time, your request was pending before the Bureau of the Budget and had not been approved.

Did you tell them it was pending? Did you give them any notice of the fact that you did expect to seek more money?

Judge Rao. Yes, sir, and Congressman Rooney told me at that time, at the hearing, that the matter was not before the House, and they could not take any action on it.

Senator MCCLELLAN. This is 5 years' time. In 5 years' time, the revenues, duties collected, have increased by 133 percent, in round numbers, percentagewise.

OPERATING COST

How much has your operating cost increased during that time? What was your appropriation in 1961? Do you know?

I thought we might get it into the record at this point, where a comparison might be made.

Judge RICHARDSON. We can give it to you back in 1962.

Senator MCCLELLAN. All right, we will take 1962.

According to the records, here

Judge RICHARDSON. In 1961, $840,500.

Senator MCCLELLAN. And now it has gone up about 133 percent, the receipts have.

As you were granted this, together with the amount allowed you, your request would be up only about 75 percent for increased cost of operation.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »