OBJECT CLASS SUMMARY

The estimated obligations for FY 1977, FY 1978, and FY 1979 are compared below and explained in more detail in the following narrative.

An explanation of our requirements by object classification follows:

11.1 Permanent Positions

This classification covers the salary costs of positions which are expected to exist for periods greater than a year. In instances where assessment projects require more than a year to complete, emloyees needed to work on such projects have been included.

11.3 Positions Other Than Permanent

are

This classification includes public members of the OTA Advisory Council, members of assessment committees, panels, and individual consultants who paid at a daily rate when actually employed. The increase in this object provides primarily for increase in the number of assessment panels and panel meetings.

12.0 Personnel Benefits

This classification provides for required employee contributions to the Civil Service Retirement fund, group life insurance, and group health insurance. The decrease for FY 1979 is directly related to a decrease in the number of permanent positions and in the number who voluntarily participate in the benefits programs.

21.0 Travel

This classification covers the cost of travel related to testimony, program operations such as monitoring technology assessment contracts, attendance at panel meetings, council hearings, and other purposes.

The FY 1978 and FY 1979 requirements of staff for travel funds are compared to that of panels and consultants, below:

This classification provides for the transporting of technical documents to our committees and panel members and contractors, and for other miscellaneous transportation charges.

23.0 Rent, Communications and Utilities

This classification covers the cost of rental of office space and equipment, telephones, postage, telegrams, etc.

24.0 Printing and Reproduction

This classification covers the cost of printing assessment reports and other day-to-day printing requirements such as stationary, envelopes, and special reports.

25.0 Other Services

This classification covers the cost of technology assessment contracts and other government and non-government services.

26.0 Supplies and Materials

This classification provides for the cost of day-to-day operating supplies and materials.

31.0 Equipment

This classification provides for the purchase of typewriters, adding machines, calculators and other office machines, and for office furniture and equipment, technical books and publications.

-5

Chart 10

STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN KENNEDY

Mr. SHIPLEY. Do you have a statement, Mr. Winn?

Mr. WINN. I do, Mr. Chairman.

First, I would like to ask permission of the Chair and members of the Committee to insert Senator Kennedy's statement in the record at this point.

[The information referred to follows:]

STATEMENT OF SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY

Chairman, Technology Assessment Board

Before the House Subcommittee on Legislative Appropriations

Mr. Chairman:

I am pleased to have the opportunity to testify today as Chairman of the
Technology Assessment Board in support of the Office of Technology
Assessment's appropriation request for Fiscal Year 1979.

Since my first term as Chairman of the Technology Assessment Board, OTA has made enormous progress in responding to Congressional requests and we are encouraged by the increasing use that the committees of the Congress have made of the assessments OTA nas produced.

Mr. Chairman:

As you know, in June of last year the Honorable Emilio Q. Daddario, OTA`s first Director, resigned from the post. As a distinguished member of the House Committee on Science, Research and Development, Mim Daddario originated the concept of technology assessment and is the author of the legislation establisning OTA passed by the Congress in 1972. Min served for three and a half years to develop the Office of Technology Assessment to the point where it is now recognized as an invaluable resource for the Congress.

Following Director Daddario's resignation, the OTA Board conducted a broad and open search for a successor. Two hundred twenty four candidates from industry, science, educational institutions, government, citizens groups, were given thoughtful consideration by the Technology Assessment Board. Honorable Russell W. Peterson was selected for the position, and was sworn into office on January 23.

Dr. Peterson brings broad experience in government and industry to this challenging post. He holds a Ph.D. in Chemistry from the University of Wisconsin. He spent a quarter of a century with DuPont in various research and executive positions. As Governor of Delaware from 1969 to 1973, he earned the respect of his colleagues and constituents. He served as chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality from 1974 to 1976. Since that time, he has managed New Directions, a citizens' organization established to analyze current international issues.

Dr. Peterson has the strong endorsement of the Technology Assessment Board and again we extend our best wishes to him.

Mr. Chairman:

The Office of Technology Assessment represents an independent research capability within the Congress, unique in its ability to address both long and short range issues across the entire spectrum of physical, biological and social technologies. The 62 reports issued by UTA at the request of the Congressional committees have addressed issues of major importance to the future of this nation.

One example with which I am very familiar as Chairman of the Health Subcommittee is the OTA report on the potential costs and effectiveness of computerized medical information systems. Such systems, not yet in wide-spread use, would not only contain complete files on patients' symptoms, vital characteristics, and treatment, but also would provide physicians with immediate access to the entire range of medical information. Such systems could contain information from medical texts and the most up-to-date research and medical journals, placing these at the immediate disposal of medical personnel. These systems raise serious questions relating to cost-benefit, the patients' rights to privacy, potential positive or adverse effects in