Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

Mr. Hoffmann, I have one remaining question directed at the overtime expended and the effect of the demonstration on the budget.

Question: Would you bring the subcommittee up to date on your efforts to control Capitol Police overtime and the impact of the recent demonstrations on your efforts?

Answer: The Capitol Police Board has over the past several months worked with the Chief of the Capitol Police to reduce the number of overtime hours worked. To a considerable extent, we have been effective. I can assure you that the Capitol Police Board will continue to monitor overtime in the future.

In order to meet the responsibility of assuring the safety and security of Members of Congress, Federal officers, legislative employees, and visitors to the United States Capitol Buildings and Grounds, and to protect the property of the United States, it was the concern of the Capitol Police Board to provide such safety, security and protection, and yet avoid, to the extent possible, any incident involving police action toward the individuals involved in the farm demonstration. In order to assure this policy, the Board was of the opinion, based upon intelligence that indicated the United States Capitol Grounds were likely to be the focal point for a number of demonstration incidents in connection with the farm protest, that police officers, in substantial numbers, should be displayed at certain locations on a twenty-four hour basis. Any such directive on the part of the Board would and did necessitate overtime on the part of the United States Capitol Police. I am convinced that the Chief, at the direction of the Board, by a proper and sufficient display of police personnel around the clock, has been instrumental in the fact that we have not had a single incident or injury within the United States Capitol Grounds.

Due to the intensity and duration of the farm protest, members of the Capitol Police on the Senate roll, as of March 10, 1979, have worked approximately 57,150 hours of demonstration-related overtime. It is conservatively estimated that approximately $732,000 will be needed to cover this expense. Based upon the average monthly overtime cost during the previous year, it is anticipated that supplemental funds of $600,000 will be needed to cover overtime expenditures for the remainder of Fiscal Year 1979. Although we feel that we would be derelict in our responsibility to request any lesser amount, every effort will be made to reduce overtime as appears consistent with our commitment to adequate security.

SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

Senator SASSER [continuing]. Thank you, Mr. Hoffmann. We appreciate you helpfulness and responsiveness not only today but throughout the whole year. You and your staff are to commended. And I want to urge you on the part of the subcommittee to keep up the good work.

Mr. HOFFMANN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that.

Senator SASSER. The subcommittee stands in recess.

[Whereupon, at 4:06 p.m., Thursday, February 22, the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at the call of the Chair.]

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR

FISCAL YEAR 1980

TUESDAY, MARCH 6, 1979

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,

Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 2:15 p.m., in room 1114, Everett McKinley Dirksen Office Building, Hon. Jim Sasser (chairman) presiding.

Present: Senator Sasser.

OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

STATEMENT OF HON. MORRIS K. UDALL, CHAIRMAN
ACCOMPANIED BY: RUSSELL W. PETERSON, DIRECTOR

1979 APPROPRIATION AND 1980 BUDGET REQUEST

Senator SASSER. The subcommittee will come to order. We are pleased to have with us today our very distinguished colleague from the House of Representatives, Congressman Morris Udall, who is Chairman of the Technology Assessment Board. Congressman Udall is accompanied by Dr. Russell Peterson, the Director of the Office of Technology Assessment, who will also make a presentation.

The fiscal year 1980 budget request for the Office of Technology Assessment is $12,500,000, an increase of $2,604,000 over the comparable 1979 appropriation.

BUDGET REQUEST REVISED DOWNWARD

Congressman Udall, I understand that you have some downward revisions in this budget request that were made by the Technology Assessment Board subsequent to the formulation of the President's fiscal year 1980 budget. These downward revisions exceed $1 million. This is indeed encouraging news. We appreciate your efforts to cooperate with the subcommittee in our joint efforts to reduce Federal expenditures.

If you would kindly proceed, Congressman Udall.

Representative UDALL. I am glad to know we are becoming widely known to assist the taxpayers with lower Federal expenditures.

Senator, I have a prepared statement which I will try to run over quickly. It isn't very long.

As the Chairman of the Technology Assessment Board, I am pleased to present our budget request. It is, as you indicated, $11.2 million. It was approved by the Board last month, and is a downward modification of the request originally submitted by the office. The consensus of the Board was that we ought to do something, and we had an opportunity to confront the current national concern about Government spending, and our request is a constant, rather than increased, level by OTA prepared for 1980. The $11.2 million request is equal to the obligation authority provided to the office for fiscal year 1979. And likewise, as the justification of estimates demonstrates, no increase is requested in the number of authorized staff employees. We had a vote on this increase, and we voted no.

We are confident that the authorization of this budget request will allow OTA to continue its fine record of producing high quality studies in a manner which is responsive to the needs of its many clients in the Congress.

RESIGNATION OF DR. PETERSON TO BECOME PRESIDENT OF AUDUBON SOCIETY

As the subcommittee undoubtedly knows, our respected director has announced his resignation. As the Chairman of the Technology Assessment Board, I want to take this opportunity to thank him publicly on behalf of the Board for his dedication to the office. We will miss him. I want to reassure the subcommittee that the Board is dedicated to a smooth, efficient transition in the leadership of the OTA.

USEFULNESS OF OTA WORK

The point made in an editorial last Friday in the Washington Post is a good one. They said the usefulness of the OTA is clear. The office has a place in the legislative process. To assure that it can perform its job well, I fully support prompt Board attention to finding a qualified successor to Dr. Peterson.

Personally, during my tenure on the Board-and I am one of the few who was there at the conception of the Board-I have enjoyed watching OTA develop and building this record to the point where it is now on a decisive and effective course. After that difficult period in the life of any institution as it becomes established, our growing pains are beginning to subside. This progress is due in large part to the efforts of Senator Kennedy and Congressman Winn, Chairman and Vice Chairman respectively during the 95th Congress, who led the Board in its policymaking role, and to the work of Director Peterson.

JUSTIFICATION OF ESTIMATES

The justification of estimates explains in some detail the specific projects which OTA is currently performing. It also describes some of the studies which the Director may present for approval to the Board for startup later this year and in fiscal year 1980. As an indication of the diversity of worthwhile efforts which fall within the capability of the office, I would like to mention briefly two

projects which I, personally, feel will be of utmost value to the interested committees and Members of the Congress.

DISPOSAL OF NUCLEAR WASTE

OTA has recently begun a study of the disposal of nuclear waste. Although we are more than three decades into the nuclear age, the evergrowing volume of high-level waste from weapons manufacture and powerplant operations is almost all still in "temporary" storage. It is shocking to think after 35 years in the nuclear age we have yet to dispose of the first pound in some kind of permanent storage. Yet permanent isolation of this radioactive waste is essential since its elements can be harmful for over a million years. This study was requested by five committees of Congress, and another five expressed an interest in it.

OTA is now assessing the state of the art of disposal of high-level radioactive wastes generated by nuclear powerplants and will investigate other aspects of that as well.

The study is exploring such questions as: What steps are involved in selecting, evaluating, and licensing potential waste resposity sites? What is involved in developing and managing a full-scale waste disposal system? What is the role of State and local governments in management of nuclear wastes? What additional research and development work is needed to demonstrate the ability to safely dispose of nuclear waste?

CONSERVATION OF ENERGY IN RESIDENCES

The second study I would like to mention deals with conservation issues in home energy use, and this is now in draft form. Before the 1973 oil embargo and the last two unusually severe winters, little attention was paid to future energy shortages. Since then, several Federal programs and regulatory initiatives have been designed to reduce residential energy consumption and increase the efficiency of home energy use. In this assessment, OTA is studying the trends of energy use in residential buildings, the role of energy prices in encouraging conservation, and the opportunities for promoting energy savings in Federal housing programs. We are exploring the role of consumer attitudes and the problems of lowincome homeowners. We are examining the effectiveness of Federal, State, and local conservation programs, as well as the nationwide status of research and development in energy conservation and opportunities for technological advance.

In addition, the study will point out the consequences of reducing residential energy use. By improving the efficiency of home energy use, residents are protected against the full impact of rising prices, and substantial energy savings result. The study brings into focus this attractive approach to saving energy.

ALLOCATION-USE OF COST-EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUES

Two other projects of interest to me and described in the justification of estimates deal with the feasibility and effects of us cost-effectiveness techniques in allocating health resource

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »