move the way it was, then this particular revised amendment would be much easier to live with.

He did take that amendment and, as I understand, it is the one that was adopted. I would not want to have the impression left, however, that we had originated an amendment which we supported and were now unwilling to buy as part of the bill itself. I hope that can be corrected.

Secretary BOYD. I would also like to state, Mr. Chairman, that this set of activities that Mr. Sweeney outlined were completely unknown to me until after last Tuesday.

Mr. SWEENEY. That is correct.

Mr. FRIEDEL. As I see it, Mr. Rooney did consult with someone in the Department.

Mr. SWEENEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. FRIEDEL. And the amendment was clarified to your satisfaction, although you said you would rather have the Senate language.

Mr. SWEENEY. That is right, sir.

Mr. FRIEDEL. Did you say you are still opposed to this amendment? You might have said you wanted the Senate language, but did you say that, if you can't get the Senate language, you would accept this amendment?

Mr. SWEENEY. We would prefer our revised amendment to the one that was drafted by the utility commissioners.

Mr. FRIEDEL. Right.

Mr. SWEENEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. FRIEDEL. I think what brought this about was your statement, Mr. Boyd, in Denver.

Secretary BoYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. FRIEDEL. And it left an awfully bad impression not only with the members of the subcommittee but of the full committee.

Secretary BOYD. Well

Mr. FRIEDEL. Let me say that I am one of the seven that voted for a stronger section 5(a) to be brought out by the committee. I am not trying to defend mysef, but I am trying to defend the members who felt they were doing the right thing, and with all sincerity, to get a bill out so that we could have pipeline safety.

Secretary Bord. Yes, sir. I don't question that. I would like to say, at the risk of being at a difference with my assistant secretary, that we did not accept that amendment. The position we had, and have, is that the Senate language is what the Department and the administration want. The point on the amendment was not that it was accepted by the Department but that the language which John Sweeney and the General Counsel's office drafted as a clarification in our judgment would do less damage than the amendment without that language in it; but it was not that that was accepted by the administration in any way, shape, or form.

Mr. FRIEDEL. I got that picture, but I just wanted to know whether Mr. Sweeney said, "No matter what, we still don't want the amendment. We want the Senate language but, if you have to pass it, pass this one."

Secretary BoyD. I can certainly understand that, and had I known this at the time I spoke, I would not have spoken in a similar vein. However, I must say that I cannot accept the idea that I, as an Ameri

can citizen, have no right to express my views on something on which I think I am informed as it turns out I may not always be informedjust as I think the members of the committee have every right as Americans, without regard to whether they are members of this committee or not, to rake me over the coals on anything I say or do.

Mr. FRIEDEL. Anyone in public life has to be thick-skinned. You know that.

Mr. SKUBITZ. Mr. Chairman, will you yield?

Mr. FRIEDEL. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. SKUBITZ. Mr. Boyd, don't you think you ought to identify what hat you are wearing when you make these statements, whether you speak as Secretary of the Department?

Secretary Born. I don't think there is any question about that, Mr. Skubitz.

Mr. SKUBITZ. I haven't read the statement, but I have heard a lot of discussion. I have tried to get hold of a copy.

Secretary BoYD. I think there was a conception that the Department submitted language which I then went out and raised cain about and, were that to be the case, I would say that I was way off base.

Mr. SKUBITZ. But in your Denver speech did you identify yourself as Mr. Boyd, American citizen, or as Mr. Boyd, Secretary of Transportation?

Secretary BOYD. No, as Secretary of Transportation, but I don't think that takes away any of the rights and privileges I have as an American citizen.

Mr. SKUBITZ. I think you ought to identify yourself.

Secretary BOYD. I spoke as Secretary of Transportation. As long as I am in this office I will speak as Secretary of Transportation. Are there any further questions of Mr. Sweeney?

Mr. SPRINGER. There is one, I think, Mr. Secretary. That is this: I don't believe any of this committee has any criticisms of any official who speaks out, but the way in which it was expressed, as I read those words, was that this committee was derelict in its duty and had worked against the public interest. This was the very definite impression I got by reading your words.

As you well know I think we have been respected friends and I have always said to you that I have never doubted your integrity or your honesty or purpose as Secretary or head of the CAB or anything else you have ever done, but I got the clear impression when I read those words in Denver that you were saying that this committee was working against the public interest and, if you want to go to the second layer, that someone on the committee had apparently sold out.

Secretary BOYD. There was no such implication intended.

Mr. SPRINGER. One member who was there and heard it I think got much of that kind of impression. In addition to his impressions, as I read it, that is how I understood it. If you say it was in good faith, I am willing to let it rest. I have no criticism of a public official who wishes to criticize the Congress as long as everything is done in good faith.

Mr. FRIEDEL. Mr. Brotzman, are you a member of the subcommittee? Mr. BROTZMAN. I am.

Mr. FRIEDEL. Do you have anything to add in reference to the Denver statement?

Mr. BROTZMAN. No, I haven't.

Mr. FRIEDEL. Mr. Secretary, the questions regarding the interpretation of the bill which I had in mind last week I find were asked of you by other members of the committee.

There is one, however; namely, section 10 (c), which provides that:

The Secretary is authorized to advise, assist, and cooperate with other Federal departments and agencies and States and other interested public and private agencies and persons, in the planning and development of (1) Federal rail safety standards.

My question is: Why do you need the advice of others? I can realize that you need to directly consult with them, but why advise with others?

Secretary BOYD. Mr. Chairman, that language was taken verbatim out of the natural gas pipeline bill, and the same reasons would apply here as in that case, and I believe that was adopted by the committee. Mr. FRIEDEL. Would you object if it were "consult with others" rather than "advise"?

Secretary BoYD. I don't see any great problem with that. In fact, I don't know what the problem is that led to the question being raised in the first place. So it is difficult for me to try to respond because, as best I can recall, Mr. Chairman, there was absolutely no controversy over this in connection with the gas pipeline bill.

Mr. FRIEDEL. I thank you. That is all I have on that.

Mr. Springer.

Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Secretary, do you have a copy of the bill before you?

Secretary BOYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. Let's turn to page 3. I believe most of the committee regards 3 as what I would call the guts of this bill.

Going to subparagraph (1), at the present time the Interstate Commerce Commission has which one or all of these standards, governing the use?

Secretary BOYD. There is none now to my knowledge.

Mr. SPRINGER. Of use, right. Design?

Secretary BOYD. No, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. Materials?

Secretary BOYD. Wait a minute. I am mistaken here. You mean the Bureau of Railroad Safety?

Mr. SPRINGER. Yes; under the present law.

Secretary BOYD. We have them all in connection with signal systems. Mr. SPRINGER. I beg your pardon.

Secretary BOYD. We have all this authority, use, design, materials, workmanship, installation, construction, and performance of signal systems.

Mr. SPRINGER. That is what you have in the present?

Secretary BOYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. Now what you are asking for is minimum standards of use, design, materials, workmanship, installation, construction, and performance of railroad facilities and equipment?

Secretary BOYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. You are asking for all of those powers which they do not now have?

Secretary BOYD. Except as to the signal systems.

Mr. Lang advises me, sir, that we also have for all practical purposes the same authority in connection with locomotives.

Mr. SPRINGER. As you want here?

Secretary BOYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. You already have with reference to locomotives?
Secretary BoYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. But you don't have it with reference to the remainder?
Secretary BOYD. That is correct, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. Now, let's go to paragraph (2) "rules, regulations, and minimum standards governing the use, inspection, testing." Do you have those now?

Secretary BOYD. Also with locomotives and signal systems.

Mr. SPRINGER. You have inspection and testing, don't you, for other than signal systems?

Mr. LANG. Mr. Chairman, if I might, we have all this kind of authority with respect to signal systems, locomotives, and certain selected other things such as safety appliances, but the safety appliances are only a small part of the total vehicle.

Mr. SPRINGER. You don't have it with regard to maintenance?

Mr. LANG. If I might again, Mr. Springer, we also can make regulations regarding maintenance on signal systems, locomotives, and safety appliances.

Mr. SPRINGER. What about servicing?

Mr. LANG. The same would apply.
Mr. SPRINGER. What about repair?

Mr. LANG. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. What about overhaul?

Mr. LANG. The same would apply in these limited areas.

Mr. SPRINGER. This would apply to all the rolling stock, what you are asking for?

Secretary BOYD. And the roadbed.

Mr. SPRINGER. I beg your pardon.
Secretary BOYD. And the roadbed.

Mr. SPRINGER. You don't have anything on the roadbed at the present time?

Secretary BOYD. No, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. "Including frequency and manner thereof and the equipment and facilities required therefor." What does that include? Secretary BoYD. That is really an explanatory phrase dealing with the rules, regulations, and standards authority concerning use, inspection, testing, maintenance, servicing, repair, and overhaul.

Mr. SPRINGER. All right.

That language in line 10 refers to the language in lines 18 to 23 on page 2:

Rail facilities and equipment include, without limitation, trackage, roadbed and guideways, and any facility, building, property, locomotive, rolling stock, device, equipment, or appliance used or designated for use in rail commerce, and any part or appurtenance of any of the foregoing.

Secretary BOYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. This means then that you have complete inspection of the yard and the land and the storage. Anything the railroad has you would then have jurisdiction of, right?

Secretary BoYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. I just want to be sure that we understand how far you are going and what you intend.

Secretary BOYD. As it relates to safety and to the extent it is not covered by the occupational safety bill.

Mr. SPRINGER. You mean that is pending?

Secretary BOYD. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. Well, suppose that bill doesn't pass?

Secretary BOYD. I don't really think it would make much difference in the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation.

Mr. SPRINGER. What I am trying to get here, Mr. Secretary, is whether what you are requesting for Federal safety regulation would cover everything that it owns.

Secretary BOYD. Everything that what?

Mr. SPRINGER. Everything the railroad owns, that it uses?

Secretary BOYD. Related to safety. Insofar as it relates to safety, yes. Mr. SPRINGER. Well, your inspection would cover that?

Secretary BOYD. Yes. There is no intention of this bill to cover anything other than the rolling stock and those parts of the operation which are related to it, which would include the signal system, the roadbed, the maintenance shops and things of that nature. It is very difficult, however, to draw language which would be limiting to that

extent.

Mr. SPRINGER. "And any part or appurtenance of any of the foregoing."

When you say any "appliance used or designated for use in rail commerce", that can be stretched pretty far. If someone had an accident in the 12th Street Station in Chicago of the New York Central, suppose an employee falls

Secretary BOYD. That is not the purport of this bill.

Mr. SPRINGER. Well, if you say that isn't the purport of this bill, then everything else but the office building, is that about right? Is the warehouse covered?

Secretary BoYD. No. What we are concerned with, with this legislation, is the operation of the railroad as a railroad.

Mr. SPRINGER. Let's go again. What if the office building is in the station?

Secretary BOYD. It would depend. If somebody fell under a train, I think that would be an area in which we would be interested.

Mr. SPRINGER. Suppose they are overcrowded and all fall down the stairway. I tried to get down some steps there and a lot of people were coming down. Do you take jurisdiction over that?

Secretary BOYD. That is not the intention of this bill.

Mr. SPRINGER. What I am trying to find out is what you have in mind. Let me outline it as best I can. The railroad operation with which we are concerned is that which relates to the use of rolling stock and all of the activities which surround that use of the rolling stock; for example, the maintenance operation, the signal systems, and the roadbed, and the way it is maintained.