I had a meeting with Secretary Lewis, but we did not talk about regulatory philosophy. So the only answer I can give you to that question is that I have had no discussions about regulatory philosophy with either DOT or the White House.

Senator CANNON. You stated on several occasions you propose to follow the intent of Congress in implementing the legislation. Do you believe that legislation strikes a proper balance between competition and regulation?

Mr. TAYLOR. Without just throwing out bouquets because I am here in front of the committee, I think the Congress did an excellent job in striking a balance between regulation and competition. It was a long struggle and a lot of time and attention was devoted to it. My view is this committee should be complimented for the job they did.

I have no problems with any of that legislation. If I did, or if I thought I would have any difficulty administering it or implementing it, I would not have applied for the job.

think the balance has been struck and it's up to the Commission to see that it's implemented.

Senator CANNON. Both of the laws contain numerous time limits, in other words, implementation is on a fast track as defined in the legislation. Does that cause you any problems?

Mr. TAYLOR. No, I think it is going to create, if anything, perhaps a little less regulatory lag and make things move on a little quicker. I think with proper handling all of those time constraints can be adhered to and lived with and we can still have some hearings.

There are not many hearings being held right now and I think a few are probably in order. I would think that, too, could be done within those time constraints if proper administrative handling is effectuated.

Senator CANNON. We, on the committee, have been receiving complaints with regard to the present motor carrier fuel surcharge. This is a matter the Commission has been studying for some time. Is this an area in which you are prepared to take action in the near future, or have you had the opportunity to look into it? Mr. TAYLOR. I am generally familiar with the broad brush issue. I understand the owner-operators are very concerned about eliminating the fuel surcharge. Some of the shippers are concerned about the fact that because it's tied to tariffs, as opposed to actual mileage or fuel usage, a windfall profit is involved.

I also understand the Commission has got to do something about it rather quickly. I can't tell you at this point in time what particular solution we should pursue. I discussed it with the staff and it's being considered at present. It will receive my immediate attention when I get there and, hopefully, we will come up with something that will be as fair as possible to all concerned.

Senator CANNON. A congressional hearing is set for June 17 and a motor carrier oversight hearing is scheduled for June 18. I note in your response to written questions that you have not yet had an opportunity to study the Conrail legislation.

If you are confirmed prior to the hearings, do you plan to testify for the Commission, and will there be sufficient preparation time for your input to be meaningful?

Mr. TAYLOR. I would if asked, Senator, but it is my understanding that probably the confirmation will work out so that it won't get to the floor until sometime next week. I have to return to Nevada on the 13th. I am not sure when that hearing is, but I doubt if I would be back here and in place and sworn in and really in a position to do it.

I did indicate in my answers that I wasn't familiar with S. 1100, but I have asked a couple of questions about it since. It's my understanding that that bill, at least the Senate bill, does not authorize any cherrypicking and suggests that if there is going to be a sale, it will be done in one package.

I can say I am in wholehearted agreement with that. I also understand the Senate bill calls for the ICC to have simply a-I shouldn't say an advisory role, but a consultation role as opposed to actually approving any sales. I think that is an appropriate role. Beyond that, I really haven't had a chance to look at the bill, and I am not that familiar with it, so I don't think my comments would be all that meaningful. If everything happens fast enough and I am here and can get myself familiar, I would be happy to testify. But I really doubt that it will be moved that fast.

Senator CANNON. Let me take this opportunity to congratulate you and thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Danforth?

Senator DANFORTH. Mr. Taylor, you were good enough to meet with Senator Packwood and me last week, and we discussed at that time your views on the general subject of deregulation. I am told that before I was able to get here this morning, you touched on it again, but I wonder if you could, at the risk of being repetitious, tell us again your views on the general subject of regulation.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, Senator, perhaps it can't be repeated often enough because I do not want to be characterized as a regulator vis-a-vis a deregulator. I don't think either of those tags or labels is appropriate.

I view my job as being responsible for the administration and implementation of the important reform legislation that was enacted last year. I feel I am totally compatible with those laws in terms of being able to do that and carry that forward. I may be a little more cautious than some in that rather than saying 2 or 3 years from now we ought to turn the ICC into a salt mine, I would rather study the impact of what's been done already.

It seems to me that is the path Congress is following. They have gone so far as to ask for studies in a number of areas, which to me is entirely appropriate, and based upon that, I think they will determine what the next step should be.

I have to say to you that is exactly my posture. Let's study what we have done and determine where we go next.

Senator DANFORTH. You would view yourself as a person who moves with deliberation and care? And you are concerned about the sudden effects of rapid movement in one direction or another? Mr. TAYLOR. Most certainly. I think if you added caution to that list of words, you would have a totally accurate statement of my postion and views.

Senator DANFORTH. Thank you.
The CHAIRMAN. Wendell?

Senator FORD. Thank you. I apologize for running late, but I didn't lose any time, did I, using your procedure.

The CHAIRMAN. I could insure that you could lose some.

Senator FORD. I understand that, but you have given me a week, one time, to get my case in order, and I am sure you would do it again, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. You won, don't forget.

Senator FORD. No, I just got a nibble, I didn't get a big bite. Please don't worry about us, we do this all of the time, and if we lose our good humor in this room, then we are in real trouble. Mr. TAYLOR. I appreciate the opportunity to catch my breath. Senator FORD. Relax and get a rocking chair and take care of a cigarette because I am going to keep you a little while.

Mr. Taylor, last year when this committee worked to pass the Rail Act, we had basically two objectives: to provide sufficient rate flexibility for the railroads to improve their financial status; and two, to assure sufficient regulatory protection for shippers against rail monopolies. If you have a couple of hours, I could tell you about captive shippers.

The members of this committee know that my particular concern during the consideration of the Staggers Act was rate levels for coal. And I have reason to still be concerned, since I understand the ICC will be voting next week on a petition to deregulate export coal rates for coal moving to the Atlantic and gulf ports for export. I find this very surprising since the Senate is in the process of considering your nomination as Chairman of the ICC, and I am sure other members of the ICC could wait until you are confirmed to explore this coal-rate issue. I wonder if you would like to comment on that situation?

Mr. TAYLOR. I would like to be given a chance to participate, Senator, and it would appear at this juncture that probably by next week I am not going to be sworn in and in a position to do that. I have to return to Nevada on the 13th. I would hope that it could be delayed.

It is my understanding that it's under consideration and you are certainly right, one of the things in my briefings that I have gone into at great length, and it was the subject matter of great concern while the Staggers Act was under consideration here, was the whole question of coal rates.

We really almost do have a dilemma put in between the national energy concern on the one hand and trying to keep the coal rates down and, on the other hand, of trying to do something about revenue for the railroads.

How that is all going to come out is going to be, I think, a matter of grave concern to lots of people. It is certainly terribly important to me. I would like to have more time to study it and I would like to participate, and since it is pending, I don't think I could indicate to you at this time how I feel about that coal export issue. Since it is under consideration, that would be prejudging the thing, and I would like to have more information.

I know an effort has been made to distinguish coal for export on the theory that it affects somebody's utility rates abroad; that is not as much concern as affecting our utility rates here. Whether

that is a valid distinction to be made is, again, something I would like to have a look at.

Senator FORD. You can almost price yourself out of the market, can't you?

Mr. TAYLOR. You certainly can.

Senator FORD. I feel that transportation costs will absorb all of the difference between the cost of foreign oil allowed to foreign countries and the costs of U.S. coal delivered. I believe this is what the railroads are out to do, at least it gives that appearance. And once this is established for export, then it's only a matter of time, in my opinion, until it's applied to domestic coal.

Let me make this little one-sentence statement if I can. I don't know whether I can get it right, but the thought will be there. Coal once literally fueled the railroads. And it is figuratively fueling the railroads now.

Mr. TAYLOR. That is apparently true, that is their biggest commodity.

Senator FORD. When we had an edict here that 7 percent was the top, ICC gave the railroads 22 percent on 8 mile-an-hour track, and all we did was sock it to the operators, another 50 cents a ton for extraction of coal, 50 cents from deep mine, high compensation rates. You just keep on and 72 days of a strike and we have got a resource here and all we want to do is kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

I am very surprised that the administration would allow you to become Chairman and be saddled with what I see coming down the road. And I think you and I have talked enough that I understand your philosophy and your concern and your ability to look into what's coming.

Mr. TAYLOR. I certainly intend to, Senator.

Senator FORD. I have done everything I said to press that ICC delay that decision until such time as you can come on board and have an opportunity to view it. I don't know whether I will have any success or not, but I understand that two of the commissioners are leaving right after the vote, and they could care less.

Mr. TAYLOR. Well, the Commission is here today and I am sure they have heard what you had to say. I know the acting chairman is here and perhaps he will take your――

Senator FORD. I wish I could pronounce his name, Alexis.

Mr. TAYLOR. Marcus Alexis.

Senator FORD. It would be an elixir if he would delay it. If you have any problems, we have something produced in Kentucky that would help you with the malaise.

In exercising discretion after the enactment of the Staggers Act, the Commission should be careful particularly when a commodity like coal is concerned. I understand that the theory of the global competition is being thought of with the Staggers Act.

I ask you, Mr. Taylor, to carefully review the Commission's action on the coal exports petition. It is a very important issue for me and other Senators with coal interests in their States and Senators with ports being used for coal export.

My time is up, I see. But I think I have gotten my point over. Mr. TAYLOR. You have, Senator.

Senator FORD. I just-I cooled off a little bit from last year and the year before, as it related to this resource, and then all of a sudden-to have this thrown right back at us is very disheartening to say the least, and I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. TAYLOR. As soon as I am aboard, it will get my immediate attention.

The CHAIRMAN. Any other questions? I might say to the press, if you want to look at his questions and answers, they are available in room 5202 of the Dirksen Building, which is the Public Information Office of the Commerce Committee, and they are there now. I have no other questions if the panel has no other questionsSenator FORD. May I ask this question? I understand you, Mr. Taylor, to say that you had other business to clean up in orderyour personal business before you could accept the position. Am I correct in that?

Mr. TAYLOR. I have tried to find out how fast this might move, and just sort of got the indication that my nomination wouldn't get to the floor of the Senate until probably sometime next week. I can change my personal plans, I spent so much time on the chairman's questions, to be sure that I answered them properly before I got here, and all of the other things I had to do tying up my law practice that I have not had the time to do anything to cleaning up my personal affairs I have to go get my car and my wife and drive back

Senator FORD. In that order?
What is the schedule for--

The CHAIRMAN. For attempting to poll or else having—

Senator FORD. Whatever.

The CHAIRMAN. All of the conflict of interests, all of the studies are done, everything is clear and we are ready to move as soon as we can if we can do it when we have our next executive committee meeting, fine, otherwise with the acquiescence of Senator Cannon, we will try polling.

Do I see Senator Melcher here?

Senator MELCHER. You see me here.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you come wishing to listen or to ask a question?

Senator MELCHER. Just to listen.

The CHAIRMAN. You missed it then.

Senator FORD. It's only been 33 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. There are about 65 questions and answers on file in room 5202 of the Dirksen Building to cover any conceivable question that you may have had. And he answered rather extensively, and you are welcome to look at it but the committee finished its questions. That will finish the hearing on Mr. Taylor. [The biographical sketch, answers to questions of the committee, and material submitted for the record follows:]

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF REESE HALE TAYLOR, JR.

Address-Residence: 424 Tahoe Drive, Carson City, Nev. 89701; Mailing: P.O. Box 646, Carson City, Nev. 89701.

Date and Place of Birth: May 6, 1928, Los Angeles, Calif.

Marital Status: Married to Jolene Yerby Taylor. Children by first marrriage: Stuart L. Taylor, 30, Anne K. Taylor, 28, and Lucile E. Taylor, 27.