Viewing page 79 of 507

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

HELICOPTER AIR SERVICE PROGRAM

For the reasons mentioned above, we believe it is our responsibility to pursue this matter before the Civil Aeronautics Board and to present the administration's base before the CAB hearing examiner in accordance with the regular procedure of the Board. That is what we propose to do. We will, of course, be glad to furnish the committee copies of any further statements or papers we file with the Civil Aeronautics Board in this matter, if that is desired.

Senator LAUSCHE. Thank you very much, Mr. Giles. You heard this morning the testimony of Mr. Boyd in which at least impliedly, if not expressly it was declared by him that it was his judgment that existing holders of certificates on application for renewal as a matter of law continue to possess the right to subsidies until such a time as the application for renewal is finalized by way of either order of he Board or judicial finding. Were you here as he testified?

Mr. GILES. Yes, sir.

Senator LAUSCHE. Is it the position of yourself as General Counsel for the Department of Commerce, dealing with business, that this is an issue that has two sides dealing with that question?

Mr. GILES. I am not sure, Mr. Chairman, that I would agree with what I understood Chairman Boyd to say was the legal conclusion there. I do understand the law to mean that the carries are entitled to the continuance of the subsidy until the Board has made a ruling to the contrary; that is, to reduce the subsidy or cut it out, subject to this qualification, and that is what would happen if Congress did not appropriate the money.

I believe the Board has taken the position in the past - and I am not suggesting there is not some legal justification for it, because I think perhaps there is - but the Board has taken the position that if Congress didn't appropriate the money and if the Board did find, under the statute, that the carrier was entitled to subsidy, then the carrier would be entitled to get that subsidy and, if necessary, go to the Court of Claims to get it.

So far as I know that issue has never been before the courts. It has not been so held or so ruled by the Comptroller General. I believe that it is an open question, and I am not convinced in my own mind that the legal conclusion suggested by Mr. Boyd would necessarily come out if the issue were drawn. But the fact of the matter is the issue has not been presented in court so far as we know.

Senator LAUSCHE. Your are here speaking for the Department of Commerce?

Mr. GILES. Yes, sir.

Senator LAUSCHE. Will Mr. Martin appear?

Mr. GILES. No, sir.

Senator LAUSCHE. He is in charge of transportation.

Mr. GILES. That is right. The Secretary asked me to come forward and appear before the committee on this matter since it is now a proceeding before the CAB, and the proceeding is being handled by my office——the General Counsel's Office.

We are, in that proceeding, representing not only the Department of Commerce but the administration, including Defense and Post Office.

I might mention that the General Counsel of the Defense Department and the General Counsel of the Post Office Department also appear in that proceeding as additional counsel.