sumers of the Department's RD&D product. Thus, 

 technology deployment potential (or flow down) 

 must be considered as carefully as the scientific 

 excellence of the programs. 



The job of eliciting guidance from our many 

 constituents and then using the same constituents 

 as conduits for technology flow down is a very 

 complex and subtle process. We must translate 

 complex techno-economic situations into under- 

 standable public discussion issues that can be 

 treated by the marketplace. Some of the avenues 

 which we use as forums for technology transfer 

 are National Governors' Conference, National 

 Conference of State Legislatures, National Asso- 

 ciation of Counties, U.S. Conference of Mayors, 

 Urban Consortium, universities, and industry sec- 

 tors including manufacturers and suppliers, and 

 operations. 



In the past, and we hope in the future, the prime 

 mover in innovation and change in transportation 

 has been and will continue to be the private sector. 

 A prime goal of the Federal RD&D program is to 

 maintain and increase the private sector involve- 

 ment and to insure its support of and response to 

 transportation needs. 



The Federal role in RD&D becomes appropriate 

 in a number of areas, particularly when the market 

 mechanism is not able to respond to national im- 

 peratives. There are four major reasons for Feder- 

 al involvement; 



1. To support changing social requirements to 

 which the market is not responsive. Safety regula- 

 tion, mobility for the elderly and handicapped, and 

 environmental considerations are some examples. 



2. To respond to factors of national importance 

 such as energy. 



3. To become involved when the development 

 risk and cost exceed the capability of the private 

 sector. This is particularly true in support of the 

 Department's operational responsibilities in the 

 Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. 

 Coast Guard. 



4. To stimulate the private sector for the needed 

 investment in innovation when the market mecha- 

 nism is not efl'ective. 



These four categories provide a means by which 

 to judge the content of the Department's RD&D 

 program. 



A major consideration in the formulation of an 

 RD&D program is the balance between near-term 

 and far-term payoff — a question that has been 

 treated in depth by this committee. 



As this committee is aware, the required re- 

 sources for an RD&D program increase signifi- 

 cantly as one moves through the various phases of 

 a development program. The definition of new 

 concepts is far less expensive than hardware im- 



158 TRANSPORTATION 



provement or development. For this reason, it is to 

 be expected that the preponderance of budget dol- 

 lars will be dedicated to near-term programs. In 

 addition, the present condition of our transporta- 

 tion system demands that we concentrate on major 

 problems of immediate concern. Such important 

 issues as the energy crisis, protection of the envi- 

 ronment, failures in the railroad industry, and 

 congestion in the cities, in addition to the need to 

 improve safety, provide the focus for most of our 

 near term RD&D dollars. 



Advanced ideas are less expensive than big near- 

 term projects — but far-term dollars have signifi- 

 cantly more leverage on the future outcomes. Con- 

 sequently, the premium on accurate planning per- 

 ceptions of the future is extremely high. 



I would now like to address the issue of future 

 planning in somewhat more detail. We consider the 

 identification of future opportunities in transporta- 

 tion to be one of our more important responsibili- 

 ties and one that receives a substantial proportion 

 of our attention. 



It is not easy to think through how we would like 

 to see the Nation's transportation system evolve in 

 the future, or to formulate the RD&D strategies 

 that will help carry us in the desired directions. It 

 involves assumptions about an unknowable future. 

 It requires a knowledge of our alternatives options 

 and a reasonable understanding of the tradeoffs 

 involved in selecting one over another. But, if we 

 are to chart the directions for the technological and 

 operational evolution of the transportation system, 

 we must do our best to gain the required insights. 



We have carried out a number of studies and 

 analyses to help us in this important function. We 

 have tried to look at transportation, not mode-by- 

 mode, but in terms of urban, intercity, and freight 

 transportation mission areas. We are interested in 

 the relative roles and balance between the indivi- 

 dual modes, and the potential for improvement in 

 the overall system through better use, perhaps in- 

 termodal, of the individual elements. 



This background of studies is providing us with 

 a continually improving insight, and through inter- 

 action with the modal administrations, a growing 

 consensus within the Department as to the best 

 directions for RD&D. We have just completed, 

 over the past six months, a series of meetings with 

 the modal administrations in which we collectively 

 reexamined and evaluated the major thrusts of the 

 departmental program. This incidently is the 

 groundwork needed for a zero-based budgeting 

 approach for FY 1979. 



In closing, I would like to share some of our 

 thinking about the future climate for transportation 

 improvements, as we move toward the year 2000. 

 We believe the two primary factors that will mold 

 this climate are the health of the economy and the 



