[Senate Hearing 108-168]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Campbell, Bennett, and Durbin.
U.S. SENATE
Office of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. PICKLE, SERGEANT AT ARMS
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. The hearing will come to order. We are
going to try to start right on time. Senator Durbin is on his
way, but I understand we have a 10:15 vote, and if we can, what
we will do is I will have him run to vote, and I will keep
things together, or I will go vote first, while he keeps the
things together here, but in the essence of time, we will go
ahead and start with my statement.
I appreciate hearing from Sergeant at Arms Bill Pickle and
the Capitol Police Board today, which is chaired by Mr. Pickle.
Thank you for being here. You hold down two jobs, in that
respect, as Sergeant at Arms and the Head of the Capitol Police
Board, but if you want to combine your statement on both, that
will be fine. Whatever you would like to do would be fine.
SERGEANT AT ARMS BUDGET REQUEST
The Sergeant at Arms budget request totals $198 million, a
significant increase over the current level, largely due to the
request for the new warehouse, the Capitol Visitor Center
projects, as well as additional staffing. I certainly look
forward to working with you.
CAPITOL POLICE BUDGET REQUEST
Our second panel will be testimony on the fiscal year 2004
budget for the Capitol Police, and you can either come back, or
deal with it in your first comments. And on the second panel,
you will be accompanied by board members, Bill Livingood and
Alan Hantman. And Chief Terrance Gainer will also make a
statement.
The request for the Capitol Police totals $290 million, and
provides 401 additional staff, for a total of 2,406 by the end
of fiscal year 2004. Your plans to increase staffing, training,
and improve professionalism of the force are very ambitious
and, in general, I am very supportive, having been a former law
enforcement officer. As a deputy sheriff years ago, I have
always tried to emphasize the importance of training and
professionalism, and having necessary manpower, too, but we
certainly want to make sure that the effort is underpinned with
a good, strong strategic plan in guiding those efforts.
I know I speak for all of my colleagues here when I say
that we are very indebted to the Capitol Police force. They
work some long shifts. When I come in the gate in the morning,
I often talk to the people at the gate about their long hours,
and I am sure they appreciate the overtime, but still, it does
take a toll on the family when you are trying to get home to
see your children, too.
When Senator Durbin gets here, I may cut in to your
testimony, Mr. Pickle, for his opening statement. But in the
meantime, why not go ahead?
SERGEANT AT ARMS STATEMENT
Mr. Pickle. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is,
indeed, an honor to be here today and I appreciate the
opportunity. Also, it is an honor to have been elected as the
37th Senate Sergeant at Arms of the United States Senate. I
will pledge to you today that I will be very forthright and
responsive to you and this committee, and I will do everything
I can to justify the Senate's faith in me.
As you said, Mr. Chairman, we are requesting $198.2 million
in this fiscal year 2004 budget. This is an increase of $40.7
million, or just over 25 percent. It is a big increase,
undoubtedly.
Fifty-six percent of the increase, or just over $22
million, is for one-time acquisitions that provide long-term
benefits to the Senate. This includes $13.5 million for a new
mail processing and warehouse facility. It also includes $7.7
million to relocate the Senate recording studio to the new
Capitol Visitor Center, and $1.5 million to furnish and equip
the Senate side of the Capitol Visitor Center.
WAREHOUSE FACILITY
The new mail processing and warehouse facility will enable
us to eliminate $700,000 in annual recurring costs. These costs
include expenses for leases and package processing. The current
warehouses are dispersed throughout the D.C. area, but they do
not meet minimum GSA requirements, and the costs to do so would
be very significant.
Besides meeting the GSA requirements, the new warehouse we
are looking for will also provide more space so that the Senate
can take advantage of volume purchases. It will also provide
better quality storage, so that the Capitol's furniture and
fixtures that are warehoused there will have a longer, useful
life, and it will provide climate control and other features to
meet the special needs of the Senate Curator and the Senate
Librarian.
RECORDING STUDIO
Looking at the recording studio, what we hope to do is move
into a state-of-the-art facility when it relocates to the
Capitol Visitor Center. Other offices will also move to the
Capitol Visitor Center, and this budget request funds the
purchase of furniture, fixtures, and equipment for all the
offices that will occupy the new Visitor Center, the Senate
side, that is.
ONGOING INITIATIVES
The balance of this roughly 25 percent increase, or $17.9
million, will fund ongoing initiatives. And of that amount,
$5.9 million will fund package processing and a full year of
maintenance for the alternate computing facility. Once the mail
processing and warehouse facility is approved and completed,
the package processing funds will be eliminated.
Providing additional resources to install, support and
maintain the Senate's computing infrastructure will cost $4.7
million, and this will be accomplished through our IT support
contract, a fairly new contract and one that has been extremely
beneficial to us in the last few months.
Funding the COLA, or the cost of living adjustments, and
salary increases will cost $4.2 million, and the remaining $3
million will be spread across various programs in the Senate
Sergeant at Arms office.
SERGEANT AT ARMS STAFF
Mr. Chairman, I have been here all of 7 weeks, and so I am
a real expert as you can tell, but in that short time, I have
seen some of the accomplishments of this extremely hard-working
staff that I have. They are dedicated; they work long hours.
And in all my years of public service and working for a number
of what I think are just outstanding agencies, I do not think
there is a better, more professional staff than what we have in
the Sergeant at Arms Office.
They have a number of challenges before them. They have
faced a number of challenges very successfully, and I am sure
we are going to meet the challenges together, especially with
the help of this committee.
ROLE OF SERGEANT AT ARMS
Certainly, the role of the Sergeant at Arms Office has
changed over the years. I was first exposed to it about 25
years ago, and when I was exposed to it at that time, it was a
much different environment. Today, it has just enormous
challenges, duties, and responsibilities.
We say that we balance the need to keep the people's house
open so that the American public and the people around the
world can see our democracy in action, and we do, indeed, do
that, and we do it with the competing needs and interests for
the safety of the members, staff, and the visitors. We balance
providing efficient common services, with delivering individual
services and solutions to Senate offices, and we work to use
the taxpayers' money very responsibly, while providing
outstanding service.
We will provide you, this committee and the Senate, with
the best security, service, and support that we can. That is
our challenge, and that is what we intend to do, sir.
My written testimony today will focus on the progress in
two key areas, Senate security and emergency preparedness, and
the services and the support that the Office of the Sergeant at
Arms provides to the Senate community. I would like to offer
that testimony for the record.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Senator Campbell. Your complete written testimony will be
included in the record. You can abbreviate it, if you would
like.
Mr. Pickle. Thank you. I would be happy to take any
questions with the balance of my time, sir.
Senator Campbell. Okay. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Honorable William H. Pickle
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for inviting
me to testify before the Committee on Appropriations as I begin my
service to the Senate community. It is an honor to be elected the 37th
Senate Sergeant at Arms, and I pledge to you that I will serve the
Senate faithfully.
I am respectfully requesting a total budget of $198,240,000, which
is an increase of $40,656,000, or 25.8 percent over the fiscal year
2003 budget. The $40.6 million increase will fund a variety of
programs.
Over half of this amount (56 percent, or $22.7 million) is for one-
time acquisitions that provide substantial long-term benefits to the
Senate community. This includes $13.5 million for a new mail
processing/warehouse facility and $9.2 million to relocate the Senate
Recording Studio and furnish the Senate space in the Capitol Visitor
Center (CVC).
The new mail processing/warehouse facility will enable us to
eliminate $1.5 million annually in recurring costs, including lease
expenses and outsourcing expenses for package processing. The current
warehouse facilities do not meet minimum GSA requirements and the costs
to meet those requirements would be significant. Other long-term
benefits this facility will afford are volume discounts for Secretary
of the Senate and Sergeant at Arms purchases; a longer useful life for
furniture and fixtures warehoused for use in the Capitol; and
specialized storage to meet the needs of the Senate Curator and the
Senate Librarian.
Relocating the Senate Recording Studio to the Capitol Visitor
Center and furnishing the Senate side of the Visitor Center will move
the Recording Studio into a state-of-the-art facility in the CVC and
provide furniture, fixtures, and equipment to outfit and support its
operation. The relocation will cost $7.7 million and the furnishings
will cost $1.5 million.
The balance of the requested increase (44 percent or $17.9 million)
will fund initiatives that are ongoing. We are requesting $5.9 million
to fund a full year of maintenance of recent security enhancements at
the Alternate Computing Facility and the outsourcing of package
processing--upon approval and completion of the mail processing/
warehouse facility, the funds for outsourcing package processing will
be eliminated. The IT Support Contract will require $4.7 million to
provide additional resources to install, support, and maintain the
Senate's computing infrastructure. Funding of the COLA and salary
increases will cost $4.2 million. The final $3.1 million are spread
across the programs in the Office of the Sergeant at Arms.
Mr. Chairman, I come before you with six weeks of experience as
Sergeant at Arms. In that short time, I have already seen some of the
accomplishments this hardworking and dedicated office has achieved. I
have also seen some of the challenges that we face and some of the
opportunities that present themselves. Our budget request will enable
us to meet the challenges we face.
The role of this office has changed dramatically over the years.
The duties and responsibilities of the Sergeant at Arms have expanded,
become more complex, and increasingly interdependent, requiring us to
balance the Senate's competing needs.
We balance the need to keep the ``People's House'' open so that the
American people and the world may see our great democracy at work with
the need to keep the Capitol safe for Members, staff and visitors. We
balance providing efficient, common services with delivering individual
services and solutions to Senate offices. We work to use the taxpayers'
money responsibly while providing outstanding service and support to
the Senate. The Office of the Sergeant at Arms will provide you the
best security, service, and support that we can, and we will work with
this Committee in doing so.
Our testimony today will focus on the Senate's progress in two key
areas: the Senate's security and emergency preparedness and the
services and support the Office of the Sergeant at Arms provides to the
Senate community.
SECURITY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Before September 11, 2001, the preparedness of the Capitol complex
paralleled the preparedness of the rest of the United States. While we
had more security in place than the rest of the country, we pursued it
on an as-needed basis, not in a comprehensive or integrated way. When
we identified specific threats, we responded. For example, the Capitol
Police implemented security upgrades in the three years following the
tragic shootings of Detective John M. Gibson and Officer Jacob J.
Chestnut in July 1998. We had also started working on security of the
mail, and had some rudimentary continuity of operations plans in place,
but we had no comprehensive strategy for ensuring the safety of the
Senate. No one had ever attacked the Senate at the level we experienced
in 2001, so we did not fully comprehend how much we needed additional
security measures to save lives and restore Senate operations.
September 11, 2001, provided a wake-up call, and we responded.
Thankfully, with the preliminary work we were doing, we were in a
position to respond rapidly when the bioterrorist anthrax attacks
occurred on October 15, 2001.
Security Strategy
The wake-up call of September 11 and the Senate's experience with
our nation's largest bioterrorist attack on October 15 underscored the
need for an enhanced, comprehensive security strategy for the Senate in
2001. The strategy that emerged ensures the continuation of the Senate
under any circumstance and protects Members, staff, and visitors, while
maintaining the essential public nature of the Senate. I am committed
to continuing that tradition and strategy.
Our strategy accomplishes its objectives by establishing a layered
defense based on threats that we know and those we can anticipate. It
creates security plans and takes actions to prevent incidents from
occurring. It includes training and exercise programs to ensure
preparedness. And the strategy identifies the resources we need to
manage the consequences and respond appropriately to ensure the
Senate's continuity of operations if an incident does occur. It
eliminates single points of failure, and develops system redundancy,
mobility, and flexibility to ensure that the Senate can continue to
function even in the face of an emergency.
The programs and resources to implement this strategy are in place.
The people who implement the programs know the urgency of completing
them, and continue to move forward quickly, and deliberately.
Our Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness (OSEP)
coordinates its activities with those of the U.S. Capitol Police and
other agencies to implement Senate security, emergency preparedness,
and continuity of operations plans and programs. It combines its
efforts with other offices within the Sergeant at Arms organization to
make sure that all of our work takes security concerns into account.
And OSEP works with every Senate office, here and in Senators' home
states, to bring the Senate community the equipment, information,
assessments, and training it needs.
The Senate funded many of our programs with an emergency
supplemental appropriation to support life-safety, threat reduction,
emergency preparedness, continuity of government and operations, and
consequence management and recovery programs. The emergency
appropriation totaled $632.9 million for the entire legislative branch.
The Office of the Sergeant at Arms received $58.2 million to fund
Senate-specific security and continuity-related programs. We worked
with this Committee and the Committee on Rules and Administration to
establish the best ways to use these funds, and I want you to know that
we are using them wisely.
My office and the Office of the Secretary of the Senate are working
with the Architect of the Capitol, the Attending Physician, and the
United States Capitol Police to ensure that all of our interdependent,
but separately funded, programs are integrated and synchronized. The
efforts of these groups have substantially improved the Capitol's
overall security posture and established a solid foundation for future
improvements. We could not have done this without the dedicated support
of the Senate Leadership, this Committee, and the Committee on Rules
and Administration Security.
A hallmark of the Senate's comprehensive security strategy is
taking reasonable precautions to prevent incidents from occurring. Risk
assessment falls under this area, as do perimeter security, many
activities of the USCP, mail and package handling, and the security
assessments we have done for virtually all Senate state offices across
the country.
Risk Assessment.--To increase our understanding of the threats we
face, we assembled a Legislative Branch Emergency Preparedness Task
Force (LBEPTF) that started a thorough threat and vulnerability
assessment of the Senate in September 2001. The Task Force expanded its
assessment to House facilities in October 2001. LBEPTF completed the
assessment in January 2002 and published it in April 2002. It resulted
in many immediate improvements (e.g., fire alarm markings and
functionality, exit markings, and publication of evacuation plans). The
assessment also identified long-term actions for the Senate's security
and preparedness and we have moved forward on those actions.
U.S. Capitol Police.--One urgent need that has been identified is
that the U.S. Capitol Police force (USCP) was not sufficiently staffed,
trained, or equipped to accept the expanded duties the new threat
situation required. To address this problem, with agreement of the
Congress, the U.S. Capitol Police force will increase its full-time
equivalent (FTE) staff positions and its capabilities. There were 1,481
FTEs in 2001, and the size of the force is growing. At the same time,
the USCP increased its internal ability to respond to hazardous devices
and materials by adding personnel, equipment, and vehicles to its
Hazardous Devices Section.
The USCP also increased the number of posts and added more roving
patrols including vehicle, bicycle, and K9 patrols. Importantly, the
USCP has established or increased its liaison positions and officer
exchanges with intelligence organizations and other law enforcement
agencies throughout local and federal government. The Office of the
Sergeant at Arms works closely with the USCP on increased security
procedures for daily and special events, access control, and screening
measures.
I am a member of the Capitol Police Board, and this year, I chair
the Board (the chairmanship alternates with the House Sergeant at Arms
annually). My position on the Police Board helps ensure that the
security efforts of the USCP align with the priorities and direction of
the Office of the Sergeant at Arms.
Perimeter Security.--I am pleased to inform you that the
implementation of the initial phase of the Perimeter Security Plan,
first proposed in 1998, was completed in 2002. After September 11,
2001, we were asked to develop a plan to provide a similar level of
protection to Senate Office buildings. My office and other security
experts developed a plan, and the Committee on Rules and Administration
recently approved it. The Architect of the Capitol will soon begin
implementation of the enhanced perimeter security plan.
Physical security measures represent one aspect of perimeter
security and the Capitol Police force represents another. The physical
security measures include bollards and pop-up vehicle barriers. The
Capitol Police force staffs the revised access checkpoints and enforces
procedures, staffs the expanded use of K9 patrols, enforces the
restriction of oversized vehicles, and supports other measures that
safeguard against vehicle-borne threats. Together, the Police and
enhanced physical security measures prevent attacks from vehicles or
their contents.
To prevent other attacks, we improved visitor access and screening
procedures for all Senate Office Buildings. When we offer public
Capitol tours, we screen the visitors outside the Capitol. We enhanced
that screening as well as the screening of visitors on staff-led tours
coming from the Senate Office Buildings.
The Office of the Sergeant at Arms has also undertaken other, less
visible, security improvements and safety systems that significantly
improve the Senate's overall security posture. We implemented extensive
security at the Capitol Visitor Center project during its construction
that includes background checks of workers, off-site vehicle screening,
physical inspections, a vehicle x-ray system, K9 explosive detection
sweeps, and strict access control and monitoring measures.
Mail Handling.--Throughout the October 2001 anthrax event, we
gathered information that would be useful in our efforts to prevent
similar incidents; to prepare in the event an incident does occur; and
to create plans, training, and resources to manage the consequences and
respond appropriately to an incident and ensure the Senate's continuity
of operations. We worked with the Department of Defense, the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy, the United States Postal
Service, package delivery service companies, local couriers, the
Committee on Rules and Administration, and Senate offices to develop
procedures to improve the safety and security of Senate mail.
During January 2002, this office established the Legislative Mail
Task Force (LMTF), made up of representatives from medical and
scientific agencies as well as those described above. Its purpose is to
ensure safe and timely mail delivery. The LMTF remains operational and
is still investigating ways to provide better and safer mail delivery
to the legislative branch.
We sealed mailing chutes and removed unmonitored mailboxes in the
Senate Office Buildings and the Capitol to eliminate the possibility of
a harmful agent being deposited in them. We also adopted mail handling
safety procedures that include irradiating, x-raying, testing, and
holding all mail until we receive negative test results.
We worked with all offices across the Senate, conducting briefings
and providing information so staff would know how to identify
suspicious mail and report it promptly to the Capitol Police and Senate
postal officials. We also advised Senate offices that they should only
accept letters and packages from uniformed Senate Post Office employees
displaying a valid ID, or from bona fide couriers.
These procedures have become the model for other agencies in the
legislative branch. Since resuming mail delivery to the Senate, we have
delivered over 25,000,000 safe letters and have reduced the time to
deliver them from an average of several weeks to six days. Moreover, we
leveraged our existing people and resources to create our own mail-
handling program, costing the Senate several million dollars less than
other legislative branch agencies that outsource their mail handling
programs.
Package Handling.--The Package Tracking and Management System that
we developed and implemented last summer is a great example of
cooperation within the Office of the Sergeant at Arms to bring new
services to the Senate community. Our IT Support Services staff
developed this new Web-based system using requirements from the Senate
Post Office, the Committee on Rules and Administration, and our user
community, along with vital participation from our Customer Support and
Training areas. The system enabled us to deliver more packages during
its first four weeks of use than our vendor had been able to deliver
during the previous five months. The technology cost less than $50,000
to implement, compared to our package vendor's proposed $1.5 million
solution. Using the system we developed in-house, we deliver safe
packages three days (on average) after we receive them, which is
considerably less time than the several weeks that was the norm under
the previous system. We are working with the Committee on Rules and
Administration to see if we can reduce that time even further.
Capitol Visitor Center (CVC).--Congress had planned to build a
Capitol Visitor Center for several years, not only to improve security,
but also to provide better visitor services. Until September 11, the
project moved slowly. After September 11, as part of the emergency
supplemental appropriation, funds for the CVC were approved, and
construction began.
In 2000, almost three million people visited the Capitol and during
peak season over 18,000 people visited the Capitol each day. Tons of
equipment, food, and other material move into and out of the Capitol
daily. These provide critical services but they also create risks to
the Capitol complex.
The CVC will help us better control the flow of visitors and
material moving in and out of the Capitol, without reducing public
access. Once the CVC is completed, we will have just as much public
access through fewer access points, and we will have better screening
and control of everyone and everything that comes into the Capitol.
That screening will take place in the CVC instead of near Capitol
doors.
Because of the design of access points, we will be able to better
screen, and isolate and remove an individual or group that poses a
security risk. Deliveries to the Capitol will go through the CVC, which
will include a remote delivery-vehicle screening facility. This
facility will make it both easier to deliver goods to the Capitol and
safer to accept those goods. The design incorporates many blast-
resistant features as well as systems that will minimize the risk of
airborne hazards within the CVC and the Capitol.
CVC construction and the implementation of the 1998 Perimeter
Security Plan created one challenge: Parking. When the CVC construction
project was approved, planners found that as many as 350 staff members
would have to move to parking spaces farther from the Capitol. Our
Parking team worked with the Architect of the Capitol, the U.S. Capitol
Police, and the Committee on Rules and Administration to create 359
parking spaces. Many of the spaces came from reconfiguring existing
parking spaces (i.e., converting parallel parking spaces to diagonal
spaces and converting the former locations of construction trailers
into parking lots). These efforts have already saved over $1 million in
leases for parking spaces, and we expect that they will save over $3
million before the CVC construction is finished. The solution is
secure, near the Capitol, and convenient for Senators and staff. It
also makes good use of existing resources and taxpayers' dollars.
State Offices.--In 2001, we had little information on the level of
security of Senators' state offices. Some assessments had been done
over several years, but we had old, inconsistent information. We moved
aggressively to address this problem by establishing a plan to conduct
comprehensive, on-site security assessments at all Senators' state
offices. We finished the assessments for all offices that were in place
in the fall of 2002, and implemented a system whereby every newly
established office will be assessed as well.
These surveys will enable the Sergeant at Arms to understand fully
the security needs of our state offices, make recommendations,
prioritize security needs, and improve security. This will be an on-
going, multi-year project and will involve physical modifications,
monitoring, and staff training.
As we think about the security of the Senate since the tragic
events of September 11, 2001, we are proud of our progress. We have
moved forward on a wide range of initiatives, and as a result, have the
pieces in place to keep threats out of the Capitol and the Senate
Office Buildings.
Emergency Preparedness
Emergency preparedness addresses how people will learn about an
event and respond to it. Since September 2001, the Office of the
Sergeant at Arms has enhanced the Senate's preparedness through alarms
and equipment, emergency notification, and training.
Alarms and Equipment.--In response to the LBEPTF Risk Assessment,
we worked with the AOC and the USCP to test and, where necessary,
upgrade the alarms and emergency equipment in every Senate Office
Building. We worked with Senate offices to ensure each has an emergency
action plan, we implemented evacuation procedures and assembly areas
for every building, and we regularly conduct evacuation drills. We also
recently added wireless annunciators to notify people of an incident,
provide instructions on appropriate steps to take, and provide more
information as an event unfolds. The Architect of the Capitol is
upgrading building fire alarms, and is integrating both the alarms and
the annunciators into the USCP command center system. With the Capitol
Police, we are conducting office security briefings to review and
reinforce office emergency action plans.
Emergency Notification Procedures.--We have established redundant
and flexible communications, taking advantage of existing systems and
expanding them to enhance and streamline our emergency notification
capabilities. We provided BlackBerry devices and updated electronic
pagers to Senators and key staff. The USCP has a telephone system that
can call individuals at pre-designated numbers in case of emergency.
Approximately 1,000 Senate telephones are connected to the Group Alert
System, which the USCP controls and can activate when needed, under
direction from the Sergeant at Arms. A wireless alert broadcast system
and the ongoing upgrade of building alarms and public address systems
will further improve emergency notification. The evacuation alarm
systems already include both audible and visual alarms. Together, these
systems provide broad emergency notification capabilities to the
Senate. With the establishment of the Alternate Computing Facility, we
will be able to implement additional emergency notification measures.
Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Protection.--In the fall of
2001, the Capitol Police Board recognized the need to expand protection
in this area. One result was the purchase of a large number of
Quick2000 Escape Hoods, which provide rapid protection from chemical,
biological, or other hazardous particulates for Members, staff, and
visitors to the Capitol. We have distributed Quick2000 Escape Hoods to
each office and throughout the Senate Office Buildings. Along with the
Capitol Police, we have trained almost 6,000 Members and staff on the
notification process and on the donning of these hoods. We are
undertaking other projects that further expand our ability to protect
the Senate from chemical, biological, radiological, and other airborne
hazards.
Continuity of Operations and Government
The events of the fall of 2001 underscored the need for strong
continuity of operations and continuity of government planning. The
Senate has demonstrated its ability to respond to attacks, but we need
to enhance and rehearse our plans so we will know what to do in advance
of an incident.
As part of the Legislative Branch Emergency Preparedness Task
Force, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency assessed our infrastructure
and recommended ways to improve it. We are now working to implement
their recommendations. This will help ensure that the Senate can
continue to function even in extreme emergencies.
Infrastructure Protection.--The Office of the Sergeant at Arms was
working to protect essential infrastructure services in the summer of
2001. We accelerated that work significantly after September 11. We are
implementing alternate locations for critical communications services,
we upgraded our telecommunications backbone, and we expanded our
conferencing capability. We also created continuity plans for critical
enterprise computing and data services and have security measures in
place for computing networks.
One recommendation of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency was to
procure a new fiber system. We are working to procure a new fiber
system that will enhance the Senate's day-to-day network operations and
enhance Briefing Center operations.
Alternate Computing Facility.--In conjunction with the House and
other legislative branch agencies, we are establishing an Alternate
Computing Facility that will back up the computing and
telecommunications infrastructure.
Other initiatives to enhance the Senate's telecommunications
infrastructure include projects to ensure that essential
telecommunications services will be available in the event Capitol Hill
is evacuated and to provide redundant and mobile communications and
broadcast capabilities. One example is the ongoing fitting-out of the
mobile recording studio vehicle and procurement of mobile
communications vans to ensure the Senate maintains flexibility and
mobility in these communications and broadcast services.
Fly-away Kits.--We are creating a recommendation for a suite of
technology that offices should acquire for their continuity of
operations. The suite will include standard and supported portable
computers, storage devices, printers, and network components that
offices can use in an emergency situation. The offices will be able to
configure the equipment off-site if they no longer have access to their
Capitol Hill spaces and local IT resources.
Information Security.--The Office of the Sergeant at Arms has a
significant focus on information security. Sergeant at Arms IT security
experts worked with experts from the General Accounting Office to
evaluate the Senate's security controls and to recommend improvements.
We implemented the recommendations and significantly improved the
Senate's overall computer security. Because of good technical and
management controls, the Senate computing infrastructure remained
secure despite threats from various viruses and worms, including the
``SQL Slammer'' worm in January 2003 (SQL stands for Structured Query
Language).
Briefing Centers.--We have established Briefing Center facilities
for emergencies that deny the use of the Senate Office Buildings and
the Capitol. All Briefing Centers are within walking distance of the
Capitol. In the event of an emergency, one Briefing Center will be
activated and all Senators informed of that location.
Briefing Centers will provide security, communications,
information, and caucus space for Members (and one designated staff
member because of the limited space available) during the critical
period immediately following an incident. The essential function of
accounting for Senators also takes place at this location. While we
envision a Briefing Center being in place only for a brief period, the
Sergeant at Arms and the Secretary of the Senate have provided the
ability for the Senate to do legislative business, if necessary.
Alternate Chambers.--We have established Alternate Chamber
facilities if the Capitol is not available but the Senate needs to be
in session. The Sergeant at Arms and the Architect of the Capitol have
completed all the modifications of the infrastructure, including
connectivity to the Legislative Information System, communications, and
broadcast systems so that the Secretary of the Senate can provide the
full range of legislative services in an Alternate Chamber.
An additional Alternate Chamber location is established off Capitol
Hill and that site is on-track to be available this year. Alternate
Chamber locations on and off Capitol Hill, as well as other continuity
of government locations, will enable the Senate to continue to meet its
Constitutional obligations in the event that the Capitol or District
are not available.
Transportation.--We expanded our transportation resources to make
sure we can move Senators and key staff in an emergency. We added three
24-passenger buses, two 15-passenger vans, and a 10-passenger van to
our fleet. Additionally, we have arrangements to provide additional
transportation and support if the Senate needs to move away from
Capitol Hill.
Continuity Planning.--Senate offices are well along in developing
continuity of operations plans, and we are working to complete this
critical program as soon as possible. These plans are updated every
year. The Office of the Sergeant at Arms continues to conduct training
and provide assistance to offices as they enhance their plans and the
supporting documents.
Exercise of Plans.--The Office of the Sergeant at Arms, with the
Secretary of the Senate, conducted a series of seminars and small-scale
exercises from May 2002 to July 2002 culminating in a successful full-
scale exercise in August 2002 that tested continuity plans and
procedures. This exercise tested alert and notification systems and the
activation of a Briefing Center and the Alternate Chamber. It
demonstrated that the Senate's supporting legislative systems will
operate in the Briefing Center and Alternate Chamber environments. In
December 2002, the USCP completed an exercise of its internal command
and control operations. The Sergeant at Arms' Office of Security and
Emergency Preparedness regular exercise program will help
institutionalize these plans and provide the framework to evaluate and
adjust them as needed.
Preparing for the Future
The Senate established necessary plans and programs to meet its
security, emergency preparedness, and continuity planning requirements.
We need to maintain the momentum of the last 18 months to be prepared
now, and to meet evolving threats. We have a framework to ensure the
process continues.
The Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness (OSEP) is the
group of professional staff within the Sergeant at Arms Office charged
to build on that framework. OSEP's mission is to consolidate and
sustain the Senate's security, preparedness, and continuity planning.
These efforts will ensure that this great body is able to adapt to the
changing threat environment, to develop and coordinate security and
emergency plans and policies, and to implement change. We trust the
Senate will continue to provide the resources for OSEP to conduct
necessary, periodic exercises that rehearse mission-critical systems
and evaluate Senate readiness. OSEP should also conduct semi-annual
Leadership briefings to report on the state of preparedness of the
Congress and on the progress of evolving security plans.
The United States must have enduring Constitutional government. By
working with common goals and the strong support of the Senate and
Congressional Leadership, we have created the foundation to make sure
that our Constitutional government will ensure. We must build on that
foundation, so this institution continues and our security remains
effective.
SERVICE AND SUPPORT FOR THE SENATE
My office has dozens of other accomplishments that support the
Senate. Let me highlight some of them.
The Office of the Sergeant at Arms has a long tradition of
providing customer support, infrastructure improvements, and transition
support. We work with the Senate community to streamline and simplify
Senate processes. This work sometimes may be invisible, but it provides
the infrastructure that supports this very public institution. We
employ a staff of dedicated, innovative, and cost-conscious individuals
who are committed to the best interests of this institution and those
we serve.
We also have a long tradition of introducing new technologies to
the Senate that serve as platforms for great forward-looking
improvements in productivity and constituent services. Some brief
examples are the microcomputer, which was not adopted by Senate offices
as automatically as you might imagine today; the introduction of local
area networks, and then connecting them using a Senate Fiber Network;
and the Internet. These technologies have been leveraged to radically
change the way we do our jobs.
Implementing the Senate Messaging Infrastructure (SMI)
The Senate Messaging Infrastructure is another of the fundamental
technologies that will alter the way we do our jobs, though we cannot
yet foresee all the benefits. Its implementation will support many of
our security initiatives and enable us to provide services that support
key Senate functions. The Office of the Sergeant at Arms is almost
finished with the full implementation of this important program.
Even though we have not quite completed our implementation, the
Senate already has a much more robust, reliable, and maintainable e-
mail infrastructure. Since the end of January 2003, we have seen almost
no enterprise-wide e-mail problems and Senate offices have received
their e-mail reliably, quickly, and efficiently.
Let me briefly describe the history of the Senate Messaging
Infrastructure. In the summer of 1998, we began a project to
investigate and implement a replacement for Lotus cc:Mail, which the
Senate had been using since 1987, and which the vendor would no longer
support. The project's goal was to establish an enterprise-wide system
as the basis on which the Senate could deploy multiple services far
into the future. Although e-mail is currently our principal focus, the
Senate Messaging Infrastructure will support the Senate in ways we
cannot yet foresee in addition to the ways we are already anticipating.
After studying the alternatives and consulting with the Senate
community, we recommended to the Rules Committee that the combination
of Microsoft Outlook and Exchange was the best choice for the Senate.
In May 2000, the Sergeant at Arms asked for Rules Committee approval to
begin implementation.
In June 2000, the Committee approved a $6.4 million contract with
Compaq Computer Corporation to begin implementing Outlook and Exchange.
These systems include functionality and capabilities far beyond basic
electronic mail, including calendaring and group scheduling, contacts
management, note organization, and task management. The systems also
provide a base infrastructure for other Senate applications, including
the BlackBerry Communications system. Many other products are available
to add to enterprise messaging systems, such as instant messaging and
video conferencing.
After a successful pilot, the migration from Lotus cc:Mail to
Microsoft Exchange began in August 2002 and is now 80 percent complete.
We have migrated 110 of 138 Senate offices, and 28 remain to be
migrated. E-mail flows smoothly, even as the volume of e-mail continues
to grow larger and larger. We now process nearly two million Internet
e-mail messages a week and we have processed as many as 500,000 in a
single day.
The messaging infrastructure encountered periods of instability
last fall and at the beginning of this year. We stopped the migrations
in mid-January to find out why. We found two reasons: (1) our
migrations reached previously unknown product limitations and (2) we
had to upgrade our software. By March 15, we successfully stabilized
the centralized system components and all 110 migrated offices by
making the necessary upgrades. On March 26, we presented technical
options to the remaining 28 offices for completing the migration. We
expect that all offices that choose to migrate will be completed before
the summer begins, and we are exploring more long-term design
alternatives to overcome the product limitations. We regularly brief
the Senate offices' systems administrators and administrative managers
on our progress.
We expect that we will soon integrate Exchange with other systems.
For example, integrating the Senate Voice Mail system into SMI would
enable the system to translate messages into a computer-readable format
that could be forwarded as an attachment to an electronic mail message,
or be put on a Web page for retrieval over the Senate intranet. Voice
mail could even be set up to receive incoming fax transmissions and
route them to the proper destination via electronic mail. We are also
working with vendors to procure applications to support wireless e-mail
and data; these applications will not rely on the Internet to
communicate.
Integrating InfoXchange, the Senate's fax broadcast system with
Outlook and Exchange would enable offices to maintain their broadcast
lists themselves, receive faxes in a centralized place, and distribute
incoming faxes via e-mail. Offices could also keep their existing fax
numbers but route them to a pool of telephone lines that could handle
large numbers of calls. The system could translate incoming faxes into
electronic files, the offices could identify their faxes, and the
system could electronically mail the incoming faxes to the offices.
Through all of our work, our priorities are to establish a stable
Senate-wide system that works well and can support our disaster
recovery and Continuity of Operations plans, while ensuring that
personal office data remains private and secure.
Serving Our Customers in the Senate Community
The Office of the Sergeant at Arms provides Senate offices the
information, tools, and support they need to work efficiently and
effectively. We assign customer support analysts to each office; we
produce materials to help staff learn about equipment, policies, and
the Senate; and we develop and host the Senate's intranet Web site and
information services.
The Joint Office of Education and Training, and Office Support
Services help the Senate take advantage of the services we offer. These
groups distribute information, promote new services, and arrange for
briefings, including briefings on security, mail handling, SMI
implementation, package management, Computers for Schools, Web services
assessments, and wireless modems.
We overhauled the Senate's intranet home page and the Sergeant at
Arms sections of Webster to make them much more user-friendly and more
function-based rather than hierarchical. We renewed our information
services contracts and executed an ongoing promotional project to
ensure that all Senate staff members know about the information
resources available to them. We are also visiting every Senate office
to promote Web-related support services and to gather information about
offices' Web requirements.
Finally, we developed a new publication, SAA Update that provides
timely information about new and ongoing Sergeant at Arms projects to
Senate offices.
Improving the Senate's Infrastructure & Capabilities
We have enhanced the Senate's infrastructure and capabilities with
improvements in every area of the Sergeant at Arms organization. I will
point out some of the highlights.
Recording and Photo Studio Digital Migration.--We are continuing
with the migration of the Recording Studio and the Photo Studio to
digital technologies. This will provide Senators with higher quality
pictures and services for their constituents. The Recording Studio
project modernizes the way the Senate provides the broadcast signal of
both the Senate proceedings and individual Senators' productions by
utilizing an enhanced digital television signal. It will also provide
expanded desktop access to television news, Senate proceedings, and
Committee hearing coverage. The Photo Studio modernization project
replaces analog-, chemical- and film-based processes and systems with
networked digital imaging capabilities. This will provide more
immediate access for printing, ordering, and downloading images by
Senate offices and will enable customers to track photo orders online.
The Recording Studio successfully relocated its operations over the
past year to accommodate the Capitol Visitor Center service tunnel
construction. We took advantage of the move to improve our studio
facilities by accomplishing part of the digital migration. Once the CVC
is complete, the Recording Studio will move into that facility, and we
will finalize the digital migration project. Relocating to the CVC will
enable us to cover 12 Committee hearings simultaneously, up from the
four we can cover currently.
Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail (PGDM) instituted an online
ordering process for all printing, photocopying, and graphics services,
and produced over 1 million documents for the Senate that were ordered
from desktop computers. During the past three years, we made process
improvements that reduced PGDM's staff by 13 percent, reduced operating
expenses by $2.5 million, and saved Senate offices over $4 million in
postage expenses. These improvements include establishing Quality
Improvement Teams that reduced errors 86 percent and employee
absenteeism 40 percent; converting leased, analog, stand-alone
photocopiers to purchased, digital, networked printers that have
improve service and reduced expenses by $1.2 million; and educating
Senate staff on letter-addressing procedures enabling outgoing mail to
qualify for maximum mailing discounts.
We enhanced our document archiving capability by introducing CD/ROM
and DVD services for Senate offices. These services enable offices to
access and retrieve archived information from their desktops, and send
and print information, as they need it.
The IT support we provide the Senate improved when we signed a new
support contract that covers the acquisition, installation, and ongoing
support of Senate offices' networks. We have seen much better
performance from our new vendor. The February 2003 customer
satisfaction surveys show that 94 percent of customers described the IT
Help Desk's services as either very satisfactory or excellent. The IT
Help Desk receives an average of 1,428 customer trouble calls per
month.
We have instituted an online catalog to begin streamlining the
process of ordering IT products. We also replaced the servers and
software that handle all incoming and outgoing Internet e-mail with
more powerful servers. This improves the Senate's ability to handle
large peaks of Internet e-mail traffic.
Supporting the Transition
The transition from the 107th to the 108th Congress was a success.
The 108th Congress brought 11 new Members to the Senate, and the
Sergeant at Arms organization supported them in myriad ways during the
transition.
Transition Office.--We coordinated all the activities of the
Transition Office for the new Senators of the 108th Congress, providing
full-time staff to support the new Senators until they could retain
their own staffs, and assisting offices with their moves into swing
suites.
Office Support During the Transition.--The end of the 107th
Congress and the opening of the 108th Congress saw 93 state office
openings, closings, or moves, all of which we accomplished with minimal
disruption. We provided demonstrations of constituent correspondence
management systems to staff representing all of the new Members, and
successfully installed their selections. These new installations were
the first to integrate fully with the Senate Messaging Infrastructure.
The State Office Liaison helped the offices of newly elected
Senators acquire and negotiate leases for commercial and federal office
space in their home states. The Liaison also helped re-elected Senators
negotiate renewal or relocation leases and did so in connection with
security assessments.
We moved the ten new Members to their temporary suites in the
Senate Office Buildings. We also have moved a total of 21 Members from
their temporary or former locations into new permanent office space.
For departing Senators, the Office of the Sergeant at Arms staff
met with administrative managers to provide information on archiving
requirements, provided microfilm and CD/ROM services to archive
Members' documents, shipped Members' archives to depository libraries,
moved packages and mail items to Senators' home states, and scanned
more than 26,000 photo images to CD/ROM.
In addition to providing logistical and technical support,
departments across the Sergeant at Arms organization provided
information and guidance to new offices. Our administrative services
department developed materials and our Joint Office of Education and
Training provided training for administrative managers on the functions
and services available to them at the Senate and on the rules and
regulations of this institution.
Working Collaboratively to Improve Services to the Senate
The Office of the Sergeant at Arms is committed to overcoming
organizational barriers to do what is best for the Senate. We work with
Senate colleagues to provide support for training and procurement, and
many of our initiatives dovetail with those of other organizations,
especially the Secretary of the Senate.
Our Joint Office of Education and Training, which the Sergeant at
Arms and the Secretary of the Senate jointly sponsor, provides training
that supports the work being done in all Senate offices, both in
Washington D.C. and in the states. The training offered includes
general professional development, Senate-specific information, computer
training on Senate supported software, support for security and
emergency preparedness initiatives, and health promotion.
Just over the past year, the Sergeant at Arms Procurement group
supported contracting for upgrades to the studios of the Republican
Conference and the Democratic Technology and Communications Committee.
It worked with the Secretary of the Senate to procure a new point-of-
sale application for the Senate's gift shop. And it helped the
Appropriations Committee acquire a new appropriations tracking system.
In addition, the Procurement group, along with the Technology
Development group, worked with the Secretary of the Senate to procure a
product and the related vendor support to upgrade the Senate's external
Web site, www.senate.gov. The Secretary of the Senate manages the site
and the Sergeant at Arms provides the infrastructure. Together with the
Secretary's office, the Office of the Sergeant at Arms redesigned and
redeveloped an all-new www.senate.gov that integrates a powerful
content management tool and improves the organization of information on
the site.
BUDGET BUILT ON BUSINESS MODEL
Mr. Chairman, in constructing our budget request, I instructed
staff to use the same business model as my predecessor and his
predecessor. This means that each department conducts a top-down and
bottom-up review when it constructs its long-range program and budget
planning activities. All of our department directors and managers look
for program efficiencies and cost-cutting savings in all mission areas.
They evaluate and eliminate duplication and redundancy wherever
practical. We leverage technology to achieve greater efficiencies and
improve program effectiveness. We believe that the fiscal year 2004
budget will provide the resources necessary to meet the needs and
requests of the Senate.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, the Office of the
Sergeant at Arms is in a unique position: We balance keeping the
``People's House'' open so that all of America and the world can see
our great democracy in action against the need to keep the Capitol
safe. We balance providing efficient, common services against
delivering individual services and solutions to Senate offices. We work
to use the taxpayers' money responsibly while providing outstanding
service and support.
As our testimony today shows, and their work--particularly over the
last year and a half--demonstrates, the more than 700 people who work
in the Office of the Sergeant at Arms are extraordinary public
servants. On their behalf, my commitment to you and the Senate is that
the Office of the Sergeant at Arms will provide you the best security,
service, and support we can.
Attachment I.--Financial Plan for Fiscal Year 2004
OFFICE OF THE SERGEANT AT ARMS--UNITED STATES SENATE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year
-------------------------- 2004 vs. Fiscal Year
2003
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year -------------------------
2003 Budget 2004 Percent
Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries................................................ $43,161 $48,271 $5,110 11.8
Expenses................................................ $38,013 $47,025 $9,012 23.7
---------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance................ $81,174 $95,296 $14,122 17.4
Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................ $55,113 $59,731 $4,618 8.4
Capital Investment.......................................... $16,779 $38,019 $21,240 126.6
Nondiscretionary Items...................................... $4,518 $5,194 $676 15.0
---------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................. $157,584 $198,240 $40,656 25.8
===================================================
Staffing.................................................... 829 846 17 2.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure that we provide the highest levels and quality of
security, support services and equipment, we submit a proposed budget
of $198,240,000, up $40,656,000, or 25.8 percent. The salary budget
request is $48,271,000, up $5,110,000 or 11.8 percent and the expense
budget request is $149,969,000, up $35,546,000 or 31.1 percent. The
staffing request is 846, up 17 FTEs.
For the second consecutive year, we have increased funds for
security initiatives. The fiscal year 2004 budget request for security
is $20,891,000, an increase of $5,912,000 or 39.5 percent over fiscal
year 2003. The most significant aspects of the total security request
are the alternate computing facility ($1,154,000 in salaries for 17
FTEs and $4,096,000 in expenses); enhanced communication services
($3,900,000); secure mail and package processing protocols ($631,000 in
salaries 17 FTEs and $3,079,000 in expenses); personnel and operating
expenses requested for the Office of Security and Emergency
Preparedness ($987,000 in salaries for 10 FTEs and $2,352,000 in
expenses); and security upgrades for Member state offices ($2,744,000
in expenses).
We present our budget in four categories: General Operations and
Maintenance (Salaries and Expenses), Mandated Allowances and
Allotments, Capital Investment, and Nondiscretionary Items.
--The General Operations and Maintenance Salaries budget request is
$48,271,000, an increase of $5,110,000 or 11.8 percent. The
increase includes $1,870,000 to fund a 3.9 percent COLA,
$1,095,000 to fund merit increases, $884,000 to add 17 FTEs,
and $1,261,000 to fund other adjustments. The additional staff
will augment our security team, improve operations, expand
services, and meet new requirements for the Senate community.
--The General Operations and Maintenance Expenses budget request for
existing and new services is $47,025,000, an increase of
$9,012,000 or 23.7 percent. The increase includes $3,700,000
for the higher costs of the Senate's new IT support contract,
which was awarded in Spring 2002 and which provides additional
resources to install, support and maintain the Senate's PCs;
$2,000,000 to screen Senate packages ensuring the safety and
security of Senate staff and property; $947,000 for maintenance
on data communication networks and systems; $618,000 for
maintenance costs on mainframe software; $502,000 for increased
management consulting services for security initiatives;
$332,000 to procure software and hardware for Internet and
Intranet services; $311,000 for maintenance support for the
Senate Messaging Infrastructure; and $210,000 for professional
services to support financial management projects that will
enable us to meet all appropriate audit standards and to
enhance budget and contract management systems.
--The Mandated allowances and allotments budget request is
$59,731,000, an increase of $4,618,000 or 8.4 percent. The
increase includes $1,934,000 to pay the rent for federal and
commercial office space which has been increasing at an annual
rate of approximately 8 percent nationwide; $1,313,000 for
enhanced telecommunications; $1,111,000 for local and long
distance services for Washington D.C. and state offices;
$968,000 for Desktop/LAN installation and support; $745,000 for
computer equipment for Members, Committees, Officers, and
Leadership; and $100,000 for the Appropriations Analysis and
Reporting System. These increases are partially offset by a
decrease of $1,669,000 for Member mail systems maintenance.
--The Capital investments budget request is $38,019,000, an increase
of $21,240,000 or 126.6 percent. We request $13,500,000 for the
acquisition of a new mail processing/warehouse facility that
will replace and consolidate our three warehouse locations. Our
current facilities do not meet GSA minimum requirements, are
functionally obsolete, and our largest location in Alexandria
has an expiring lease which the landlord will not renew on a
long-term basis. The new support facility will consolidate the
Alexandria warehouse and the two smaller warehouses into one
space that will meet the Senate's long-term space needs. It
will include modern physical security, optimal storage
configuration, and material handling equipment. In this
facility, we will be able to implement efficient operating
procedures and an inventory control system. Importantly, the
new facility will meet the all the space needs of the Secretary
of the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms. It will include museum
quality environmental controls for the Senate Curator and
climate control for the Senate Gift Shop, Stationery Store and
the Senate Library. The new support facility will include a
mail and package screening area for the Senate Post Office.
This will enable the Senate to save $750,000 in operating costs
annually and improve service by assuming responsibility for the
package screening service that is currently performed by a
vendor. The Senate Post Office will also upgrade the existing
mail screening infrastructure to current standards.
The budget request includes $7,675,000 to relocate the Recording
Studio to the Capitol Visitor Center. The relocation will
enable expended coverage of up to 12 simultaneous committee
hearings through a central production facility. Concurrent with
the relocation, we plan to upgrade the chamber audio system and
our television and radio production facilities. As a result of
this and the final phase of the Digital Migration Project, the
Senate will have a truly state-of-the-art studio for Senate and
Committee broadcasts as well as for communication with
constituents.
Facilities will need $1,485,000 to acquire furniture and
equipment for core Senate space in the CVC.
IT Research and Deployment will require $1,500,000 for consulting
services and analysis of software for the redesign of the CCMS,
which will better enable Senate offices to efficiently
communicate with constituents. Increased functionality for the
CCMS/Email filtering system will cost $185,000 and list server
capabilities will cost $154,000.
Operations will start several additional projects: Replacement of
outdated publishing equipment will cost $745,000; replacement
of a 12-year old outgoing mail sorter with updated equipment
will cost $500,000; replacing the current data collection and
job tracking systems will cost $500,000; and replacing the
outdated ID system will cost $150,000. Updating the equipment
will enable us to reduce maintenance and postage costs, track
job costs, and produce higher quality products. The Post Office
will acquire a custom designed mail sorter for $750,000 and a
mail delivery truck that will expedite the sorting and delivery
of incoming mail for $60,000.
Network Engineering requires $3,432,000 for upgrades to network
switches, firewalls, the Network Management System, and the
state office wide area network.
--Nondiscretionary items fiscal year 2004 budget request is
$5,194,000, an increase of $676,000 or 15.0 percent compared to
fiscal year 2003. The request consists of three projects that
support the Secretary of the Senate: contract maintenance for
the Financial Management Information System (FMIS), $2,596,000;
enhancements to the Legislative Information System (LIS),
$1,968,000; and requirements definition for enhancements to the
Senate Payroll System, $630,000.
Attachment II.--Fiscal Year 2004 Budget Request by Department
The following is a summary of the SAA's fiscal year 2004 budget
request on an organizational basis.
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year 2004
-------------------------- vs. Fiscal Year 2003
Department Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2004 Percent
2003 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capitol Division........................................... $10,942 $12,351 $1,409 12.9
Operations................................................. $28,584 $55,618 $27,034 94.6
Technology Development..................................... $29,578 $36,667 $7,089 24.0
Senate Messaging Infrastructure Project.................... $5,165 $945 ($4,220) 81.7
IT Support Services........................................ $49,915 $55,269 $5,354 10.7
Office Support............................................. $26,502 $29,330 $2,828 10.7
Staff Offices.............................................. $6,898 $8,060 $1,162 16.8
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $157,584 $198,240 $40,656 25.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each department's budget is presented and analyzed in detail
beginning on the next page.
CAPITOL DIVISION
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year
-------------------------- 2004 vs. Fiscal Year
2003
Capitol Division Fiscal Year Fiscal Year -------------------------
2003 Budget 2004 Percent
Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries................................................ $5,783 $6,689 $906 15.7
Expenses................................................ $1,915 $2,418 $503 26.3
---------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance................ $7,698 $9,107 $1,409 18.3
Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................ $2,744 $2,744 $0 ...........
Capital Investment.......................................... $500 $500 $0 ...........
Nondiscretionary Items...................................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
---------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................. $10,942 $12,351 $1,409 12.9
===================================================
Staffing.................................................... 135 137 2 1.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Capitol Division consists of the Executive Office, Media Galleries and the Office of Security and Emergency
Preparedness.
Operations and maintenance salaries increase $906,000, or 15.7
percent, to $6,689,000. This increase will fund the addition of two
FTEs, $170,000; an expected 3.9 percent COLA, $416,000; merit funding,
$115,000; and other adjustments, $205,000. The Office of Security and
Emergency Preparedness requires two FTEs to direct, develop and monitor
the processes and procedures needed to ensure security on Capitol Hill
and to work on the Continuation of Operations Plan (COOP).
Operations and maintenance expenses increase $503,000, or 26.3
percent, to $2,418,000 primarily for increased management consulting
services for security initiatives.
The allowances and allotments budget request for state office
security initiatives remains flat for fiscal year 2004.
The capital investments budget request for COOP related purposes
remains flat for fiscal year 2004.
OPERATIONS
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year
-------------------------- 2004 vs. Fiscal Year
2003
Operations Fiscal Year Fiscal Year -------------------------
2003 Budget 2004 Percent
Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries................................................ $15,658 $17,209 $1,551 9.9
Expenses................................................ $6,629 $8,893 $2,264 34.2
---------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance................ $22,287 $26,102 $3,815 17.1
Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................ $0 $0 $0 ...........
Capital Investment.......................................... $6,297 $29,516 $23,219 368.7
Nondiscretionary Items...................................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
---------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................. $28,584 $55,618 $27,034 94.6
===================================================
Staffing.................................................... 353 363 10 2.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Operations Division consists of the Central Operations Group: Printing, Graphics and Direct Mail, Parking
Office, ID Office, Photo Studio, and Hair Care Services; Recording Studio, Post Office, and Facilities.
Operations and maintenance salaries will increase by $1,551,000 or
9.9 percent to $17,209,000. This increase is due to the addition of ten
FTEs, $400,000; budgeting for an expected COLA, $609,000; merit
funding, $408,000; and other adjustments, $134,000. Central Operations
is increasing its staff by four FTEs. Three FTEs will be required to
properly staff the warehouse facility and one additional FTE is needed
to provide administrative support. The Post Office is requesting four
FTEs to ensure that packages and mail are accurately tested, sorted and
delivered in a timely manner and two FTEs to provide administrative
support to the Superintendent of Package Delivery and Special Services.
Operations and maintenance expenses budget request is $8,893,000,
an increase of $2,264,000 or 34.2 percent compared to fiscal year 2003.
This increase is due to costs to screen Senate packages by a contractor
providing more secure package processing, $2,000,000; uniform parking
lot and street signage, $100,000; and to update furniture inventory,
$100,000.
The capital investment budget request is $29,516,000, an increase
of $23,219,000 or 368.7 percent compared to fiscal year 2003.
We request $13,500,000 for the acquisition of a new warehouse/mail
processing facility that will replace and consolidate our three
warehouse locations. Our current facilities do not meet GSA minimum
requirements, are functionally obsolete, and our largest location in
Alexandria has an expiring lease which the landlord will not renew on a
long-term basis. The new support facility will consolidate the
Alexandria warehouse and the two smaller warehouses into one space that
will meet the Senate's long-term space needs. It will include modern
physical security, optimal storage configuration, and material handling
equipment. In this facility, we will be able to implement efficient
operating procedures and an inventory control system. Importantly, the
new facility will meet all the space needs of the Secretary of the
Senate and the Sergeant at Arms. It will include museum quality
environmental controls for the Senate Curator and climate control for
the Senate Gift Shop, Stationery Store and the Senate Library. The new
support facility will include a mail and package screening area for the
Senate Post Office. This will enable the Senate to save $750,000 in
operating costs annually and improve service by assuming responsibility
for the package screening service that is currently performed by a
vendor. The Senate Post Office will also upgrade the existing mail
screening infrastructure to current standards.
The budget request also includes $7,675,000 to relocate the
Recording Studio to the Capitol Visitor Center. The relocation will
enable expended coverage of up to 12 simultaneous committee hearings
through a central production facility. Concurrent with the relocation,
we plan to upgrade the chamber audio system and our television and
radio production facilities. As a result of this and the final phase of
the Digital Migration Project, the Senate will have a truly state-of-
the-art studio for Senate and Committee broadcasts as well as for
communication with constituents.
Facilities will begin to acquire furniture and equipment for core
Senate space in the CVC, $1,485,000.
Several additional projects will commence in Operations: $745,000
to replace outdated publishing equipment; $500,000 to replace a 12-
year-old outgoing mail sorter with update equipment; $500,000 to
replace existing data collection and job tracking systems; and $150,000
to replace the outdated ID system. The updated equipment will enable us
to reduce maintenance and postage costs, allow job cost tracking and
produce higher quality products. The Post Office will acquire a custom
designed mail sorter to provide better accuracy, expedited sorting, and
a safer working environment and a mail delivery truck which will
expedite the delivery of incoming mail, $750,000 and $60,000,
respectively.
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year 2004
-------------------------- vs. Fiscal Year 2003
Technology Development Services Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2004 Percent
2003 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $8,768 $9,809 $1,041 11.9
Expenses............................................... $11,934 $17,420 $5,486 46.0
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $20,702 $27,229 $6,527 31.5
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
Capital Investment......................................... $4,358 $4,244 ($114) 2.6
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $4,518 $5,194 $676 15.0
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $29,578 $36,667 $7,089 24.0
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 125 126 1 0.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Technology Development Services Department consists of the Systems Development Services, Network Engineering
and Management, Enterprise IT Systems, Internet/Intranet and Research Services, and IT Security.
Operations and maintenance salaries will increase $1,041,000, or
11.9 percent, to $9,809,000. This increase is due to the addition of
one FTE, $74,000; funding for an expected COLA, $352,000; merit
funding, $234,000; and other adjustments, $382,000. Systems Development
is adding two FTEs for a Senior Information Technology Specialist to
support and maintain new and existing enterprise servers and a Senior
Software Specialist to assist with the Legislative Information System.
Partially offsetting this increase is a decrease of one FTE in Network
Engineering.
Operations and maintenance expense budget request is $17,420,000,
an increase of $5,486,000 or 46.0 percent compared to fiscal year 2003.
This increase is due to funding the operational support for the Senate
Messaging Infrastructure Project, $3,400,000; maintenance on data
communication networks and systems, $947,000; maintenance costs on
mainframe software, $618,000; delivery of an expanded Sergeant at Arms
organization intranet portal, $300,000; and increased maintenance costs
for voice equipment, $298,000.
Capital investments budget request is $4,244,000, a decrease of
$114,000 or 2.6 percent compared to fiscal year 2003.
Network Engineering requires $3,432,000 for upgrades to network
switches, firewalls, the Network Management System, and the state
office wide area network.
Nondiscretionary items budget request is $5,194,000, an increase of
$676,000 or 15.0 percent compared to fiscal year 2003. The request
consists of three projects that support the Secretary of the Senate:
contract maintenance for the Financial Management Information System
(FMIS), $2,596,000; enhancements to the Legislative Information System
(LIS), $1,968,000; and requirements definition for enhancements to the
Senate Payroll System, $630,000.
SENATE MESSAGING INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year 2004
-------------------------- vs. Fiscal Year 2003
SMI Project Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2004 Percent
2003 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $423 $441 $18 4.3
Expenses............................................... $3,593 $504 ($3,089) 86.0
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $4,016 $945 ($3,071) 76.5
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
Capital Investment......................................... $1,149 $0 ($1,149) 100.0
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $5,165 $945 ($4,220) 81.7
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 5 5 0 ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and maintenance salaries will increase $18,000, or 4.3
percent, to $441,000. This increase is due to funding for an expected
COLA, $16,000, merit funding, $10,000, and other adjustments, ($8,000).
Operations and maintenance expenses decrease $3,089,000, or 86.0
percent, to $504,000. The SMI Project is expected to move into the
maintenance phase by fiscal year 2004. Technology Development Services
is funding maintenance for SMI beginning in fiscal year 2004. The SMI
project team will be redeployed to address other initiatives for the
Sergeant at Arms. An organizational structure and charter will be
developed. The project is requesting $504,000 in operations and
maintenance funding, mainly for consulting services supporting major
initiatives.
Capital investments decrease $1,149,000, or 100.0 percent due to
the completion of the SMI project.
IT SUPPORT SERVICES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year 2004
-------------------------- vs. Fiscal Year 2003
IT Support Services Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2004 Percent
2003 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $5,694 $6,274 $580 10.2
Expenses............................................... $12,446 $15,547 $3,101 24.9
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $18,140 $21,821 $3,681 20.3
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $27,750 $29,689 $1,939 7.0
Capital Investment......................................... $4,025 $3,759 ($266) 6.6
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $49,915 $55,269 $5,354 10.7
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 101 102 1 1.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The IT Support Services Department consists of the Desktop/LAN Support, IT/Telecom Support, IT Research and
Deployment, and Equipment Services branches.
Operations and maintenance salaries increase $580,000, or 10.2
percent, to $6,274,000. This increase is due to the addition of one
FTE, $75,000; budgeting for an expected COLA, $223,000; merit funding,
$153,000; and other adjustments, $130,000. IT Research and Deployment
is adding one FTE as a senior information technology specialist to
support the new CCMS applications.
Operations and maintenance expense budget request is $15,547,000 in
fiscal year 2004, an increase of $3,101,000, or 24.9 percent compared
to fiscal year 2003. This increase is primarily due to an increase in
the cost of a new IT contract awarded in Spring 2002, $3,700,000, which
provides additional resources to install, support, and maintain the
Senate's PC's.
Allowances and allotments budget request is $29,689,000 in fiscal
year 2004, an increase of $1,939,000 or 7.0 percent compared to fiscal
year 2003. This budget supports voice and data communications for
Washington D.C. and state offices, $17,941,000; maintenance and
procurement of Members' constituent mail systems, $4,255,000;
procurement and maintenance of office equipment for Members' Washington
D.C. and state offices, $3,475,000; Desktop/LAN installation and
specialized support, $3,418,000; and the Appropriations Analysis and
Reporting System, $400,000. The increase in Telecom Services costs is
attributed to major new initiatives that include upgrading older
telephone systems in state offices, improving service over wide-area
network to provide multimedia capabilities and to take advantage of new
technology and continued efforts to ensure critical telecommunications
can be maintained under any circumstance.
Capital investments budget request is $3,759,000, a decrease of
$266,000, or 6.6 percent compared to fiscal year 2003.
IT Research and Deployment will require $1,500,000 for consulting
services and analysis of software for the redesign of the CCMS which
will better enable Senate offices to efficiently communicate with
constituents. Increased functionality will be added to the CCMS/Email
filtering system and list server capabilities will be added, $185,000
and $154,000 respectively.
The Wireless PDA project will commence with enhancements to
BlackBerry type systems, $300,000. The Public Key Infrastructure
Project will commence, $250,000, and will provide an encryption and
authentication system to secure outbound electronic messages to
constituents.
OFFICE SUPPORT SERVICES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year
-------------------------- 2004 vs. Fiscal Year
2003
Office Support Services Fiscal Year Fiscal Year -------------------------
2003 Budget 2004 Percent
Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries................................................ $1,846 $1,995 $149 8.1
Expenses................................................ $37 $37 $0 0
---------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance................ $1,883 $2,032 $149 7.9
Mandated Allowances & Allotments............................ $24,619 $27,298 $2,679 10.9
Capital Investment.......................................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
Nondiscretionary Items...................................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
---------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................. $26,502 $29,330 $2,828 10.7
===================================================
Staffing.................................................... 28 28 0 ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office Support Services Department consists of the Customer Support, Help and IT Request Processing, and
State Office Liaison branches.
Operations and maintenance salaries will increase $149,000, or 8.1
percent, to $1,995,000. This increase will fund an expected COLA,
$70,000, merit funding, $47,000, and other adjustments, $31,000.
Operations and maintenance expenses will remain flat at $37,000.
The allowances and allotments budget request increases $2,679,000
or 10.9 percent to $27,298,000. Factors contributing to this increase
are projected increases in rent for federal and commercial office
space, $1,934,000 and funding for computer allocations, $745,000.
STAFF OFFICES
[Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS Variance Fiscal Year 2004
-------------------------- vs. Fiscal Year 2003
Staff Offices Fiscal Year --------------------------
Fiscal Year 2004 Percent
2003 Budget Request Amount Incr/Decr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Operations & Maintenance:
Salaries............................................... $4,989 $5,854 $865 17.3
Expenses............................................... $1,459 $2,206 $747 51.2
----------------------------------------------------
Total General Operations & Maintenance............... $6,448 $8,060 $1,612 25.0
Mandated Allowances & Allotments........................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
Capital Investment......................................... $450 $0 ($450) ...........
Nondiscretionary Items..................................... $0 $0 $0 ...........
----------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................................ $6,898 $8,060 $1,162 16.8
====================================================
Staffing................................................... 82 85 3 3.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Staff Offices Division consists of Education and Training, Human Resources, Administrative Services,
Financial Management, Special Projects, and Information Technology.
Operations and maintenance salaries increase $865,000, or 17.3
percent, to $5,854,000. This increase is due to the addition of three
FTEs, $166,000; budgeting for an expected COLA, $185,000; merit
funding, $128,000; and other adjustments, $387,000. Financial
Management will be adding two FTEs to support the audited financial
statement project and to support contract administration.
Administrative Services is adding one FTE to provide administrative
support to the Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness and for
Special Projects.
Operations and maintenance expenses increase $747,000, or 51.2
percent, to $2,206,000. Information Technology increases $280,000 for
management consultants. Financial Management increases $210,000 for the
audited financial statement project, contract management support,
budget system enhancements, and software maintenance. Special Projects
increases $100,000 for miscellaneous expenses. Human Resources
increases $75,000 for physical abilities and medical guidelines updates
and labor relations training for management and supervisors.
Administrative Services increases $25,000 for the fare subsidy increase
and the installation and monthly service fees for TV cabling in the
Conference Center.
All capital investments will be completed by fiscal year 2004.
Senator Campbell. You have been here 7 weeks. Okay. We will
give you 1 more week to figure out a plan to protect all
Americans who visit the Capitol. Would that be enough time?
Mr. Pickle. We will master that, sir.
Senator Campbell. You will master it.
Well, I say that somewhat in jest, but I understand that
the demands of your job have risen considerably since the last
Sergeant at Arms was here. It is not going to be easy, and the
committee will certainly give you all the support and help that
we can.
BUDGET PRIORITIES
In the categories of your budget, you have significant
increases, but the subcommittee allocation might not be up to
the task. More than likely, it is going to be below what is
going to be proposed for the Legislative Branch agencies. So we
may have to make some reductions.
Do you have a priority list, things that you literally have
to have, and those things that could be put off?
Mr. Pickle. I think we do, but I think rather than give you
a quick answer now, I think we really ought to look at this--
there are some things that are impacted by the Capitol Visitor
Center's complete date that may give us some breathing room
here, and funding could be made available later, and that's
only come to light within the last week or so, but I think we
certainly would prioritize, if you so directed us to.
Senator Campbell. Okay. Well, I would like to, and I am
sure Senator Durbin would also like to know more about it, if
you do prioritize.
Mr. Pickle. Yes.
ALTERNATE COMPUTING FACILITY
Senator Campbell. What is the status of the alternate
computing facility that was funded in the fiscal year 2002
supplemental?
Mr. Pickle. We had a walk-through this past week. We should
be taking occupancy, along with the House and the Library of
Congress, sometime in May. And we hope to start the
installation of telecommunications equipment and data systems
by June or July. It is a very important aspect of security for
this body.
You have to wonder--being new here, you have to wonder why
this was not done before, and maybe 9/11 and October 15, 2001,
shed some light on the vulnerability. It was a vulnerability.
It is no longer a vulnerability.
MAIL PROCESSING
Senator Campbell. You mentioned the mail processing system.
Is that system going to be equipped to detect traces of things
like Anthrax, and so on?
Mr. Pickle. All mail that comes to the Capitol is
irradiated by the Post Office. When we take custody or receive
that mail, we do additional testing, but I would be somewhat
reluctant to, in an open forum like this----
Senator Campbell. Yes.
Mr. Pickle [continuing]. Talk about----
Senator Campbell. I do not want you to. That is good. All
right.
WAREHOUSE
The warehouse is the largest item in your budget, $13.5
million for that warehouse. Why is that needed, and when would
it be operational? Have you identified the site, or got the
plans done, or anything of that nature?
Mr. Pickle. We do not have a firm site. The dilemma that we
face, and the Senate, in particular, faces, all the offices
here, is: We have three very separate and distinct locations,
one of which is part of the Russell Building. None of these are
very suitable as warehouses. None have climate control or
environmental controls. They are not up to GSA standards, which
are fairly strict.
We also pay leases. We are paying for these. At one point,
we were in jeopardy of losing the largest warehouse we have,
which is down in Alexandria.
What we are attempting to do is consolidate in one
location, and realize a cost savings in the outyears for the
Senate, and also do a better job of providing for service to
the Senate.
Senator Campbell. All right. As I mentioned before, what we
are going to do, since we have a 10:15 vote, is take turns
chairing this while one votes, and the other ones stay here.
But if I can cut in, did you have an opening statement,
Senator Durbin?
Senator Durbin. I will just submit it for the record.
Senator Campbell. Okay. We will put that in the record.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Richard J. Durbin
Mr. Chairman, thank you for scheduling today's budget
oversight hearing on the Senate Sergeant at Arms and the U.S.
Capitol Police Board.
First of all, I want to welcome you, Mr. Pickle, and
congratulate you on your appointment as the 37th Sergeant at
Arms. It is certainly an honor for us to have someone with your
background serving us here in the Senate. In this time of
heightened security enhancements and measures, your knowledge
and expertise are truly appreciated.
I am also delighted to see Mr. Keith Kennedy, Deputy
Sergeant at Arms back here in the Senate. You served as Staff
Director of the Senate Appropriations Committee under Senator
Hatfield, and did a wonderful job. It is a pleasure to have you
back in the Senate and here with us today. I know that you and
Mr. Pickle will make a great team.
I also want to welcome Chief Gainer, a native of my home
state of Illinois. It is good to have you here representing our
Capitol Police force.
The excellent work of your predecessors is very apparent
today in the Senate. When we met in this subcommittee exactly
one year ago today, the talk of anthrax, major mail delays and
health risks associated with irradiated mail dominated a great
deal of our hearing. Today we don't have to deal with any of
those subjects. This is a tremendous relief.
The subject of security around the Capitol, however, is
now, more than ever, a serious one. You both have your work cut
out for you in this difficult time of international unrest. I
am glad to see the plans that you have outlined to assure that
our security needs are being addressed.
I want to congratulate the Capitol Police on its
recognition by the Commission on Accreditation for Law
Enforcement Agencies. This is a well-deserved and highly-
respected honor, and we who are fortunate enough to be under
your watchful eye, are thrilled for you.
I am glad to see the aggressive increase in officers and
civilians at the Capitol Police. I understand that the staffing
study you are conducting is nearly complete. I look forward to
receiving the results of this study.
SENATE MESSAGING SYSTEM
Senator Campbell. Let me ask you one other thing on the
Senate messaging system. There are 28 officers who have yet to
be migrated over to the new E-mail system, owing to production
limitations. What are those product limitations, and are there
future problems that we might expect with the Senate messaging
system? How much have you spent to date on that project?
Mr. Pickle. To date, we have spent $26 million on the SMI
project. There have been problems.
Senator Campbell. What kind of problems?
Mr. Pickle. Well, I think that the Senate poses a very
unique challenge, even to the quality of the vendors that we
are using, and we are using two of the most recognizable names
in the country, and certainly two of the most technologically-
advanced companies in the country.
We do pose some unique challenges to the Senate. When you
view the Senate as being a large corporation with--when you
look at 138 offices here in Washington, and approximately 440
or so spread around the country, and you are supporting over
8,000 PC desktops, not to mention laptops, and you have some
very unique needs at each committee and each member office,
even the finest technology companies find this a unique
challenge.
There are architecture problems, and there are software
problems that are being addressed. Our vendors are working
around the clock with us, and they have been here. They have
been very supportive, and we are relying on their expertise to
get us through this.
We hope to have the migrations complete by the first part
of June. That is our goal. It is working very well. There have
been bugs, and you are going to have bugs.
Senator Campbell. Are you going to need additional funds to
ensure its operation?
Mr. Pickle. It is premature at this time to say. I believe
this: We will need maintenance funds to maintain it, but the
final design, and the final architecture has not been arrived
at yet. We want a system that is flawless, and we are not
flawless yet.
Senator Campbell. Okay. Senator Durbin, did you have any
questions?
Senator Durbin. I only have one question. I would like to
apologize to Mr. Pickle that we did not have a chance to get
together yesterday, but I certainly look forward to sitting
down with you.
MAIL PROCESSING
Are you keeping track, are records being kept of the mail
processing for the Senate, to give us any indication as to
whether or not we are back up to speed as to where we were
before the Anthrax problem?
Mr. Pickle. Yes, we are. We are not where we were before in
that a letter earmarked for the Senate today will take
approximately 6 days, on average, to arrive here, from postmark
to delivery. Now, of course, that is probably not faster than
it was prior to October 15th, but we are back up as far as
processing. The mail handling is safe, it is efficient, and we
are actually saving money over where we were right after
October 15th.
I want to, if I could just for a minute, give credit to the
Sergeant at Arms Office for something that people call Yankee
ingenuity. When we looked at that time on how we could get
packaging, or packages and cargo delivered here in a safe
manner, we had some very large cost estimates from vendors, in
excess of $1.5 million annually. The Post Office and the
operations folks here, led by Rick Edwards and Harry Green, our
Postmaster, came up with a wonderful idea at a cost of $30,000,
which is more state of the art and more efficient than the
vendor was able to provide for us.
So we are making progress, but the fact that we have so
many processes and procedures to go through to ensure safe mail
delivery are going to certainly slow down mail delivery.
Senator Durbin. I have two other questions. Is our approach
to dealing with mail different than the House's approach?
Mr. Pickle. Yes. Very much so. The House is much more
reliant on vendors at a much higher cost.
Senator Durbin. Can you give us a comparative cost on our
mail system, as opposed to their mail system?
Mr. Pickle. I would have to come back to you later with
that, Senator. I would be happy to.
Senator Durbin. They have contracted out to a firm to
handle this.
Mr. Pickle. They use a vendor for most of theirs, and they
do have--of course, we have a different amount of the mail
volume than they have, but their process, I do know from
dealing with them and talking with them, is much more expensive
than ours.
Senator Durbin. What kind of complaints do you receive from
Senate offices from the workers who are opening mail and
processing it, as to health complaints, or concerns about
fumes, or reaction, or that sort of thing?
Mr. Pickle. There have been, I believe I am correct, about
200-plus complaints received from Senate staff, who complained
of breathing problems, rashes, that type of complaint, smelling
fumes. We brought in a unit of the CDC, the National Institute
of Safety and Health, who did a very comprehensive study in
conjunction with the Attending Physician's Office. We found a
couple of things. There are, as they say, aromatic, hydrocarbon
fumes being given off by this mail that has been irradiated.
However, the levels are such that they do not pose a health
hazard, but be that as it may, there are still a small
percentage of people who are complaining and believe that they
do have some illness from this, and the Attending Physician is
monitoring this very carefully.
Senator Durbin. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Pickle. Thank you.
Senator Durbin. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
STAFFING INCREASES
Senator Campbell. All right. Just maybe one more before we
are done. Your budget includes 17 additional staff over fiscal
year 2003. As I understand it, you have not reached the
approved 2003 level of 829; therefore, the real increase of
number of people that you will be hiring will be 49. What are
they going to be working in, if you can say that in the public
forum?
Mr. Pickle. Well, first of all, there are going to be--out
of the 17 that we have asked for this year, 6 are earmarked
towards security functions. Some of these will be working in
mail processing and mail handling. The others will be working
in the area of technology and central operations, to take on
some of the additional responsibilities that we have taken on
since September and October of 2001.
We have not filled those positions, as you indicated, which
we were given last year. There are a number of reasons for
that. First of all, my predecessor was very fiscally
responsible. He did not want to go out front and start hiring
people, unless he knew that we had the funding for it, and I
concur wholeheartedly. We have approximately 73 postings out
there now, and we are not just hiring people who apply. We are
looking for the best people to work here. We are doing it very
aggressively, but we are doing it in a very deliberate fashion.
Senator Campbell. I see. Okay. Before Sergeant at Arms
Pickle is done, Senator, did you have any questions or
comments?
COMMUNICATION DEVICES
Senator Bennett. Did you talk about the Blackberries and
the beepers being----
Senator Campbell. No.
Senator Bennett. Let us get to the real important stuff.
Senator Campbell. I had hoped I got away from that one. Do
you want to do that?
Senator Bennett. Okay. I feel like I am wearing a
bandolier, with all kinds of grenades hanging on it, with----
Senator Campbell. Cell phone.
Senator Bennett [continuing]. And a cell phone, and a
Blackberry, and so on.
I have stopped carrying the beeper now, because the
Blackberry will tell me when there is a vote. Are we moving
forward on anything to----
Mr. Pickle. We are, Mr. Chairman. I do not want to sound
like a broken record.
Senator Bennett. I am no longer the chairman.
Mr. Pickle. I am sorry. I do not want to----
Senator Bennett. There are days when I saw the allocation
to the Ag Subcommittee that I wished for the chairmanship of
the Legislative Branch, because we got whacked a whole lot
worse than this subcommittee.
Mr. Pickle. I do not want to sound like a broken record on
this response, but, yes, we are looking. The Blackberry, at the
time it was selected, really was the best device out there.
More recently, there are several competitors who offer a
product, several products, which we are looking at now.
We agree that to have two, three, four instruments on your
body is just not very productive, and it is a problem, but
trying to eliminate that single point of failure, and get it
down to one device, or two at the most, is what our goal is.
Senator Bennett. Thank you. It is a very serious, major
national problem.
Mr. Pickle. Yes.
Senator Bennett. International.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Senator Campbell. Okay. Without giving away any information
that you should not in a public forum, how do you feel about
our readiness for the Capitol complex, compared to 1 year, 1\1/
2\ years ago?
Mr. Pickle. I think there is no comparison. Post-9/11 and
post-10/15/2001, Al Lenhardt, then Sergeant at Arms, and his
staff, did an outstanding job, along with the police
department, of preparing the Capitol for preventing future
attacks.
There are, as you say, a large number of highly classified
projects ongoing. There are many things that we are doing which
are visible and not classified, such as posting barriers,
badging, mail processing, mail handling, but there are many
things that we are doing which are not visible, and I feel that
the posture of the police department is at the highest it has
ever been, the alert is high, and we are doing all we can to
support them.
Senator Campbell. Well, I know there have been a lot of
changes, and I still remember 9/11, when a policeman came
running into our office and told us we had to evacuate, but
that there was no evacuation plan, so I know we have come a
long way. Thank you.
If there are any further questions, we will put those in
writing to you, if any other members have a question.
CAPITOL POLICE BOARD
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. PICKLE, CHAIRMAN, CAPITOL
POLICE BOARD
ACCOMPANIED BY:
TERRANCE GAINER, CHIEF, U.S. CAPITOL POLICE
WILSON LIVINGOOD, HOUSE SERGEANT AT ARMS
ALAN HANTMAN, ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL
Senator Campbell. We will go on and take the testimony of
Chief Gainer now, if you could come to the table there.
Did you not have an additional statement for this, Mr.
Pickle?
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. PICKLE
Mr. Pickle. I was going to, but realizing that time is
short, I am going to dispense with that, and just introduce, if
I can, the other members of the Police Board.
Senator Campbell. Okay.
Did Mr. Livingood also have a statement, too?
Mr. Pickle. No. It will just be myself very briefly, and
Chief Gainer.
To my left is Bill Livingood, House Sergeant at Arms, Chief
Terry Gainer, who was sworn in last June, and to my right, Alan
Hantman, Architect of the Capitol. This board is very committed
to doing the right thing for the Congress. We are very
committed to supporting this police department in any way we
can. We think they have done an outstanding job, and rather
than take up time telling you what I think, I am going to turn
it over to Chief Gainer, sir.
Senator Campbell. Chief, welcome to the committee.
STATEMENT OF CHIEF TERRANCE W. GAINER
Chief Gainer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
subcommittee. I am honored to appear before you today to
discuss the United States Capitol Police fiscal year 2004
budget request.
Mr. Chairman, I would first like to thank the committee for
their continued support of the Capitol Police. The pay and
other incentives received in the fiscal year 2003 appropriation
are a significant advantage in recruiting, hiring, and
retaining good men and women in officer positions, as well as
attracting highly qualified civilian professionals for key
support roles and functions.
We would also like to thank the committee for support of
the acquisition of the new offsite delivery facility, and the
new headquarters building, and we have been working with the
Architect of the Capitol to develop our requirements for the
new facilities, and look forward to the day when we can occupy
facilities that are capable of meeting our expanded needs.
I am pleased and proud to announce a recent and important
accomplishment that the men and women of the Capitol Police
have achieved. The Capitol Police is the first full-service
federal law enforcement agency to become fully accredited by
the Commission on the Accreditation for Law Enforcement
Agencies, otherwise known as CALEA.
The Capitol Police voluntarily subjected themselves, and
were accredited after a lengthy process by CALEA. This
accreditation by CALEA is a means of matching and scoring the
Department against cutting edge, professionally recognized
standards of law enforcement excellence. I congratulate the men
and women of the Capitol Police for this outstanding
accomplishment, and their dedication to the mission of this
organization, and the wisdom of the previous chiefs to engage
in this process.
The United States Capitol Police, as you know, is in a
period of transition. Due to the ever-increasing and underlying
threat to Congress, the role of the Capitol Police has expanded
to ensuring the continuity of the Legislative Branch of
Government, and the national legislative process, as well as
extending a sense of safety and protection to all who work in
and visit the Capitol complex. We work very closely with the
Sergeant at Arms, and with the leadership of both the House and
Senate, to ensure that the security of the Congress is
appropriately managed.
The ability of the United States Congress to meet its
constitutional responsibilities is very much intertwined with
the ability of the Capitol Police to meet its mission. The
Capitol Police are ready and willing to meet the challenges a
changing environment poses to the structure of our operations.
Our budget request, as you have noted, is approximately
$290.5 million, which as a result of the supplemental, can be
reduced to $275.5 million. It represents a reasonable,
necessary, and balanced plan to directly address the threats of
today, and proposes the utilization of resources to ensure the
protection of Congress, its members, staff, visitors, and the
legislative process in the future.
Our proposal is robust. The implementation of the United
States Capitol Police strategic plan, which this budget
supports, will ensure the uninterrupted continuation of the
Congress. This committee has begun funding, and the Capitol
Police are engaging in an aggressive increase, in both police
officers and civilian support personnel.
This increase in staff is the largest and most important
part of our budget, and hence, our plans. The attainment of our
goals depends, in part, on having the right people in the right
strength and numbers, organized into an effective and flexible
blend of capabilities and skills. In order to meet this goal,
and provide a measured approach to adequately staff the
Department to meet the threats and challenges we face in
security operations, we have undertaken and are in the process
of finalizing a comprehensive staffing study of all areas
within the Department. This study, which is tied to our
strategic plan, represents our professional recommendations for
adequately staffing the Capitol Police, with the right mix of
sworn and civilian personnel, to meet the needs of the current
threat environment.
We will provide the committee copies of the study, with the
appropriate staff briefings, upon its approval and review by
the Capitol Police Board. The Capitol Police, as of today, has
1,393 sworn personnel, and we are anticipating concluding
fiscal year 2003 with 1,569, and a budget request to finish
fiscal year 2004 with 1,833 sworn officers.
We also have 227 civilians, with the goal to finish fiscal
year 2004, with 573 onboard professionals. This substantive and
substantial increase in the staff is the backbone of the plans
to fully staff all the necessary law enforcement areas around
the Capitol complex, and to be able to provide sufficient
intelligence capabilities, robust physical security, and
response functions, as well as adequate administrative and
logistic support services within the Police Department.
The fiscal year 2004 estimate for salaries is $218.3
million, or a 25.1 percent increase over the previous year. Our
general expense request of approximately $72.2 million will be
reduced by the $15 million related to the fiscal year 2003
supplemental, for a total of approximately $57.2 million to
fund the operational and administrative capacity of the
Department.
We have designed and implemented security systems to
protect and prevent unauthorized physical and electronic access
around this complex. A good portion of this budget will go to
maintaining these systems at peak performance, and creating
necessary expansions. Maintenance, life-cycle replacement, and
expansions of services will cost approximately $8 million over
the previous year.
Also included is the equipment required of the new off-site
delivery facility. The Capitol Police will incorporate in the
facility cutting-edge technologies to examine all incoming
deliveries, and stop any harmful package from entering the
Capitol complex. The equipment and technology required to
appropriately complete this facility will cost approximately
$4.3 million.
Funding is also requested for the accommodations, such as
personnel, equipment, new staff, modernization of core
information technology systems, and creation of the Capitol's
first six-person mounted horse unit. We are also developing a
Hazardous Materials Response Team, HMRT. This highly trained
team, with civilian professionals will stand ready to deal with
any chemical, biological, or radiological threat which could
occur in the Hill.
We have other highly trained elements that deal with
explosives, armed intruders, unruly crowds, disturbed
individuals, or other individuals who make threats. All of our
response teams and, in fact, all of our operations rely on
effective communications. The technological world of
communications is constantly changing, and we need to keep in
step with advances in this area.
The Capitol Police employ several modalities of
communication for effectiveness and redundancy. This budget
plan requests additional funds to expand and update our
communications capabilities to provide increased effectiveness
in our operations. Whether it is effective communications,
effective incident response, effective staffing strengths, or
simply effective operations, we value being the best.
The men and women of the Capitol Police are talented,
motivated, and engaged professionals who take great heart in
protecting this Congress. As Chief of the Capitol Police, and
on the Department's 175th anniversary, I take great pride in
the many years of service that the United States Capitol Police
have provided the Congress.
Building on that legacy, we at the United States Capitol
Police look forward to continuing to safeguard the Congress,
staff, and visitors to the Capitol complex during these
challenging times, and we look forward to working with the
Congress, and particularly this committee.
PREPARED STATEMENTS
I thank you for your time, and I am ready to take any
questions you might have.
Senator Campbell. Okay. Thank you.
[The statements follow:]
Prepared Statement of William H. Pickle
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, we are honored to appear
before you to discuss the fiscal year 2004 Budget Request for the
United States Capitol Police. With me today are the other members of
the U.S. Capitol Police Board, Mr. Bill Livingood, Mr. Alan Hantman,
and Chief Terrance Gainer. As you know Chief Gainer was sworn in as
Chief of Police in June of last year.
Having been appointed on March 17, 2003, I have been a member and
the Chairman of the Capitol Police Board for a relatively short period
of time. During that time, and based on past experiences, I have
developed a strong respect for the capabilities and professionalism of
the men and women of the United States Capitol Police. I would also
like to express my appreciation to Bill Livingood, Alan Hantman, and
Chief Gainer for their outstanding contributions and for their wise
counsel during this learning period I am traversing. We have developed
an excellent working relationship in this short period of time. A
spirit of cooperation and unity has developed between us that will be
evident in the future and I feel will best serve the Members of
Congress, staff and visitors to the Capitol complex during these times
of uncertainty and heightened security.
This spirit of cooperation is strengthened by our shared focus and
mission to protect and support the Congress in meeting its
Constitutional responsibilities. The three thrusts that the Department
has identified--Prevention, Response, and Support are key to meeting
their mission. I support the vision of the United States Capitol Police
to be a model federal law enforcement agency, leveraging partnerships,
and being in the forefront in developing and implementing state-of-the-
art security, law enforcement, and incident response programs to ensure
the continued protection of the Congress and legislative process in a
changing threat environment. I further support training and other
measures being taken to enable the men and women of the Department to
meet the increasing challenges, and to perform at the highest levels of
professionalism. I will undoubtedly have these items in mind when
making decisions that impact the security of the Congress and impact
the Capitol Police.
I know that there are issues facing the Capitol Police. Facilities
and space requirements are one of the critical issues. It appears that
progress is being made in this area and in the not to distant future we
could have movement on a new headquarters facility, and an offsite
delivery center. I feel it is critical that we make sure that this
momentum continues, because other plans are dependent upon it. One
plan, which is dependent upon facilities and space, is staffing
increases. The Capitol Police began, with committee support, an
aggressive staffing increase. This budget addresses critical security
needs for more officers and support staff to carry out the mission of
the Capitol Police. These staffing increases are vital and I urge your
support of the staffing strengths laid out in this budget plan, as well
as coming decisions regarding facilities.
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I want you to know that
I am very excited to be here and that I am looking forward to working
with this Board, and the Committee on the security of the Capitol
complex and the issues facing the Capitol Police. Thank you for this
opportunity to appear before you today, Chief Gainer will present his
remarks regarding current operations and Capitol Police plans for the
coming fiscal year.
______
Prepared Statement of Terrance W. Gainer
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am honored to
appear before you today to discuss the United States Capitol Police
fiscal year 2004 budget request.
Mr. Chairman, I would first like to thank the Committee for their
continued support of the Capitol Police. The pay and other incentives
received in the fiscal year 2003 appropriation are a significant
advantage in recruiting, hiring and retaining good men and women in
officer positions, as well as attracting highly qualified civilian
professionals for key support roles and functions.
We would also like to thank the Committee for its support of the
acquisition of a new off-site delivery facility and a new headquarters
building. We have been working with the Architect of the Capitol to
develop our requirements for the new facilities and look forward to the
day when we can occupy facilities that are capable of meeting our
expanding needs.
I am pleased and proud to announce a recent and important
accomplishment of the men and women of the Capitol Police. The Capitol
Police is the first full-service federal law enforcement agency to
become fully accredited by the Commission on Accreditation for Law
Enforcement Agencies otherwise known as CALEA. The Capitol Police
voluntarily subjected themselves and were accredited after a lengthy
process by CALEA. This accreditation by CALEA is a means of matching
and scoring the Department against cutting edge, professionally
recognized standards of law enforcement excellence. I congratulate the
men and women of the Capitol Police for this outstanding accomplishment
and their dedication to the mission of this organization.
The United States Capitol Police is in a period of transition. Due
to the ever increasing and underlying threat to the Congress, the role
of the Capitol Police has expanded to ensuring the continuity of the
Legislative Branch of government and the national legislative process
as well as extending a sense of safety and protection to all who work
in and visit the Capitol complex. We work very closely with the
Sergeants at Arms and with leadership of both the House and the Senate
to ensure that the security of the Congress is appropriately managed.
The ability of the U.S. Congress to meet its constitutional
responsibilities is intertwined with the ability of the Capitol Police
to meets its mission. The Capitol Police is ready and willing to meet
the challenge this changing environment poses to the structure of our
operations. Our budget request of approximately $290.5 million, which
as a result of the supplemental can be reduced to $275.5 million,
represents a reasonable, necessary and balanced plan to directly
address the threats of today and proposes the utilization of resources
to ensure the protection of Congress, its Members, staff, visitors and
the legislative process into the future. Our proposal is robust. The
implementation of the USCP strategic plan, which this budget supports,
will ensure the uninterrupted continuation of the Congress.
This Committee has begun funding, and the Capitol Police are
engaging in, an aggressive increase in police officers and civilian
support personnel. This increase in staff is the largest and most
important part of our budget, and hence our plans. The attainment of
our goals depend, in part, on having the right people, in the right
strength and numbers, organized into an effective and flexible blend of
capabilities and skills. In order to meet this goal and provide a
measured approach to adequately staff the Department to meet the
threats and challenges that face security operations of the Congress we
have undertaken, and are in process of finalizing, a comprehensive
staffing study of all areas within the Department. This study, which is
tied to our strategic plan, represents our professional recommendations
for adequately staffing the Capitol Police with the right mix of sworn
and civilian personnel to meet the needs of the current threat
environment. We will provide the Committee copies of the study with
appropriate staff briefings upon completion, which is expected within
the next few weeks. The Capitol Police, as of April 5th had 1,393 sworn
personnel and we anticipate concluding fiscal year 2003 with 1,569 and
a budget request to finish fiscal year 2004 with 1,833 sworn officers.
We also have 227 civilians with a goal to finish fiscal year 2004 with
573 on-board professionals. This substantive increase in staff is the
backbone of plans to fully staff all necessary law enforcement areas
around the Capitol complex and to be able to provide sufficient
intelligence capabilities, robust physical security and response
functions as well as adequate administrative and logistical support
services within the Police Department. The fiscal year 2004 estimate
for salaries is $218.3 million or a 25.1 percent increase over the
previous year.
Our general expense request of approximately $72.2 million will be
reduced by $15 million, related to the fiscal year 2003 supplemental,
for a total of approximately $57.2 million to fund the operational and
administrative capacity of the Department. We have designed and
implemented security systems to detect and prevent unauthorized
physical and electronic access around the complex. A good portion of
this budget will go to maintaining these systems at peak performance
and creating necessary expansions. Maintenance, life cycle replacement
and expansion of services will cost approximately $8 million over the
previous year. Also included is the fit out of the new offsite delivery
facility. The Capitol Police will incorporate, in the facility, cutting
edge technologies to examine all incoming deliveries and stop any
harmful package from entering the Capitol complex. The equipment and
technology required to appropriately complete this facility will cost
$4.3 million. Funding is also requested for the accommodation, such as
personal equipment, of new staff, modernization of core IT systems and
creation of the Capitol's first six person mounted horse unit.
We are also developing a Hazardous Materials Response Team (HMRT).
This highly trained team of civilian professionals will stand ready to
deal with any chemical, biological, or radiological incident, which
might occur on the Hill. We have other highly trained elements that
deal with explosives, armed intruders, unruly crowds, disturbed
individuals, and individuals who make threats, etc.
All of our response teams and, in fact, all of our operations
depend on effective communications. The technological world of
communications is constantly changing and we need to keep in step with
advances in this area. The Capitol Police employ several modalities of
communication for effectiveness and redundancy. This budget plan
requests additional funds to expand and update our communications
capabilities to provide increased effectiveness in our operations.
Whether it is effective communications, effective incident
response, effective staffing strengths, or simply effective operations,
we value being the best. The men and women of the Capitol Police are
talented, motivated, and engaged professionals who take great heart in
protecting this Congress.
As Chief of the Capitol Police on the USCP's 175th anniversary, I
take great pride in the many years of service this Department has
provided to the Congress. Building on that legacy, we at the USCP look
forward to continuing to safeguard the Congress, staff, and visitors to
the Capitol complex during these challenging times. And we look forward
to working with the Congress and particularly this Committee.
I thank you for your time and am ready to take any questions you
may have.
Senator Campbell. Did you have any additional comments, Mr.
Pickle?
Mr. Pickle. No.
MOUNTED HORSE UNIT
Senator Campbell. Okay. Well, we have got our second call
to vote. Senator Durbin will be back in 1 minute, and he will
chair until I get back.
I have got a number of questions. Let me ask you one that I
am particularly interested in first, and that is: You included
in your budget funds to start a mounted horse unit. Long before
I was ever in public office, that is what I did. I was a
training officer in Sacramento, and part of my responsibility
was to train police horses.
In fact, I wrote the manual for the Sacramento Sheriff's
Department and the Law Enforcement Academy, and we did not have
the budget to do that, but we watched other departments, like
San Francisco, the success they had with crowd control during
the riots years before that, and we were convinced, based on
what other departments were doing, that one mounted patrolman
in a crowd control situation is the equivalent of about ten on
foot. But it requires some additional problems, like
transportation, stabling, all the rest of the stuff.
We did not have the budget to do it, so we might just put
that in your think cap. It is probably a little different here,
because a lot of people in this part of the country, they do
not ride. Further out West, as you probably know, a lot more
people do ride. What we did is: We found the police officer who
had an interest and who owned his own horse, and the department
leased them, not for much. I think it was $15 a day, as I
remember, and the officers provided their own transportation to
get them to work, and it saved the department a ton of money in
not buying horses, not worrying about stabling, not worrying
about feed, and doing all of the rest of the things.
So I remember, we had about 30 on the mounted division of
patrol. They only worked summers, and then we trained them in
the wintertime, but they made a terrific impact for that
department. And most big departments now use horses, not only
because they are great with crowd control, but people like
them, too. We found that they were public relations tools in
dealing with visitors in our county parks.
The only bad experience we ever had, I would have to tell
you, is that we had this old cowboy that was also a policeman,
and he was a team roper, and we were out on patrol one day by
the parks, and we had this guy in a motorbike that kept zipping
through, and we could not get him to stop. He would outrun us,
because he was on a light motorcycle.
Unbeknownst to the rest of us, this one sheriff, one
deputy, he brought a rope with him one day, and he tied one end
to his saddle horn, and when the guy went by, he roped him, and
jerked him off his motorbike.
He did not come back, by the way. He did not do that any
more. So that was the only bad experience we ever had with
them. All of the rest of the experiences with mounted patrol
horses were good, so I want to do whatever I can to help you. I
think it would just be a real benefit.
The Park Police get horses donated, and they have a stable,
as you know, down here. They have one up in Rock Creek Park,
and they have another one right down here on the mall, too. I
do not know what you had in your long-range plans to get a unit
going, but I just want to commend you for doing that, and I
think it is really going to make a very strong addition to the
department.
Chief Gainer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In light of that, I
would like to double the request from six to twelve.
Senator Campbell. I just got you a whole bunch of
motorcycles. We have to do one thing at a time here. I will be
back in just a moment.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR RICHARD J. DURBIN
Senator Durbin [presiding]. How are you?
Chief Gainer. Good. Thank you, sir. It is good to see you.
Senator Durbin. Please proceed. I see your family all the
time in Chicago. They are doing well.
Chief Gainer. Thank you, Senator. I just concluded my
remarks, and I am available for questions, sir.
ADDITIONAL OFFICERS
Senator Durbin. Good. Now, it is my turn. Let me ask you, I
think it was 1 or 2 years ago, maybe last year, we talked about
800 new officers in the Capitol Police. Tell me what the goal
is today, how many more officers we are talking about.
Chief Gainer. We have just completed our staffing plan. It
took us a number of months to do that, and it was done from top
to bottom within the Department, and it built off an earlier
plan that the Department had done, as well as an outside
vendor, who came in and did an analysis. We have just submitted
that plan in the last couple of days to our Sergeant at Arms,
so they have not had a chance to really digest it, but as you
know, our current sworn strength is 1,393, and we anticipate
finishing fiscal year 2003 with 1,569, and we would like to
move towards 1,833 at the end of 2004. That is just the sworn I
am talking about. I know that is a substantial increase. I
would like to break down the larger areas of that.
We would need 138 officers to staff in accordance with that
1998 study that we did, which was done in concert with the
Secret Service, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms, and the U.S. Marshals Service, and the outside
vendor, but that would permit us to post one officer outside an
entrance for deterrence and surveillance, one officer at a
magnetometer, one officer at the X-ray machine, and then
another officer for surveillance behind that. Some of that was
born out of our experience when our officers were killed in
1998.
One hundred and six additional officers then would be
required to fully staff our explosive detection equipment, so
that the itemizers that we think should be at each of the
entrances for staff, or civilian, or visitors would have that
additional capability.
The Capitol Visitor Center will require 135 additional
officers, given at least eight new posts, the magnetometer
positions that will be there. The Botanical Garden, when it is
fully staffed, and all of our officers are deployed there,
would require an additional 27 officers. All these additions
end up meaning you need more first-and second-line supervisors,
so that would require 63 more.
In addition, because of the different vulnerability in
attacks, and the threat of attacks that we have, we would put
119 more officers in and about the area, this includes
increased visibility posts, our threats section, and to our
protection unit.
Senator Durbin. So the original estimate of 800, I do not
know if you are familiar with that, and I--was that last year
or the year before last year? Has that number changed? I
believe we are talking about uniformed officers in 800. The
goal of finding 800 officers over a given period of time, I do
not know how many years it was----
Chief Gainer. That has remained about the same then.
Senator Durbin. About the same.
Chief Gainer. Yes, sir.
ADDITIONAL CIVILIAN STAFF
Senator Durbin. The civilian requirement, though, has gone
up.
Chief Gainer. It has gone up significantly. We have 227 on
board now, and we would like to finish 2004 with 573, and,
again, I know that is a whopping increase, but let me just hit
the highlight of those areas which are above our current
authorization.
Some 59, nearly 60, would be just in the physical security
area alone, whether it is physical security systems,
countermeasures, and construction security. Another 143 would
be in the administrative support area. Our Human Resource
Division, with some of the growth, and taking over the
responsibilities that were heretofore done by either the Senate
or House, both our financial, our procurement, and the
management of personnel, is very taxed. I think some of the GAO
reports and others have appropriately criticized us for not
having enough people to do the job there. So that
administrative support, physical services, legal, additional
trainers, would be 143.
Logistics, whether it is property, vehicles, or facility,
would require another 23.
Our strategic operations and planning and incident
management would require another 56 people, let me break that
down. As I have indicated, the accreditation process in my
remarks, we have just been approved for accreditation. It does
require some people to maintain that. Our HMRT would grow. It
is a new unit, that I believe has been previously authorized
for 60 people, and our strategic operation and planning, where
we are really merging a lot of the different planning
functions, and adding, I think, to there, would require a total
of 56. Our canine, off-site, investigations, and security aides
would add an additional 15.
Senator Durbin. If you attain these goals, what will be the
total complement of the Capitol Police?
Chief Gainer. The total number ultimately would be 1,833
sworn, and 573 civilians, for a fiscal year 2004 total of just
over, as my adders are adding behind me, and we project some of
the civilian growth that I discussed above would occur in
fiscal year 2005.
Senator Durbin. It is 2,400, roughly, somewhere in that
range.
Chief Gainer. It is 2,929 at the end of fiscal year 2005.
Senator Durbin. Historically, give me an idea, what was it
1 or 2 years ago, before September 11th, let us say? Do you
have any idea?
Chief Gainer. I do not have that immediately in front of
me, Senator. I will get that for you, sir. [As of September 30,
2001, the Department had a total of 1,364 employees].
Senator Durbin. It is clear, it is substantially----
Chief Gainer. It is a big growth.
RECRUITING OFFICERS
Senator Durbin. I will be the first to acknowledge that the
men and women who serve in the Capitol Police have done an
extraordinary job since September 11th at great sacrifice,
personal and family sacrifice. We cannot thank them enough. We
had a little button made. That did not say it. I mean it was--
our gratitude is genuine.
I need to ask a question, though, because when we asked at
an earlier panel--I am not sure that you were part of it--how
many people have to be interviewed before you find,
successfully find a new uniformed officer in the Capitol
Police. I believe the number was ten. Is that still----
Chief Gainer. That is an accurate number, but I am really
delighted to say that we are not having any problems with the
recruitment issue, and I think that is in a large part due to a
couple of things.
The pay package that you have agreed to, especially in the
last year, has put us in the forefront in this area, plus the
Department continues to gain a reputation of a good place to
work, with a lot of different opportunities. And to the extent
that other departments, whether it is the city or the
surrounding states are not hiring, it is to our advantage.
So at the moment, our impediment to getting people sworn in
is our ability to get them through the police academy at
Glynco. We anticipate, I think, about 360 people completing
that program next year. In addition, we are looking at a
lateral entry process that may permit us to bring any number of
people in who are already trained either at FLETC or other
certified academies, and bring them in through an instruction
program that we would have here, so we could even grow quicker.
STAFFING ALTERNATIVES
Senator Durbin. This is a personnel-intensive effort. What
efforts are you making to find alternatives that would deal
with security in a way that would require fewer people?
Chief Gainer. Well, one of the ways you would do that is
through overtime. There has to be a balance between the right
number of people and the amount of overtime that is acceptable,
this is more of an operational and cost issue than hiring
people.
Senator Durbin. I do not think my question was clear. What
I am looking for is: Is there an alternative to this personnel-
intensive increase? Have you looked to technology, and other
means to establish security that would not require as many
FTEs?
Chief Gainer. Yes. I mean technology is key to how we are
managing what we do, but at the moment, we are leveraging the
technology to the greatest extent we can. But given the number
of doors, and garages, and entrances, that is where a lot of
this labor-intensive deployment comes in. Even as we get to the
opening of the Capitol Visitor Center, there is no indication
at this point that other doors and entrances would be closed,
so that all the technology and security that the Capitol
Visitor Center brings would just be added personnel.
PUBLIC ACCESS
Senator Durbin. At this time, we still have limited public
access, do we not, to Capitol Hill and some of its buildings?
Chief Gainer. Well, the total numbers are limited, but all
staff, member, and public tours are open.
Senator Durbin. In terms of Capitol tours as well, is that
back up to the level that it was before September 11th?
Chief Gainer. It is not.
Senator Durbin. Is it envisioned that we will open the
Capitol again to that same group or same number in the near
future?
Chief Gainer. I think we have to look at that on a weekly
or monthly basis, and work with the Senate and the House
Sergeant at Arms to determine what the appropriate number ought
to be. Even as the war in Iraq was beginning to wind down, and
we had anticipated that the threat level to the United States
was going to be changed, we were examining that and working
with both the Sergeant at Arms in moving towards opening
further. I think as security information changes, hopefully, we
will be able to suggest allowing more people in the Capitol.
LOC POLICE MERGER
Senator Durbin. Some people would be surprised to learn
that there are several different police forces on Capitol Hill,
one of them being at the Library of Congress, and this
committee has asked to see if we can integrate the Capitol
Police with the Library of Congress security force. Can you
tell me what progress has been made on that?
Chief Gainer. Well, we are moving along with that rapidly,
as you know, the law requires that I propose a plan to this
committee and others by mid-August, I believe August 19th. I
have had a series of personal meetings with the Librarian of
the Congress and the Deputy Librarian. We have formed
committees to work through the major issues, like the joint
operations, personnel issues, and legal issues. We have hired a
contractor, a former chief of police, who participated in a
large merger of a city police department and county agencies.
So, I believe we are well on track to present the plan, and
the costs, and the implication of doing that. I also would make
the record clear, from my point of view, that having a single
department, under the command of the Capitol Police and under
our budget control is better for security, and is very doable,
as we work through all those technical issues to achieve that.
Senator Durbin. I support it, of course, but I want to ask
you two questions that have come up. One is: What are the
different standards that we have, for retirement, for example,
between the Library of Congress, security, and Capitol Police?
Are you taking that into consideration, so that there is some
accommodation or grandfathering of security officers currently
at the library?
Chief Gainer. Senator, that is one of the things we would
be looking at. I met personally on two different occasions with
most of the sworn employees at the Library of Congress, and
assured them that my understanding of the intent of the
committee, or the Congress, of our effort would not be to harm
anyone in this, and that during all these committee meetings,
as we develop our plan, we are going to have to figure out who
can make the cut and meet our standards, who might need
additional training, who might be grandfathered in, or who
might be pensioned out.
Senator Durbin. The other concern that the Library of
Congress has made, I think, a valid observation is that their
responsibility is a little different than the responsibility in
other places in the Hill. They have a fiduciary responsibility
when it comes to the collections that are priceless and
irreplaceable, and view their security requirements somewhat
differently than perhaps someone who is guiding hundreds of
people through a Capitol Hill building.
Are you taking that into consideration, in terms of the
complement for security standards that will be used, and the
supervision that will be sensitive to that need?
Chief Gainer. Very much so. One of the ways we are doing
that, again, is: All of our subcommittee working groups have
people both from our agency and theirs, and I know there are
things that we can learn from them, and them from us. I have
also detailed an inspector over to that building, and the
Library of Congress was good enough to give us space there, and
we have offered to do some exchange programs now with our
personnel, and we have invited them to participate in any of
the in-service training classes that we have. But I have also
pointed out to them that there is a lot of very important and
historical items that we are responsible for in this Capitol
complex, so in many respects, there is commonality of tasks.
Senator Durbin. There are some similarities, no doubt about
it.
Chief Gainer. Yes, sir.
Senator Durbin. I might also note that if I am not
mistaken, the Capitol Visitor Center is going to create an
underground access to the Library of Congress. It just makes
sense for us to have a common security force that works
together and complements one another, in terms of their
responsibilities in that regard.
Chief Gainer. Yes, sir.
APPLICANT ATTRITION
Senator Durbin. I do not have any further questions here. I
do not know if there are any for the record that the staff has
prepared that they would like me to consider.
You have stated for the record, Chief Gainer, that
recruitment retention efforts have been improved because of the
pay package and benefits that are available, but you said that
it also, I hope I am not misstating this, that there were still
some ten applicants for every person who was finally accepted
to the Capitol Police force.
Chief Gainer. That is correct, Senator.
Senator Durbin. What are the reasons why people do not make
the Capitol Police force?
Chief Gainer. Well, the first cut you need to make is the
written exam. So you need to get past the written exam, a
physical, a background check, a psychological test and a
polygraph examination. Once you get past all those, and there
is an offer of employment, the candidate is then sent down to
FLETC. So in that process is where people continually are
weeded out.
Senator Durbin. Can you give me ideas, percentages of those
who would fail the written exam, physical exam or, when
offered, not accept the position?
Chief Gainer. I would have to get back to you with the
specifics of that, Senator.
[The information follows:]
UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE RECRUITMENT STATISTICS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002
[As of May 1, 2003]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Candidates Tested............................. 3,578 ...........
Candidates Passed............................. 2,697 75.4
Candidates Applied............................ 1,959 \1\ 72.6
Disposition of Candidates Who Applied:
Disapproved Prior to Conditional Offer.... 571 29.1
Declined Prior to Conditional Offer....... 257 13.1
Disapproved After Conditional Offer....... 545 27.8
Declined After Conditional Offer.......... 185 9.4
Background Investigation Pending.......... 46 2.4
Appointed................................. 315 16.1
Scheduled for Appointment................. 11 .6
Recommended for Appointment............... 29 1.5
-------------------------
TOTAL................................... 1,959 100.0
=========================
Total Appointed, Scheduled & Recommended...... 355 ...........
Percent of Candidates Tested.................. ........... 9.9
Ratio of Appointed to Tested.................. ........... 1 of 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Percent of those that passed.
NOTES:
A Conditional Offer is given prior to the polygraph exam, physical exam,
and psychological evaluation.
Appointments from the 46 candidates currently pending completion of
background investigation would slightly increase the percentage. If
all were appointed the Percentage would increase to 11.2.
STUDENT LOAN REIMBURSEMENT
Senator Durbin. Let me ask you: One of the things that we
talked about is student loan reimbursement, and that has been a
program that I have pushed, and there are some skeptics on the
Hill. I think people with children in college, or recent
graduates, understand how important this element is when you
start talking about a job. Can you tell me whether this has
been used by the Capitol Police?
Chief Gainer. Well, we just, in the past 30 days, completed
the regulations that would put that into effect, and we, in
fact, anticipate that it will be fully operational by the 30th
of July. I think the mandate of that would have it in effect by
June. June is when the educational assistance program will be
ready to be completely available. So we have laid out the
regulations, the amount of money has been budgeted to do that,
and now it is a matter of putting it into our recruitment
efforts, and making it available to our current employees.
DIVERSITY OF THE WORK FORCE
Senator Durbin. Can you give me any indication of the
diversity of the Capitol Police force?
Chief Gainer. Let me see if I have that.
I am sorry, sir. I will have to get back to you on that.
Senator Durbin. If you would. What efforts are being made
to promote diversity in recruitment for the Capitol Police?
Chief Gainer. Part of what we do there is, where we
advertise, and where we visit. Over the course of 1 year, I
believe there will be about 200 visitations our recruiters will
make throughout the United States. I think it is 200. They will
go to various colleges, universities, military bases. And that
will be done, whether it is a college that is traditionally
African American, or looking at recruiting from Puerto Rico, to
try to increase the Hispanic level. So we target where we might
find the most minorities or gender differences.
[The information follows:]
UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE GENDER AND RACE OR ETHNICITY STATISTICS
[In percent]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gender Race/Ethnicity
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Officers Black or Asian or Hispanic
Male Female White American African Pacific or
Indian American Islander Latino
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AS OF MAY 12, 2003
1,436..................................... 81.6 18.4 65.3 .3 29.6 1.3 3.5
AS OF JUNE 2000
1,199..................................... 82.2 17.8 67.3 .3 28.8 1.1 2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Per Department of Justice statistics, in June 2002 the USCP had the second highest percentage of black
police officers of all federal law enforcement agencies.
PAY SCALE COMPARISON
Senator Durbin. How does your pay scale compare to the D.C.
Police Department?
Chief Gainer. Actually, we are above the D.C. Police
Department in our entry-level pay, and our step increases, and
the fact I happen to have a son who is a member of the
Metropolitan Police Department, and was just shocked to learn,
as he completed his 18 months, that he would not be getting a
step increase because of budget problems that they are having
there. That is not an issue we have.
I will give you some examples. The entry level for a United
States Capitol Police Officer is $43,166. For a Park Police
Officer, it is $40,345. For a Secret Service Uniform Division,
it is $40,349, and for the Metropolitan Police, it is $39,644.
So just over the MPD, we are slightly better than $4,000.
Senator Durbin. Forty-three----
Chief Gainer. It is $43,100 for us and $39,600 for MPD.
Senator Durbin. There was a time when we were losing
Capitol Police officers to the Transportation Security
Administration. Now, I see they are laying off people. Some
3,000 more were announced yesterday, if I am not mistaken.
Obviously, this may create a pool of talent looking to apply to
come back to the Capitol Police. Have you noted that from any
of the previous layoffs?
Chief Gainer. Actually, some of the personnel that we lost
that went over there had made inquiries about coming back here
and, again, fortunately, the legislation that was passed by
both the House and Senate recently permits us to do that.
I might add that flying home from Chicago, where I was
taking a son to look at a college, last night, I happened upon
one of the officers who formerly worked for us. He was on that
flight doing his duty, and we had a chance to kibbitz a little
bit, and I suggested to him that he ought to come back home. He
was lamenting about the travel, and some of the promises were
not quite there, and I said we would welcome him back with open
arms.
Senator Durbin. Thank you, Chief.
Mr. Chairman.
MOUNTED HORSE UNIT SUPPORT
Senator Campbell [presiding]. Thank you, Chief. I
understand Senator Durbin asked a number of questions that I
was going to, too.
I have a few more. While I was walking over to vote, I got
to thinking I might have given you the wrong impression a
little bit about the use of horses. I am very, very supportive
of it, by the way, but I reflect back on my days when I was a
training officer for those horses. And, you know, you see those
old Westerns where these cowboys are running around shooting.
Well, I want the record to reflect you can shoot off any horse
once, and the next time you even look at your gun, you are
probably going to go to a rodeo unless you have an awful lot of
training.
Chief Gainer. Noted.
Senator Campbell. You will take that into consideration. We
used to get a lot of help from, of all the strange places, from
the Boy Scouts of America, and we got the local Boy Scout
troops--and they loved it, by the way--to act as crowds. And,
of course, it was kind of scripted, but we had them crumble up
newspapers, for instance, and fill small water balloons, and
throw them at us, do all kinds of stuff to get the horses used
to these very unusual circumstances, but if they are trained
right, they are going to do you a lot of good. So I hope you
pursue that----
Chief Gainer. Yes, sir.
LOC POLICE MERGER
Senator Campbell [continuing]. And I will certainly help
you.
Let me talk a little about the merger of the Library of
Congress. I do not know if Senator Durbin hit on that or not,
but Speaker Hastert had a problem with that, based primarily on
the difference of training, whether it was necessary for the
police over at the Library of Congress to go through the same
training or not. Do you find some additional challenges you had
not expected in this merger?
Chief Gainer. Well, there are a lot of issues to be worked
through yet, and to develop the plan that we owe you by August
19th, none the least of which is how you transfer individuals
and make them meet our standards. One of the things that is in
the legislation requires that any new hires would meet the
standards of the United States Capitol Police, and we have
talked with them about that.
So some of our subcommittees will be working on the issue
of who can make the cut and simply put on our uniform rather
quickly, with a minimal amount of training, and who, because of
either background, or physical ability, or age, would not do
that. Then we would have to work through, if that is the case,
if there is a group of those individuals, are there things that
can augment the security that needs to be done either in the
Library of Congress, or elsewhere, that would accommodate them,
or offer them buyouts, or early retirements.
I do not think there are any impediments, except some of
the public statements that I have heard that would indicate
that the Library of Congress supports the notion that the
budget for this unit would be within their budget. I could not
support that, and I would not recommend that to either the
Police Board or this committee, or the notion that the ultimate
commander of that unit, whether it is an inspector, if it is
similar to our other divisions, would report directly and
outside of the chain of command of the police department. I
think those are two very key issues of command and control that
would be essential for the successful merging of the agencies.
Senator Campbell. When they hire, do they have the same age
requirements as the Capitol Police?
Chief Gainer. At the current moment, they do not.
Senator Campbell. They do not. They have requested 54
additional officers, as I understand it, in the fiscal year
2004 budget. Can you, or do you, or have you done an analysis
about the need for those positions, and how the hiring of their
officers might affect this planned merger, for instance, if
they are hiring of an age that is above the age restriction you
have? Is that going to be a problem?
Chief Gainer. The analysis of that is in the embryonic
stage. We have to do more work on that, and figure out what the
implication is, and why they would want that number.
Senator Campbell. Is that included in your manpower study
that you are doing?
Chief Gainer. It is not.
STRATEGIC PLAN
Senator Campbell. It is not. In your manpower study, is
that part of your strategic plan?
Chief Gainer. The merger of the Library of Congress police?
Senator Campbell. Yes.
Chief Gainer. It is, sir.
Senator Campbell. It is. Has there been an outside agency
hired to do that, or are you doing that in-house?
Chief Gainer. The merger process, or the----
Senator Campbell. The strategic plan, in general.
Chief Gainer. The strategic plan, the one we just
completed, was done largely in-house, based on earlier work the
police department had done. But only in the last 24 hours have
we had some conversations with the GAO to ask them to both
please help us with the strategic plan and the staffing plan to
make sure that they coalesce, as we think they do, and to
ultimately deliver a strategic plan that is in conformity with
the recent legislation that requires something done by sometime
this summer.
FACILITIES
Senator Campbell. This summer. Okay. On your facility
needs, did we not last year provide money for a training
building for you?
Chief Gainer. Yes, sir.
Senator Campbell. What is the disposition of that? Is that
going to also house your new headquarters, or just the
training?
Chief Gainer. It is out in Cheltenham, Maryland. It was
opened just about 1 year ago, this past summer, and it is part
of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center properties. We
completely occupied, and staffed it. That is where we are
training the individuals. But also in the supplemental budget,
there was money given for a new training facility out there
that would accommodate live fire and tactical training of our
officers.
TRAINING
Senator Campbell. Do they do 80 hours of training there? I
thought I saw 80 hours somewhere in my notes.
Chief Gainer. One of our goals is to increase in-service
training for everybody to 80 hours. Now, we have fallen short
of that thus far, mainly because of the overtime requirements,
and the threat conditions we are operating under. Most police
departments, progressive police departments, like 40 hours.
Again, we want to be the best.
Senator Campbell. Forty?
Chief Gainer. We want to be on the cutting edge, and have
80 hours. The average, some officers have had 80 hours. Most
officers right now have only had 40. We instituted a training
day. Every single day is a training day, where at a roll call,
everybody gets 8 minutes on some type of subject. We still have
work to do to get everybody up to 80 hours, which also, I might
add, is one of the reasons for the manpower increase.
So the 40-hour in-service training, morphing to 80 hours,
is in addition to the firearms training we get. In order to do
that, you have to have people not on post, and not working
overtime.
RETENTION OF EMPLOYEES
Senator Campbell. For a while, you had a retention problem.
I think you alluded to it earlier. People were going through
your training, and then trying to get into another agency, air
marshal, or something of that nature, and that, I understand,
has slowed down. Have you had any people who want to transfer
in from other departments?
Chief Gainer. We have. I just mentioned, I happened to fly
in a plane last night with an individual who is a former member
of our agency of 10 years, and went over to the sky marshals. I
invited him back, and he was at least thinking it over. We also
had some inquiries by about a half-dozen other employees who
have left the Department.
Senator Campbell. He was one of your former officers.
Chief Gainer. Yes.
LATERAL ENTRY PROCESS
Senator Campbell. Have you had some that were not your own
former officers? If they come in, do they go through the same
amount of training, or the same type, or do they have some
abbreviated lateral transfer consideration, or something in
lieu of that?
Chief Gainer. It is a great question, sir. It was only in
the past year that we received the ability to do that, and in
the past 30 days, we have sat down with both our recruiters and
trainers to implement a program that we hope that by the fall
will introduce a class of only lateral-entry officers, who have
either gone through FLETC under some other Federal agency, or
some accredited agency, that would then only be trained from 8
to 10 weeks at our academy at Cheltenham.
Senator Campbell. Eight to 10 weeks. As I remember, years
ago, our training was around 12 weeks, which was kind of an
average in California in those days.
Chief Gainer. Universally, it has grown. Our officers do, I
believe, 12 down at FLETC, and another 12 up here.
Senator Campbell. When they do the 12 up here, do they live
at home, or are they in a dorm facility?
Chief Gainer. They do not stay at the facility.
Senator Campbell. I have a few other questions, that I do
not know if Senator Durbin touched on or not. So that I do not
duplicate those, the remaining ones I will submit. If you will
answer them in writing, I would appreciate that.
Chief Gainer. Thank you, Senator.
SHINING LIGHT OF THE NATION
Senator Campbell. I just want to tell you that it is my
personal hopes that the Capitol Police become the shining light
of the police departments nationwide. There are a lot of good
police departments out there, and since I used to be the
Chairman of the Treasury Subcommittee, I used to visit a lot. I
worked with the HYDA program, and the ATF, and a lot of groups,
the CTECH transfers. I have seen a lot of them, and there are
some really good ones.
It has always seemed to me that the Capitol ought to be a
step above and ahead in terms of what the American public sees
when they think of an American police officer. I have carried,
I think, more legislation in this Senate than any of my
colleagues on police bills, the bulletproof vest bills, the
cops in schools programs, I mean a hell of a bunch of them.
One of the things I still remember from the days when I was
a deputy, I was teaching school at the same time, and that was
in the days when the word ``pig'' was a common word for a
police officer. It used to bother me that so many young people,
at least in those days, did not see policemen as people who
have a family, and had kids, and were Dad, and coached Little
League, and did all the stuff that normal dads or moms do.
Part of the job, it seems to me, of a good progressive
police department is trying to bridge that gap with young
people, so that they could grow up respecting policeman,
because in this day and age, I also have the view that since 9/
11, policemen, as well as firemen, EMTs, and others, they are
going to be the real front line warriors in this whole new
defending-America-system that we find ourselves in. And I
cannot think of a department I would rather have be the kind of
shining light of all police departments than our Capitol
Police.
I want to tell you that I intend to be very, very vocal and
very forceful of the things that you want to do with the police
department.
Chief Gainer. Senator, I appreciate that. I neglected to
take this opportunity to say: There are many members of this
department, union representatives, both civilian and sworn, in
the room with me, and they have done a tremendous job over
these years, and I am so proud to be here with them, and I will
pass your comments on to them.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Campbell. Well, pass that on. I am particularly
happy that you are going to upgrade the protection of members,
because I am getting too old to wrestle guys down and handcuff
them, like I did for Strom Thurmond about 5 years ago.
With that, I have no further questions, but I will submit
some in writing. I appreciate you being here.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Board for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell
MANPOWER STUDY
Question. Your agency has been working on a manpower study to
identify staffing needs.
Why haven't you completed the strategic plan prior to making
staffing decisions?
Answer. We are approaching the Strategic Plan development in 2
phases:
--Phase 1--update of the October 1999 Plan by reaffirming our
mission, vision and values, reviewing strategic direction and
goals to ensure the plan addresses the changing threat
environment; and considering changes to format as well. We have
completed Phase 1 and the plan has been presented to the Board
who is currently reviewing the document.
--Phase 2--Summer 2003. Rewrite the plan and prepare an
accountability report that shows our progress against the plan.
The staffing study was started after the initiation of Phase I of
the Department's strategic plan. After the initial draft of Phase I was
completed, the Department's Command Staff performed a review of both
the strategic plan and the draft-staffing document. This review tied
the staffing requirements identified in the staffing analysis to the
mission, vision and goals of the organization as stated in the Phase I
of the strategic plan to ensure that there were no inconsistencies
between the two documents.
Question. What are the criteria you used in determining staffing
needs? Have you figured out what each position is going to do and what
contribution it will make toward accomplishing your vision for the
Department?
Answer. Assessing the staffing requirements of the Department
included two components, a thorough analysis of sworn staffing
requirements and civilian staffing requirements. Each analysis was done
separately but each used some similar methods to derive the needed
staffing levels of the Department. Both analyses looked at the current
staffing needs, as well as projected needs in fiscal years 2004 and
2005, as determined by the Department's Strategic Plan, and included
input from key personnel throughout the Department. The analyses also
drew on information from other staffing analyses and studies, done
either internally or by outside consultants. Outlined below are the
specific methodologies used for deriving sworn staffing requirements,
and the methodology used for civilian staffing requirements.
Summary of Sworn Staffing Methodology
In order to determine the requirements for sworn staffing levels of
the United States Capitol Police, discussions were held with Bureau,
Division and Section Commanders. Determining sworn staffing
requirements is a constant project due to the every changing needs of
the Department and is based on new assignments, additional protection
details based on threats or directions of interest, visiting
dignitaries, staffing for unexpected security requirements and, more
recently, the Homeland Security threat levels. The methodology used is
outlined below.
--Discussed with Bureau, Division and Section Commanders to determine
how their responsibilities have changed since 9/11, the anthrax
incident and the increased threat to the Capitol complex due to
terrorism, chemical, biological and radiological threats.
--Discussed with Bureau, Division and Section Commanders how
technology could assist and be incorporated within their area
of responsibility.
--Used recommendations from the 1998 United States Capitol Police
Security Review and the Booz-Allen & Hamilton Personnel Audit
of Security Operations at the Capitol complex to establish
standardized criteria to compute the number of officers
necessary at each post throughout the Capitol Complex.
--Reviewed the supervisory ratio within each Bureau to meet the
standard ratio of 1 sergeant for every 10 officers and 1
lieutenant for every 40 officers.
--Standardized the posts within the Uniformed Services Bureau to
allow for one officer per piece of equipment i.e., x-ray,
itomizer, podium, magnetometer at all access points and, in
addition to the previous, a pre-screener at all visitor access
points.
--Reviewed the staffing levels in Dignitary Protection Division to
allow for 2 agents per protectee per shift. In addition to
increased manpower, allowed for sufficient advance personnel
for both in and out of town operations.
--Standardized protection details into three levels. Level one--
Individual, who as a result of their leadership position,
public profile, recorded threat activity or related factors, is
deemed to require protection while in the Washington
Metropolitan Area. Level two--Individual, who as a result of
their leadership position, public profile, recorded threat
activity or related factors, is deemed to warrant protection
within and outside the Washington Metropolitan Area. Level
three--Individual, who as a result of their status as a
Presidential successor, leadership position, public profile,
recorded threat activity or related factors, is deemed to
require around-the-clock protection at all locations.
--Determined the minimum number of instructors necessary to conduct
training programs, by the using a staffing formula. The formula
begins with the total number of classes/programs multiplied by
the number of program hours divided by the number of hours an
instructor is available for classroom/practical exercise
instruction. In utilizing this method for determining staffing
requirements, the Training Services Bureau can ensure that it
meets its mission with a calculable and logical approach.
Summary of Civilian Staffing Methodology
In order to determine the requirements for civilian staffing levels
within the USCP, we initiated a project team consisting of staff from
the Offices of Financial Management (OFM), and Human Resources (OHR),
specifically the Director of OFM, the Budget Officer, the Deputy
Director of OHR and the Staffing Classification Specialist. The project
was carried out over a period of five months and began as a zero-based
civilian staffing analysis of the entire Department. The methodology
used by the project team is outlined below.
--Met individually with each Office Director or Bureau Commander and
their respective Division managers to determine the unit's role
in meeting/advancing the Department mission and how those
responsibilities have changed since the September 11th and the
Anthrax incidents and whether those changes in responsibilities
have impacted the need for civilian staffing.
--Interviewed the Office/Bureau staff about all aspects of their
staffing requirements, leading to constructive discussions and
analysis on workload and staffing issues.
--Analyzed, during workgroup sessions, how such items would impact
staffing needs: mission changes, paradigm shifts and new
requirements.
--Discussed and analyzed the existing and needed administrative
support for the Bureaus/Offices, and benchmarked an
administrative structure in each Bureau/Office. The standard
office (or model office) would include the following
administrative positions: one office manager, one
administrative assistant and possibly one management analyst,
depending upon the size, complexity and unique needs of the
Office/Bureau.
--Analyzed the potential for civilianization, based upon our three-
prong criteria.
--Does the position require police powers to effectively carry out
the duties assigned?
--Does the position require law enforcement training?
--Does the position provide required background for the upward
mobility of sworn staff?
--Reviewed and analyzed any studies and analyses that have been
performed either internally or by outside consultants to
determine the optimal staffing levels for civilians within the
USCP. Documentation reviewed included desk audits, previous
staffing studies, other agency comparisons, and workload
assessments.
--Developed staffing needs for each Bureau/Office. The staffing
requirements were broken out by immediate needs and out-year
needs.
Question. What is wrong with existing security practices that
requires change and why does that revision require additional staff?
Answer. In 1998/99 Booz Allen Hamilton performed a validation of
our staffing model and a standard was developed for staffing posts.
Since that initial study, the Department had been working to achieve
the developed standard, but had not achieved the level of staffing
required by the model. The recent staffing study incorporated that
model which is still appropriate for the Department. In addition to
standard model staffing, there have been many changes since 9/11--we
have added a significant number of posts and have been tasked with
several additional duties, which require additional staff to adequately
perform. The following summarizes, in general, the types of activities
we are supporting and plan to support. Should your staff require more
detailed information, we will be happy to provide in a closed forum.
--Ability to fully staff posts according to a model standard--A 1998
study conducted by the United States Capitol Police, in concert
with the United States Secret Service, the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms, and the United States Marshall Service,
developed a standard for staffing of entrance posts to
buildings within the complex. Booz Allen Hamilton subsequently
validated this standard in an independent review.
--Responsible for operating multiple technologies and sources for the
collection and dissemination of critical information utilizing
multi-media technologies to maintain situational awareness of
ongoing events as well as our expanding role in Hill-wide
communications and emergency notifications.
--Expansion of the intelligence and investigative capabilities of the
Department to enable a more comprehensive analysis of
intelligence data and threats against Members of Congress as
well as an increased level of involvement and coordination with
Dignitary Protection Division who provide protection for
Congressional leadership.
--Management of the increasing threats caseload of almost 3,000
threats and direction of interest cases per year.
--Expansion of specialized tactical response capability for the
Congress, enhanced protection during evacuations occurring on
the Capitol complex, coordinated reconnaissance operations for
visiting Heads of State/Dignitaries, participation/coordination
of assault operations occurring on the Capitol complex. Conduct
of counter-sniper operations during special events that require
enhanced protective measures, and provision of specialized
response capabilities during hostage/barricade situations.
--Implement new training initiatives for increases in staff and the
complexities of incident response and management as well as
other technical training requirements resulting from the
increasing complexity of our responsibilities.
Question. What activities are envisioned for facilities management
(especially given AOC's role in this)?
Answer. The Architect of the Capitol currently manages the
facilities for the United States Capitol Police. There are currently no
plans to assume the functions of the AOC with respect to USCP
facilities. However, we have established a good working relationship
with AOC staff, since close coordination with the AOC on all projects
is critical. As such, the coordination of projects, the defining of
operational requirements and the facilitation of work to reduce the
impact on operational effectiveness and OSHA and other safety reporting
and inspection responsibilities requires Capitol Police resources. In
addition, we envision that the facilities group, which would fall under
the Physical Securities umbrella, would coordinate with the AOC on
physical construction site security issues. Activities envisioned for
facilities management include:
--Coordinating all office, lab, training and warehouse space needs
for the Department. To accomplish this, we would perform space
analysis to meet USCP operational requirements; review and
verify program requirements; recommend innovative and efficient
use of existing space; and work with the AOC and contracted
vendors who supply maintenance services to the Department.
Coordinating the daily maintenance and improvement of space
occupied by USCP employees by providing innovative and
efficient use of existing buildings, rooms and work space.
--Planning and managing all construction activity for the USCP by
performing site evaluations, overseeing the development of a
conceptual site plan and building plan, reviewing construction
documents, reviewing/establishing schedules, serving as the
initial point of contact for security systems, data
connectivity and telecommunications and furnishings
integration.
Question. Has consideration been given to contracting for some
services on an as-needed basis rather than establishing a permanent
capability to do everything in house--assuming that is what these
numbers intend.
Answer. The Architect of the Capitol currently manages the
facilities for the United States Capitol Police. There are currently no
plans to assume the functions of the AOC with respect to USCP
facilities. Contracts for facility maintenance, etc. will continue to
be managed and funded by the AOC.
Question. Who outside of the agency did you consult with in
developing your manpower study?
Answer. As indicated in the response above, we leveraged any
previous studies performed on staffing levels in the Department to
determine appropriate personnel levels. In addition, we consulted with
GAO staff on general project direction, while we were performing the
study. Also, at the request of the Committees, we are working with GAO,
which is currently performing a review of our study.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 STAFFING
Question. Your budget assumes the addition of 301 additional sworn
positions next year. Is it realistic that you will be able to recruit,
train and accommodate this many new officers next year?
Answer. We believe we can both hire and accommodate the requested
number of officers for fiscal year 2004 due to the success of our
recruitment efforts and lower than expected attrition rates. We will be
filling the 360 slots that we have been allocated at the Federal Law
Enforcement Training Center (FLETC). In addition, attrition has been
down substantially from fiscal year 2002. As a result of these factors,
we are currently projecting to end fiscal year 2003 with 1,569 sworn
personnel, which is 27 above the level planned when the fiscal year
2004 budget request was developed.
We have been coordinating with the AOC and additional space has
been identified in the Government Printing Office facilities. Funding
for additional interim leased space was provided to the Architect of
the Capitol in the fiscal year 2003 supplemental and we anticipate
utilizing the space very soon.
Question. Will these additional positions allow you to eliminate
overtime? How much in savings will be achieved by eliminating or
reducing overtime?
Answer. The new positions will reduce our overtime needs but
because of special events, late sessions, extended hours of the
dignitary protectees, demonstrations, and normal vacancies, overtime
never will be eliminated. We have calculated that the cost of covering
the 1,656 average productive hours of an officer with overtime is
almost comparable to the annual cost of an employee when benefit and
leave costs are factored in. Therefore, covering posts with overtime is
not more expensive. However, operating and morale issues make regular
staffing the preferred option.
In fiscal year 2002, $27.25 million was spent on overtime. We
currently are projecting that we will spend approximately $24.5 million
in fiscal year 2003 for some 568,000 hours of overtime. Our fiscal year
2004 budget request, including COLA increases, includes approximately
$23.5 million for an estimated 513,000 hours of overtime. We have
estimated that at full staffing levels we will be required to work
approximately 260,000 hours of overtime to cover those type of items
discussed above. At today's salaries, this would cost approximately
$11.6 million. We should point out that because not all posts are being
covered, some new staff would be assigned to cover currently unmanned
posts.
CIVILIAN STAFFING
Question. You are requesting 573 civilian positions next year--a 76
percent increase above this year and a much more dramatic increase over
prior years. Can you explain why this is necessary?
Answer. The civilian staffing levels requested have been adjusted
since the development of the fiscal year 2004 budget request to 491 to
accommodate the most critical staffing needs and to provide for a
rational implementation phase-in. Additional civilian positions will be
requested in future budget years. The requested civilians will allow
the Department to expand and improve critical ongoing functions as well
as provide for important new initiatives. The additional staff will
play a vital role in ensuring that each operational function is carried
out in a manner that would ultimately enhance the Department's ability
to fulfill its mission of protecting the Congress. In addition, the
position of the CAO is only two years old and many new functions
required to operate a sound administrative infrastructure are provided
for in the request. The following summarizes the types of activities
civilians in the Department are supporting or are proposed to support
over the next two years.
--Expansion of security related systems due to the dramatic increase
in the importance, size and complexity of physical security and
technical security programs to counter the threat of terrorist
actions. Areas of significant activity in this area include:
Physical security; Security support; Security surveys;
Technical and electronic countermeasures; and Construction
security.
--Expansion of the investigative capabilities of the Department will
enable a more comprehensive analysis and tracking of
intelligence data and threats against Members of Congress, as
well as an increased level of involvement and coordination with
the various task forces associated with Homeland Security and
intelligence gathering efforts.
--The consolidation of the Command Center and Communications Center
and related activities.
--Bureau and Office Administrative Support to enable officers
currently filling administrative functions to return to the
field.
--Coordination of planning within the Department for scheduled major
events and unexpected emergencies throughout the Capitol
complex as well as consolidating strategic and operational
planning
--The Hazardous Material Response Team (HMRT) is being staffed and
will provide a response capability for detection,
identification, litigation, and decontamination for the Capitol
complex. When there is a report of a suspicious item, a team
comprised of sworn hazardous devices and civilian hazardous
material response personnel will respond to the scene. HMRT
also will be capable of conducting tests and sampling to
determine the extent of any contamination.
--The Off-site Delivery Center (OSDC) currently utilizes civilians to
handle freight and as administrative assistants. In the next
fiscal years, 15 officers who currently screen the freight and
trucks will be replaced with civilian truck screeners who were
hired for the CVC project. These truck screeners will assume
the screening role at the OSDC in a phased approach over the
next two years. As the CVC project nears completion, the truck
screeners will be phased in and the officers will be phased
back into other assignments.
--GAO and our external auditors have identified human resource
management as an area of significant weakness. The proposed
staffing is aimed to address the identified weaknesses, provide
resources to handle the significant staff increases throughout
the Department and build a best practices human capital
function.
--Anticipated staff for the newly created Office of Employment
Counsel and augmentation of the Office of General Counsel to
provide legal counsel and representation to the Capitol Police
Board before federal courts and the Office of Compliance.
--The USCP Vehicle maintenance function has grown significantly since
September 11th. At the direction of the Committees, we have
implemented a vehicle take home program for K-9, which has
significantly increased the maintenance cycle of these
vehicles. In addition, we have acquired additional, and more
complex, vehicles, which require personnel to maintain.
--Property and asset management functions have increased due to
increased workload and the increase in equipment purchases
since 9/11.
--Additional instructors are necessary to provide training to new
sworn positions requested to ensure all recruit and incumbent
officers meet training standards. Areas include lethal and non-
lethal weapons training, legal instruction, and response to
nuclear, chemical, biological, and radiological threats. These
training initiatives require periodic re-training and
remediation to meet training and accreditation standards.
--Modernization of fiscal services is necessary to provide better
accountability over budgets and budget execution, address the
backlog and delay of procurement actions, and improve the
Department's ability to effectively carry out the acquisition
planning process and move from crisis mode operations to an
orderly acquisition process. In addition, there are several
critical accounting functions which are either not being
performed or are not adequately being performed such as :
completion of full set of GAPP financial statements and all
treasury reporting.
--Expansion and modernization of information technology efforts will
allow for the continuation and expansion of the business
systems modernization program to update and support legacy
systems as well as maintain existing systems and develop new
system capabilities.
FACILITY NEEDS
Question. The Capitol Police have identified many facility needs,
as your agency grows and improves its capabilities, including the need
for a new headquarters building and a new off-site delivery facility.
This Committee has provided partial funding for the headquarters
facility and full funding for the delivery facility. Please update us
on where you are with these two facilities including recent setbacks
you have had.
Answer.
Headquarters
On March 12, 2003, the Capitol Police Board approved Square 695
(New Jersey Ave. and I Street SE) as the site location for the new
headquarters building. The Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is preparing
letters requesting permission to proceed to negotiate for the purchase
of the property. The Facilities Master Plan will require an update to
reflect increased staffing levels requested in the fiscal year 2004
budget submission and relative impact on the space required in the new
headquarters.
Off-Site
In October 2002, the Capitol Police Board approved the USCP/AOC
submitted proposal to the Board for a new site for the off-site
delivery facility to be located in NE Washington, DC. In November 2002,
the AOC submitted letters to Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration and the House Office Building Commission (HOBC)
requesting approval to negotiate for the purchase of the property.
However, the AOC did not receive approval to negotiate due to the
elections and subsequent change in leadership. In January 2003, the AOC
received approval to reprogram funding to purchase the property. The
AOC also resubmitted requests to negotiate to HOBC and Senate Rules,
and received Senate Rules approval in early February. Unfortunately, in
April 2003 before all approvals could be received, the property owners
sold the property to another entity. Currently, the AOC has no
prospects on a suitable site that meets the unique characteristics
associated with an off-site delivery center.
Question. What is the interim solution for addressing space
deficiencies and do you have the space you need to accommodate the
additional staffing you have requested for next year?
Answer. The USCP has taken several steps to accommodate increases
in staff until a permanent headquarters solution is found. There have
been ongoing requests through the AOC to the respective oversight
committees for additional space in the Capitol complex to accommodate
our growth. However, these requests have not proved fruitful. The USCP
has identified space located in the Government Printing Office building
at 732 North Capitol Street that could support some administrative
functions and storage. The USCP has requested the AOC submit a request
to the authorizing committees to secure this space as a partial interim
solution until a new headquarters can be built. The USCP continues to
compact existing space, exacerbating already over crowded conditions.
In preparation of projected space deficiencies, the USCP has attempted
to develop an interim space plan to bridge the gap until a new
headquarters building is completed. The plan is a ``cut to the bone''
approach, with recommendations for utilization or, in most cases, over-
utilization of existing space assigned to the Department. The
Department has reduced the size of training and roll call space to
create administrative space. Emergency equipment has been re-located
out of 119 D street and been placed in a storage container box outside.
The closing of a corridor in 119 D has provided additional space for
lockers, and gymnasium equipment is being relocated to an attic area to
provide additional space for lockers. However, the adjustments within
the current headquarters are insufficient to meet our needs. In
addition, we are exploring possible alternatives to achieving space
requirements by looking to other federal entities for space and then
finally to identify lease options in proximity to the Capitol complex.
DIGNITARY PROTECTION
Question. During consideration of the recent supplemental spending
request, the Board decided to pull back its request for additional
protective details. What is the status of your review of the adequacy
of the dignitary protection program and when will you submit those
results to the Committee?
Answer. The Capitol Police maintains dignitary protection for
Leadership and for other Members of Congress based on intelligence
information and review of threats that warrant increased protection
levels. This policy remains in place and remains appropriate for
operations at this time.
CAPITOL POLICE BOARD
Question. In the fiscal year 2003 appropriation bill, Congress
required the Capitol Police Board to undertake a review of its mission
and effectiveness.
What is the status of that review?
Answer. The Board currently is evaluating the implications of the
Congressional directive contained in Public Law 108-7 and is confident
that it can meet the statutory time requirements (initial review and
report due August 20, 2003) to provide the necessary report and
recommended adjustment to the Appropriations Committees. At this point
in time, our staff has reviewed the GAO report and associated
recommendations as well as potentially relevant corporate governance
statutes and related materials to assess and evaluate their impact on
the future mission, processes and direction of USCP Board. Based on the
results of the review, recommendations will be forthcoming in August as
required by the Statute. A vacancy announcement for the Executive
Assistant for the Capitol Police Board has been approved by the Board.
The implementation of administrative processes that are being developed
will be greatly enhanced by this position.
Question. Do you have any preliminary ideas as to whether there
ought to be any changes to the mission and duties of the Board,
including whether the term of the chairman ought to be a full Congress,
rather than a session of Congress?
Answer. Since a comprehensive analysis is ongoing and not yet
completed, it may be premature to conjecture on additional specifics
regarding final recommendations.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Campbell. The subommittee is recessed.
Chief Gainer. Thank you.
Senator Campbell. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:05 a.m., Thursday, May 1, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
the Chair.]